African Centre for Leadership, Strategy & Development

CENTRE LSD NEWSLETTER

by admin on January 27, 2012

Created by admin on Mon, 5/3/2012 -

centre lsd publications

Otive Igbuzor, PhD

Executive Director,

African Centre for Leadership, Strategy & Development (Centre LSD),

Suite 27, 2nd Floor, Tolse Plaza,

4, Franca Afegbua Crescent,

Off Jonathan Mariere Road,

Near Apo Legislative Quarters, Zone E,

P. O. Box 9661, Garki, Abuja, Nigeria.

Website: www.centrelsd.org

E-mail: otiveigbuzor@yahooo.co.uk

OUTLINE OF A PAPER PRESENTED AT THE CENTRE FOR DEMOCRACY AND DEVELOPMENT (CDD)-OPEN SOCIETY INITIATIVE FOR WEST AFRICA (OSIWA) JOINT FORUM ON RESOLVING THE POLITICAL IMPASSE IN NIGERIA HELD AT DENNIS HOTEL FROM 15-16 JANUARY, 2010.

INTRODUCTION
It has been established all over the world that democracy is the best form of government. The effective functioning of democracy requires among other things the conduct of credible, free and fair elections as well as sound, effective, professional and culturally valid democratic institutions. In this paper, we examine the challenges of democracy in Nigeria and what needs to be done to restore franchise and strengthen the democratic process. But first, we explicate the concepts of democracy and democratization.

CONCEPTUAL CLARIFICATIONS
DEMOCRACY
The concept of democracy has been defined in various ways by different people. The most popular definition is the one given by Abraham Lincoln who defined democracy as œthe government of the people, by the people and for the people. According to C.B. Macpherson œdemocracy originally meant rule by the common people, the plebeians. It is very much a class affair; it meant the sway of the lowest and largest class. According to Lord Bryce, democracy is government in which the will of the majority of qualified citizens rule. But to John Plamentz, œdemocratic government means government by persons freely chosen by and responsible to the governed.

From the above, it is clear that scholars are not in agreement of what democracy is. However, it is well established all over the world that democracy is the best form of government. Democracy is so important in the world today that it has become the driving force of development. In any case, different scholars put emphasis on different issues, which they consider to be crucial to democracy. For instance, Robert Dahl argued that œ a key characteristic of a democracy is the continuing responsiveness of the government to the preferences of its citizens considered as political equals. On the other hand, Thomas Hodgkin posits that œ the central concept of democracy has normally been understood in its classic sense as meaning essentially, the transfer of political and other forms of power from a small ruling European class to the mass of the African people¦..the African demos.

Despite the above differences majority of scholars agree that liberal democracy contains some basic principles which include citizen participation; equality; political tolerance; accountability; transparency; regular, free and fair elections, economic freedom; control of the abuse of power; bill of rights; accepting the result of elections; human rights; multi-party system and the rule of law. We are aware that some scholars make a distinction between civilian rule and democracy. However, in this paper, we shall use the two terms interchangeably. In our view, civilian rule is the beginning of democracy. It should be recognised that establishing and strengthening democracy is an on going process demanding continuos effort and imagination. Meanwhile, democracy goes beyond mere regular holding of elections for as Fayemi has argued, œpolling booths and voters are not all that make a democracy. Indeed, democracy at its core, is a state of mind, a set of attitudinal dispositions woven into the fabric of a society, the concrete expression of which are its social institutions. Undemocratic social institutions cannot there for sire or sustain democratic governments, no matter how often the ballot box ritual is enacted.[i]

DEMOCRATISATION: STRENGTHENING AND DEFENDING DEMOCRACY
The concept of democratization has attracted the attention of scholars all over the world particularly at the end of the cold war. Some scholars have suggested that democratization is a process that passes from decay of authoritarian regime through stages such as preparatory phase, the decision to democratize, electoral contestation, the handover of power by the authoritarian regime, the legitimation of the new political regime and consolidation of democracy.[ii] According to Monga, democratic consolidation is a precise sequence of events involving internal or domestic variables such as clandestine political forces, awakening of civil society, demographic shifts, exhaustion of coercive apparatus and deteriorating economic conditions; and external variables such as the end of the cold war and IMF/World Bank conditionality all leading to the decision to democratize. But to O Donnel and Schmitter, democratization is the process whereby rules and procedures of citizenship are either applied to political institutions previously governed by other principles (e.g. coercive control, social tradition, expert judgement, or administrative practice), or expanded to include persons not previously enjoying such rights and obligations (e.g. nontax payers, illiterates, women, youth, ethnic minorities, or extended to cover issues and institutions not previously subject to citizen participation (e.g. State agencies, military establishments, partisan organizations, interest associations, productive enterprises, educational institutions etc).[iii] Although the definitions above place a lot of emphasis on democratization as a process, Nwabueze argues that it is not only a concept, nor is it synonymous with multi-partyism but is also concerned with certain conditions of things; conditions such as a virile civil society, a democratic society, a free society, a just society, equal treatment of all citizens by the State, an ordered, stable society, a society infused with the spirit of liberty, democracy, justice and equality.[iv] According to Nwabueze, democratization in its fullest sense requires that the society, the economy, politics, the constitution of the State, the electoral system and the practice of government be domocratised with the following twelve things:

