Chris Nwedo
Here, the essence of election is swiftly vanishing as viable means of guaranteeing orderly processes of leadership ‘succession and change, an instrument of political authority and legitimacy. The failure of true elections or their absence largely defines the predominance of political dictatorship and personalized rule…
It is a spectacle of immense concern that African democracy is increasingly becoming more repressive and totalitarian as the political classes are becoming more desperate and uncontrollable in the truce-less ‘mortal combat’ for power. It is not disputable that these classes of politicians know and value the principles of democratic governance because they discuss endlessly true facts about democracy and good governance and negate these in various ways. In Nigeria, the upheavals in the polity get messier as some groups of double-talking power seekers eulogise the merits, consensus candidates, zoning or rotation of elective positions, automatic tickets, internal party democratization and dictatorial impositions of better candidates to guarantee less hurtful wrangling and monetary costs. Typically, these positions are canvassed with threats of brute force and spiteful display of smartness, and insisted on subject to the dispositions of those whose self-centred interest over ride that of the collective Nigerians. Many Nigerian politicians seemed to be grappling with incurable diseases of insensitivity and self-centredness. Politics in Nigeria may forever remain lethal until it is significantly devested of unlimited powers and uncontrollable influences.
Today, Rivers state is reverberating with devastating inferno sparked by uncontrollable actions and invectives of those willing and ready to obliterate the state, thanks to selfish political calculations. There are palpable signals that the state is beleaguered by vicious groups of political hunters prepared to make mince- meat of anyone as they shoot at sight the state and the institutions. The ongoing fracas in the State Assembly and the shading of blood stumbled from recalcitrant politics of obstinate political rulers determined to make the state vulnerable to wreck if they do not have their way. But Rivers’ political plight is a replication of events in many other states of the Federation. However, Rivers’ embarrassing situation seems spectacular because it is more current and ongoing especially as there are more people conspicuous enough to take the blame. However, behind the veneer of this destabilizing friction is the immoderate ambition of just one Nigerian. This crisis may likely to continue, and become more complicated as long as the trouble maker and the supporters see prospects of economic gains at the terminal. Probably after the wilful destructions of the state and the institutions there will be an amnesty to reward the combatants. It is a pity for Rivers state.
As the converging political opposition groups pour vituperations on the ruling party, and continued to exaggerate the fictitious capacity to do better than the Peoples’ Democratic Party that imposed Bamanga Tukur as the Chairman of the National Working Committee and contemplating giving automatic tickets to GEJ for 2015 presidency, the opposition are craftily perfecting plans to impose Muhammad Buhari, Ahmed Tinubu or any other beneficiaries of the duo’s anointment come 2015. Meanwhile, the Peoples’ Democratic Party and some sections of Nigerians deride Ahmed Bola Tinubu describing him as a despot for imposing his daughter, Mrs. Folashade Tinubu-Ojo, as President General of Nigerian Association of Market Women and Men. According to the critics, Folashade was not a full-time trader and cannot on this ground succeed Tinubu’s mother late Alhaja Abibat Mogaji who just passed on. For many of these critics, the imposition of Tinubu’s daughter on the traders is irresponsible, insensitive and imprudent because the presidency of the National Association is neither hereditary nor the reserve of the Tinubu’s family. This fact effectively correlates the propositions from some quarters that the National leader of Action Congress of Nigeria, Ahmed Tinubu, is threateningly egotistical, despotic and cannot be trusted with power.
Tony Caesar Okeke, the Acting National Publicity Secretary of PDP, said the ACN leader ‘who parades himself as a democrat’ has clearly shown his despotic tendencies with the installation of his daughter as the leader of traders without recourse to democratic processes. Okeke concluded that Nigerians have seen clearly that the so-called democrat and self-styled messiahs in the ACN are indeed, wolves in sheep’s skin’. On the other hand, apologists of the APC have been endlessly struggling to sell Buhari at all cost as incorruptible, detribalized, revolutionary, democratic and an indispensable panacea to the progressively drifting Nigeria. And for the sake of this same campaign, Tinubu was painted in the image of Moses, the liberator, a perfect saint. But most Nigerians seemed disinclined to be sweet- talked into another disparaging choice by those relentless in the determination to ruin the polity for selfish ends.
In spite of promises of selfless service, transparent internal democratic processes and a completely more responsible approach to leadership, the party under formation has of today not been able to hold itself together because of inflexible conflicts of interest as religious and ethnocentric platforms emerged, out smarting objectivity and fairness in the choice of who holds sensitive positions. There is a manifest predisposition of the hierarchy to impose subjective agenda of the more conspicuous fragments of the alliance. These are samples substantiating the disinclinations of the national political classes to cleaner and more responsible political competitions.
