Thursday, 28th March 2024
To guardian.ng
Search

2015 elections and Nigeria’s democratic evolution

By Ibrahim M. Zikirullahi
20 July 2015   |   5:19 am
THE success of the 2015 elections in Nigeria was the result of the determination of Nigerians to ensure democracy works. The success did not happen because the institutions supporting democracy had suddenly become strong.
Buhari-os

President Buhari and his vice, Osibanjo.

THE success of the 2015 elections in Nigeria was the result of the determination of Nigerians to ensure democracy works. The success did not happen because the institutions supporting democracy had suddenly become strong.

The fact that the votes of Nigerians counted in the elections, is a testimony about the grit and determination of the Nigerian people. It is imperative to build on the gains of 2015 by building strong institutions to nurture our democracy.

Depending solely on the strength and character of strong individuals alone, as the case was with Professor Attahiru Jega, would be problematic in the long run. What this tells us is the need to evolve a better electoral system. We do not have to reinvent the wheel.

The part of the work regarding undertaking a proper diagnosis of the fundamental issues affecting the electoral process has been done.

Specifically, the Justice Mohammed Uwais Committee Report of 2008 devoted substantial time to the spadework of identifying parts of the electoral architecture to be tweaked.

There is consensus across the board that the independence of INEC is still far from being achieved, especially when the provision, Section 153 sub section 1 (f) of the 1999 Constitution, which lists INEC as a federal executive body, is considered. The meaning of this is that the electoral umpire would continually be tied to the apron strings of the Federal Government, and by extension the ruling party at the centre.

Equally, there are the issues of appointments of key personnel and Commissioners of INEC granted the President. Also critical to a better institutional repositioning of INEC is the challenge of funding for INEC’s operations. The current system is dogged by delays, which hamper timely planning and execution of those plans. The Uwais Report also canvassed the establishment of an autonomous and constitutionally recognized Electoral Offences Tribunal to investigate all electoral frauds and related offences, while coordinating the enforcement of the provisions of the Act relating to all forms of electoral malfeasance.

The Electoral Offences Commission, if created, will free INEC of the burden of prosecuting electoral offences. Similarly, there is the need to unbundle INEC in a way to end the current nebulous arrangement in which the Commission is virtually charged with everything remotely connected to the democratic process.

In this regard, Political Parties Registration and Monitoring Commission should be set up to put an eye on the political parties.

Other components are required to free INEC and have it concentrate on elections are. The civil society should put an eye on the process to ensure the votes count, and to make government accountable to the people. The deployment of the Quick Count Election Observation methodology by the Transition Monitoring Group (TMG), to observe the 2015 Presidential Election surely ranks as one of the high points of policing the process for transparency. A methodology like this deters fraud, increases confidence in the electoral process, and generates a treasure trove of data which would be significant to the push for electoral reforms.

Also, there is a need for reform of governance at the local level for enhanced citizens’ participation. Advancing Nigeria’s democracy requires effective citizen participation in governance and political accountability by elected holders of public office to their constituencies. A decade after the return to civilian rule, the political space in Nigeria still features a thriving authoritarian political culture and a strong tendency to the monopoly and concentration of power in the hands of the elite to the exclusion of the mass of the population, especially the local and urban poor. With its historical roots in more than three decades of military rule, the authoritarian culture pervades all aspects of social life and manifests in such forms as intolerance of dissent, impatience with due process, adoration of power, authority, and their possessors, the use of command, intimidation, and force as primary means of social control, and values that place primacy on the achievement of ends irrespective of the means.

On its own part, the elite monopolisation of power and exclusion of the mass of the population consists essentially in the reduction of popular political participation to membership in political parties and voting at elections, while even such participation is made mostly meaningless by elite control of party policy and practice and by the greater importance of violence, fraud, and other malpractices rather than votes in determining the outcome of elections.

These features of the political space present grave threats to the democratisation process in Nigeria. The authoritarian culture generates attitudes and ways of thought that are antagonistic to democracy, particularly by rejecting constraints on the use of power, encouraging disdain for the rule of law and due process, and demanding conformity and unquestioning obedience to command.

In addition to impoverishing the democratic credentials of the entire system of governance, elite monopolisation of power and the political space has removed any meaningful counterbalance to the ruling elite and allowed them to rule almost completely in their own interests, with little consideration for the interests and concerns of other sectors of society.

This has translated into a governance regime marked by the arrogance of power and a crucial absence of a sense of political responsibility and responsiveness to the diverse needs and concerns of the populace.

In these ways, Nigeria’s authoritarian culture and elite monopoly of power hinder the democratisation process and encourage the violation of basic human rights. Moving forward, there is a dire need for a change in this area to give Nigerians the needed impetus to get involved in governance at their local levels.

The gains of 2015 would be meaningless to the ordinary people if it does not percolate to guarantee popular participation at the local level.

Before the 2015 elections, the narratives were frightening. There were schools of thought that already predicated the demise of Nigeria. Nigeria was, however, able to snatch a collective victory from the jaws of defeat. This feat does not, however, mean we should go to sleep.

The task of entrenching true democracy has just begun. As voters in Kogi and Bayelsa prepare to go to the polls in November and December this year, it is hoped that we will build on the gains and goodwill from 2015. It should be such that by 2019, Nigeria would have evolved an electoral process driven by institutions. That would be a positive culmination of the massive efforts that have so far gone into the herculean task of ensuring the votes of the Nigerian people count.

• This article is an abridged version of a paper presented by TMG Chairman, Comrade Zikirullahi at the 8th Nigerian Election Forum at Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), Washington DC

0 Comments