1. Multi-partyism under a democratic constitution having the force of a supreme, over-riding law;

A complete change of guards and the exclusion of certain other categories of persons from participation in democratic politics and government;
A genuine and meaningful popular participation in politics and government;
A virile civil society;
A democratic society;
A free society;
A just society;
Equal treatment of all citizens by the State;
The rule of law;
An ordered stable society;
A society infused with the spirit of liberty democracy and justice; and
Independent, self-reliant and prosperous market economy.
From the above definitions and descriptions, five characterization of democratization is evident. First, the move for democratization is an admission that the previous system was not democratic. Meanwhile, it has been accepted all over the world that democracy is the best form of government. Military rule is not only undemocratic but also an aberration. This is why the Organisation of African Unity (now African Union) decided not to allow any military head of State in its meetings and deliberations. Second, democratization is a process that has to be worked upon by the citizens of the country concerned. It cannot be donated by one country to another. Although external factors can give a push for democratization, the nature, form and depth of the process will depend largely of the citizens of the country. Third, democratisation leads to an expansion of the democratic space and increased participation of citizens especially those that are usually excluded and margilised like minority groups , Youth and women. Fourth, for democratization to succeed, there is an underlying assumption of acceptance of democratic values, culture and democractic way of doing things charaterised by respect for other peoples views, dialogue, consensus building and respect for the rights of others. Finally, following the fall of the Berlin wall, there came a new wave of democratization. One of the challenges of this new democratization process is the challenge to subordinate the military to civil authority.

Scholars have delineated three œwaves of democratization in Africa from the 1950s to the 1990s.[v] The first phase occurred in the 1950s and the 1960s with the departure of the colonial powers and it was characterized by one party rule, intolerance of opposition and charismatic leaders who fought for independence. The second wave started in the 1970s when brutal dictatorships collapsed in some countries (Uganda, Central African republic and Equatorial Guinea) while in some countries, elections for legislative seats were held (Senegal, Burkina Faso, The Gambia, Botswana and Mauritius) but some countries regressed into authoritarian rule after brief experimentation with democracy (Nigeria and Ghana). The third wave commenced in the late 1980s and early 1990s with the collapse of the Soviet Union that marked the end of the cold war that heralded multi-party democracy in many African countries. It has been documented that at least 38 countries held œfounding elections between 1989 and 1994.[vi]

CHALLENGES OF DEMOCRACY IN NIGERIA: The challenges of democracy in Nigeria are enormous but can be discussed under two main headings:

a) WEAKENED, COMPROMISED AND INEFFECTIVE DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTIONS: We have argued elsewhere that sound, effective, professional and culturally valid institutions are of prime importance in consolidating democracy.[vii] In Nigeria, institutions of democracy that should help in consolidating democracy are weakened, compromised and made ineffective by an irresponsible and rascally political elite and a corrupt and inept bureaucracy. The institutions affected include:

Legislature

Election Management Bodies

Security agencies

Judiciary

The end result of all of these is a complete loss of franchise in Nigeria.

b) THE LOSS OF FRANCHISE IN NIGERIA[viii]

There are a lot of challenges with the conduct of elections in Nigeria from the 1922 election to the 2007 election. It has been documented that elections in Nigeria are constant tales of violence, fraud and bad blood.[ix] The challenges include among other things irregularities which put the credibility of the entire electoral process in doubt; problems with the legislative framework which puts constraints on the electoral process; several organisations are not playing their roles to ensure credible, free and fair election; the electoral system does not give room for inclusiveness; lack of independence of electoral commissions; long process of election dispute resolution; irresponsible behaviour by politicians and followers manifesting in thuggery and violence; lack of effective democratic institutions and monetisation of politics. It has been documented that money not only determines who participates in electoral politics but that money drowns votes and voices in Nigeria as ˜godfathers openly confess about shady deals, funding or sponsoring elections for ˜godsons and purchasing electoral victory.[x] The end result of the challenges is that the votes of the citizens do not count.[xi]