For a large majority of Nigerian politicians, politics is a game of sabotage, manoeuvrings and backstabbing self-progression. For this fact, betrayal is a clear-cut trade mark of a successful politician in Nigeria. This is why the older and the more morally bankrupt politicians are preferred and recycled as strategists, because they are cruder and more insensitive as they draw from wealth of experiences of past bad politics in which anything is weaponised in the do or die political contestations. For the ’embattled war horses’, politics is perceived in context of division, hostility, illogical friction against anyone outside the camp, and opportunities to deepen racial and religious antagonism.
From all the geopolitical zones, groups tagging themselves elders have unprecedentedly proliferated with each counterfeiting the other and making irritating comments. The political confusion in the polity today is made more complex by jingoistic tirades of the ‘elders’. This is why as some elders rally in Abuja in solidarity, and to persuade the president to elongate and continue, even if he is misruling, the others are vowing to make the polity ungovernable if he fails to step down immediately. At a point, a group of terrorising elders solemnly vowed to command the National Assembly to commence impeachment processes against the president for reasons best known to them. It is providential that there is still functional peace in most parts of the polity and that the National Assembly does not seem ready to take order without apparent and instantaneous gain.
It is unfortunate that Nigeria transited to a brand of democracy that is disposing her to self-implosions with the political leaders desperate to snatch both the power and the society for own gratification. It is not surprising that some Civil Society groups in Nigeria have taken up the roles a fifth columnists in the project to cripple the nation. They are the groups bought over and sponsored in the agenda to deal treacherously with Nigerian nation. These groups are identifiable effortlessly by their instantly recognizable slant and desperation. They endorse factions, threaten others and make statements proving their statuses as political mercenaries. Civil Society group misses out when it fails to be seen as an objective interventionist, unbiased umpire driven by passion for universal national interest.
The development of this nature further poses a profound challenge in the sense that Nigerian state deserves a political order capable of inspiring factors of continuing social stability and integrated development. In fact, neither socio-economic development nor affirmative political progression is possible in a society that pillories divergent political expressions and stifles basic freedom. This is a kind of the social order susceptible to leadership system devoid of partnership with the people, a ‘sole rulership’. ‘Sole rulership’ is compared to a leadership framework that vigorously carries on without the assent and collaboration of the citizens. This style of leadership characterizes nations conquered in absolute terms by the ones in command and who intend never to relinquish power in spite of the cost. History is dotted with spiteful narratives of the preposterous ‘power-lovers’ who went every length to destroy without trace all hypothetical challengers.
For motives of self-perpetuation, power-grabbers loathe credible election processes in a resolve to cleave to power and remain in total control. Even when such elections are organized, they are basically ritualistic devices legitimating nasty grips on power. In this situation, elections instantaneously represent usual occasions to ‘decontaminate’ the tensions arising from exigencies of reforms. Elections should constitute important elements in true culture and practice of liberal democracy. Regrettably, this is not the case specific to Nigeria but to situations in most authoritarian states. Here, the essence of election is swiftly vanishing as viable means of guaranteeing orderly processes of leadership ‘succession and change, an instrument of political authority and legitimacy. The failure of true elections or their absence largely defines the predominance of political dictatorship and personalized rule in Africa.
Free, fair and credible elections in their current forms in most authoritarian states appeared to be rapidly fading shadows, absconding phenomena, yet the commitments of masses are energised and people are profoundly willing to take further steps to eclipse forces against all forms of democratization ideas. This commitment proves indispensable for a new dawn of socio-political and economic self-determination for the states. In spite of resolve of the relentless despots to diminish the chances of regular changes of leadership, free choice of representatives and environment of free expression, there has been a growing enthusiasm among the people for free, competitive and multi-party elections. The mutinous political protestations in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya in particular were seen as spontaneous reaction of people who were for so long asphyxiated by varied degrees repressions by their respective political autocrats. The protest leading to dethronement of President Mohammed Morsi demonstrated that Egyptians are unwilling to settle down in the absence of cleaner politics of justice and fairness.
In Nigeria, the demand for revitalisation of opposition against the domineering control of one political party since 1999 informed nocturnal moves and desperate realignments by some political opposition groups to dislodge the ruling party come 2015 general elections. In fact, there is a growing consciousness for free and unfettered political space notwithstanding treacherous obstacles and hammerings designed to weaken the commitment and cohesion among political activists. Increasingly, people are constructing political platforms and making strong political statements as proves of determination to participate in power competition notwithstanding the fact that elections are largely marred by violence, fraud and often negated when they do not reflect the choices of the ones in charge. The trend is towards knocking-off the bottoms of the old order of despotic political rulership under the guise of civil governance.
This article was written by Chris Nwedo and was published in Nextvoice Newspaper July 25, 2013. P.12
