Last week, The Guardian newspaper published a news report in which the paper marvelled at the situation that has brought Nigeria to the point where citizens openly beg the military to take over the reigns of power. Before this publication, the social media have been awash with such calls, even rallies in some cities nudging the military to act. During the #EndBadGovernance protest in August, people were seen marching in the streets, pleading with the military boys to please intervene in the political process.

In her book, “Times to Remember,” Rose Kennedy, mother of president JFK, stated that the most significant thing about living a long life, was that things you never expected to happen, begin to happen. (She wrote the book at the age of 83).

For many Nigerians, especially those in their 40s and above, no one would have believed, even in their wildest dreams, that a day would come when citizens would openly and brazenly express their preference for military intervention in the political life of the Nigerian state. But we, all of us, have lived long enough to see this happen. And it is an incomprehensible situation, one that limits and conditions us. It brings us to an unbelievably dangerous crossroad. 

It was Obafemi Awolowo, a man of great intellect and wisdom, who famously stated that the worst form of civil rule was better than the best form of military rule. A contest of two extremes. If Chief Awolowo were to stop by today, and see the mess civilian rulers have turned Nigeria into, his reaction can only be left to the imagination. So, how did we get here?

Yes, the government spokesperson or persons have come out to condemn the calls with the usual grandiose rhetorics that characterise such situations. Also the military high command have equally condemned and rejected the invitations while assuring of its commitment and loyalty to the constitution and the government in place.

The assurance here is comforting, but it fails to answer the big question. And that big question needs answering. Despite the human rights violations and high vaulting political instability and sundry atrocities associated with military rule, why would anyone want the military back in power?  This is the huge question confronting us. 
 
Those who were born in 1999, the year the military made its exit are now in their mid 20s. Those born under Abacha and Babangida would now be in their late 20s and early to mid 30s. They knew nothing about what military rule represented and certainly, they were too busy or too uninterested or simply too enamored to read up the numerous literature that chronicled the chaos and incandescence that years of military rule engendered. But, is it just about the ignorance of the youth population, or the undying hatred of those who are unable to come to terms with the outcome of the last election, or is there something more fundamental and more encompassing? 

Nigeria’s First Republic lasted merely five years, followed by 13 years of military rule. The Second Republic lasted another four years and the military took the saddle and paddled the ship of state for another 16 years. With blood and tears, Nigerians fought relentlessly, clawing and biting, to get the military back to their barracks.

Many citizens, big and small, lost their lives in the process. While many others were incarcerated and tortured in military dungeons, those who could find the means fled into exile. At long last, in 1999, the military made its final retreat and handed over the political machine to the civilian class – the politicians.

A new era had begun – the dawn of democracy. But from 1999 till date, Nigeria steadily declined, despite the huge promises and expectations that heralded the dawn of this democratic dispensation. Winston Churchill once remarked that “democracy may not be the best form of government,” but insisted that “none is better”. There are reasons why many believe him. Democracy as a system of government, has certain characteristics and self sustaining mechanisms that confer it greater appeal than others.

These special qualities include general participation of the people through the representative process; periodic elections; constitutional regulations; rule of law and adherence to due process. For those countries and people that respect these principles, democracy has worked, and they have reaped the dividends. But in Nigeria, we moved in the opposite direction.  

So, for Nigeria, the reverse has been the case. Our representatives represent only themselves; we engage in periodic selections; the constitution regulates nothing and nobody; and instead of the rule of law, the law of the rulers triumphs. In the ministries, agencies and parastatals, due process is exactly what the man on top interpretes it to be – service rules be damned. This is why nothing is working and nothing has worked, whatever the system.

The First Republic was fashioned after the British-type parliamentary system, but it failed. Afterwards, we opted for the American-oriented presidential system and yet nothing changed. The failure was and has been even more catastrophic. We merely changed the car, but we did not change the drivers. 
To be continued tomorrow.
Professor Egbo is a Lecturer/ Resource Person with NILDS Abuja. He can be reached via:
08037910012. (WhatsApp only).