The 2007 general election was held on 14th April, 2007 for the President, Vice-President, Senators and members of the House of Representative[xii] and 21st April for the State Governors and members of the house of Assembly.[xiii] Many commentators have argued that the 2007 election is the worst election in the history of the country in terms of irregularities and reversal of election result by election tribunals. Several Nigeria organisations monitored the 2007 election including Transition Monitoring Group (TMG), ActionAid Nigeria, the Catholic Justice, Development and Peace Committee (JDPC), Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) and Federation of Muslim Women Association (FOMWAN). They all came with the verdict that the elections lack credibility and was not free and fair.

Scholars are in agreement that all previous elections in Nigeria have had one form of irregularity or the other. However, Okey Ibeanu has argued that the 2007 election is unique in some sense. According to him,

¦it is in a qualitatively different stage than what obtained in the past. The specificity of direct capture as a form of primitive accumulation of votes lies in the massive deployment and involvement of the state in its design and implementation. In earlier stages of primitive accumulation of votes (PAV), political parties rigged elections and although the state was generally not neutral, its institutions were used (instrumentalised) for the purpose of achieving PAV. In other words, state institutions were first captured by private interest, particularly political parties, and then deployed for PAV. Thus, the state acted in PAV in externality often serving to create the enabling environment for it to occur and supervising its implementation. Under direct capture, however, the state does not act in neutrality, but is the principal implementer of PAV. Thus, while in previous phases of PAV, political parties rigged elections using the instrumentality of the state, in direct capture, the state rigs elections for political parties. It is this change that accounts for the brazenness of election malpractice in the 2007 elections, namely the transformation of the state from an instrument and external enabler of rigging, to direct party and implementer of rigging.[xiv]
It is very clear that the political class in Nigeria want to operate œdemocracy without elections. Several efforts have been made in the past to restore franchise to the electorate incluing opposition organising, voter education, protection of mandate, electoral reforms, judicial intervention and electoral reform panel set up by President YarAdua in 2007. Historically, ruling political parties and incubents are the major offenders in making the people to loose their franchise. This is why opposition parties have also constituted the bulwark of efforts to restore franchise. Civil society organisations have also worked tirelessly to restore franchise to the citizens. Prior to the 1999 elections, there were a lot of voter education programmes to sensitise citizens on the importance of elections after many years of military rule. In the 2003 elections, there were also a lot of voter education programmes. But in 2007, a new lexicon was introduced namely protection of mandate which involved mobilising citizens to protect their votes in a way that election results reflect the actual votes cast by citizens.

ROLE OF CSOS
The role of civil society organizations in overcoming the challenges of democracy in Nigeria is enormous. This role is amplified by the ascendancy of neo-liberalism, irresponsibility of the political class and the crass opportunism and incompetence of the bureaucracy. But we argue that civil society is not meant to take over the role of the state but to promote active citizen involvement or everyday democracy and the effectiveness of the state. The World Alliance for Citizen Participation, CIVICUS aptly captures the role of civil society in its three major objectives of promoting civic existence, civic expression and civic engagement, CIVICUS popular three Es.[xv] Promoting civic existence involves defending peoples fundamental rights to organize and act collectively towards the public good. Promoting civic expression entails strengthening the capacities of civil society organizations to freely amplify the voices of ordinary people and promoting civic engagement requires fostering interaction between citizens, their associations and other institutions to ensure that public institutions reflect the will of the people and are accountable to them.

In our study of civil society in Nigeria under the auspices of the Civil Society Index (CSI) developed by CIVICUS, we discovered that the structure and environment dimensions of civil society in Nigeria are less developed than the values and impact dimensions.[xvi]

CAPACITY NEEDS OF CSOS
For CSOs to perform the key roles of promoting civic existence, civic expression and civic engagement requires certain kind of culture and skills. The culture required is the ability to act as facilitators, enablers or catalyst, empowering others, persistency, analysis and activism. It also requires the capacity to challenge structures and powers of oppressive State officials and institutions as well as traditional systems with risks of possible arrest, intimidation and repression from the state and traditional structures. It therefore requires skills in leadership, strategy, organization, management, mobilization, campaigning, advocacy, analysis, communication, research, networking and activism.

OPTIONS FOR CSO ENGAGEMENT: RESTORING FRANCHISE, STREGTHENING AND DEFENDING DEMOCRACY

a. Option One: Political Education: Elaborate and widespread political education should focus on right of citizens to elect their leaders, voter education, election violence, power analysis, class struggle, and patriarchy and gender equality.

b. Option Two: Protection of Mandate: In the last ten years, especially during the 1999 and 2003 elections, civil society organisations have conducted a lot of voters education programmes focusing on the importance and power of the vote. Citizens were mobilised to come out to vote for candidates of their choice. Citizens came out in 1999 and 2003 but were disappointed when they realised that in some cases votes do not count. Despite this, there is the need to continue to embark on voter education because it is basic to engaging other strategies. In preparation for the 2007 elections, many civil society organisations started training citizens and communities on the protection of mandate. This involves a series of tools and strategies that citizens can use to engage political parties, security agents and electoral officers to prevent manipulation of electoral franchise. There is the need to continue and scale up efforts at mandate protection taking into consideration experiences in the 2007 elections and bye elections conducted since then.

c. Option Three: Advocacy and Campaigns: We have been doing a lot of advocacy on these issues but there is the need to conduct campaigns. By campaigns, we mean the need to engage the society in conversation about these issues. The political elite in Nigeria have shown insensitivity to well argued positions. The only possibility of ensuring that the political elite listen is massive public facing campaigns. The Enough is Enough rally is a good example.

d. Option Four: Monitoring of the Electoral Process: There should be elaborate monitoring of the constitutional reform and electoral process. Even when they give only a days notice before public hearing, mobilisation should be done to flood the place with people and memoranda. When they go on retreat, a large number of people should attend and organise public demonstrations. We can organise a parallel retreat in the same town and work on the same agenda and release our positions to the press.

Similarly, we should monitor the electoral process. We should ensure that voters register are displayed before elections to enable registered voters, political parties and electorate to make claims and objections. Similarly, we must ensure that announcement of results is done at polling centres by presiding officers and duly signed copies given to accredited agents, the Police and State Security Service. It is imperative that all efforts are made to ensure that the electoral law and regulations are implemented faithfully. As Jibrin Ibrahim has noted, most African constitutions are excellent documents; they have most of the right provisions about the rule of law, human, civil and political rights, elective institutions, governmental accountability, separation of powers etc. The problem however is that these provisions are not followed.[xvii] Our argument here is that if the provisions of the constitution and the Electoral Act 2006 were followed, the level of irregularities in the 2007 would not have been experienced. We must therefore put emphasis on implementing whatever law is used in the conduct of elections in Nigeria. We should not put all our efforts on electoral reform and fail to be vigilant. In particular, the role of different stakeholders that need to be performed to ensure credible, free and fair election should be enforced. The stakeholders include Political Parties, Security Agencies (NPF, Armed Forces), media, religious and traditional institutions, CSOs, International Organisations, the National Assembly, the Executive and the Judiciary.

e. Option Five: Election Observation: We should begin now to plan to observe the election in 2011. The experience in Ekiti State bye election on 25th April, 2009 where civil society attempted to deploy at least one election observer to each polling unit shows that election observers can serve as deterrent to election riggers. We should plan to deploy at least one election observer to each of the polling units in the 2011 elections. Development partners will have a lot of role to play in this regard.

f. Option Six: A POLITICAL STRATEGY: It must be recognised that electoral reform will not bring about social change i.e. changes to the existing structures and social, political and economic arrangements. Ultimately, changes will take place if the objective and subjective conditions are conducive for widespread changes in the political arena. We have argued elsewhere that for change to occur in any society requires the presence of objective and subjective conditions.[xviii] Objective conditions exist when situations are evidently abnormal with huge contradictions which can only be resolved by change. The subjective conditions are the organizational preparations required to bring about change. In our view, the objective condition is ripe in Nigeria. There is poverty in the midst of plenty. There are huge contradictions and gap between the poor and the rich. The country cannot continue in the way it is presently being run. Unfortunately, the subjective conditions are absent. There is no virile political party or movement that is committed to change neither is there a vanguard revolutionary organization to guide that change. There are no well organized democratic and popular organizations to support a change process. Although, there are individuals committed to and are driving change, the organizational support required for sustainability and great impact is lacking. The challenge is to build the organizations with dynamic and visionary leadership as well as a committed followership that is dedicated to change. Therefore ongoing attempts to build the requisite organization, leadership and followership for change which must be assisted, nurtured and consolidated for the necessary change to occur in Nigeria.

While options one to five will help in the conduct of elections, ultimately, strengthening and deepening of democracy in Nigeria will depend on a long term strategy of changing the nature and character of the state and the conduct of politics, political party organising and eventual capture of political power by democratic, radical and progressive forces in Nigeria. The present nature and character of the Nigerian state is such that political power has become the easiest method of primitive accumulation of capital. The resource curse and the oil economy have made rent seeking behaviour predominant leading to the collapse of Agriculture and industry. There is the need for a change in the nature and character of the state in a fundamental manner that will affect the political culture and development paradigm in the country. This will affect political party organising so that there will be ideologically rooted parties that will practise issue based politics. Ultimately democrats and progressive elements will participate and change the colour of politics in Nigeria.

Finally Whether in terms of alternative strategies or political strategy, there is the need for some strategic approaches for the restoration of hope in Nigeria. First and foremost, there is the need to mobilise forces of change to make rigging of election difficult if not impossible. This will require a movement of patriotic and dedicated Nigerians that are opposed to the present bankrupt ruling elite. The movement will educate and mobilise citizens to resist rigging of elections. A major strategy that the movement can use is effective communication especially to citizens on the dangers of loss of franchise to the entire society. Secondly, there is the need for the transformation of institutions of democracy. It must be recognised that democracy goes beyond the ritual of conducting elections. Democracy is a holistic concept that involves process, culture and attitude. This means that deliberate efforts must be made to inculcate democratic values and ethos including building electoral culture of electing prefects in primary and secondary schools, social clubs, town unions etc

CONCLUSION
Although it has been recognized all over the world that democracy is the best form of government, the nature and practice of democracy has been challenging. Some scholars have argued that democracy is a process that needs continous refinement, strengthening and defending. The history of democratic process in Nigeria is a chequered one. In the 50 years of Nigerias post independence existence, the military ruled for about thirty years. With the return to civil rule in 1999, one would have expected that democratic institutions such as the legislature, election management bodies, security agencies and the judiciary will work to strengthen and defend the nascent democracy. Unfortunately, the institutions are weakened, compromised and made ineffective leading to loss of franchise in Nigeria. This has placed a lot of responsibility on CSOs to promote civic existence, civic expression and civic engagement. In order to do this CSOs require capacity especially in the areas of leadership, strategy, organization, management, execution, advocacy and campaigns. Therefore, options available to restore franchise and strengthen democracy in Nigeria include political education, protection of electoral mandate, advocacy and campaigns, monitoring of the electoral process, election observation and political strategy for change.

ENDNOTES

[i] Fayemi, K. (2001) Preface in Agonizo, Biko and Idem, Unyierie , Nigeria: Democratising a Militarised Civil Society. London, Centre for Democracy and Development Occasional paper Series No. 5.

[ii] Monga, C. (2002), œA Theory of Democratic Consolidation in Democracy and Development, Journal of West Affrican Affairs. Vol. 3, No. 1. pp7-27. London, Centre for Democracy and Development.

[iii] O Donnel and Schmitter

[iv] Nwabueze, B. O. (1993), Democratisation. Ibadan, Spectrum Books Ltd

[v] Johnston, P and Lee, C., œPolitical Liberalisation and Democratic Change in Sub-Saharan Africa, 1970-1995: A Cross Sectional Analysis, Democracy and Development Journal of West African Affairs, Vol. 3, No. 2 pp 37-50

[vi] Bratton, M. and van de Walle, N., Democratic Experiments in Africa: Regime Transitions in Comparative Perspective (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press)

[vii] Igbuzor, O (2005), Perspectives of Democracy and Development. Lagos, Tolalu and Associates.

[viii] This section is taken from Igbuzor, O , Strategies for Restoring the Franchise in Ibeanu, O and Ibrahim, J.(Forthcoming), The 2007 Nigerian Elections or the Direct Capture of the Peoples Sovereignty.

[ix] Agbakoba, Olisa and Ilo, Udo Jude (2004), Where did we go Wrong? A Review of the 2003/2004 Elections in Nigeria. Lagos, The Human Rights Law Service.

[x] Adetula, V. A. O. (2008), Money and Politics in Nigeria. Abuja, IFES, Nigeria.

[xi] Transition Monitoring Group (2003), Do the Votes Count? Final Report of the 2003 General Elections in Nigeria.

[xii] The Senators and members of the House of Representatives constitute the bicameral legislature at the national level.

[xiii] At the State Houses of Assembly, there is a unicameral legislature.

[xiv] Ibeanu, )(2008), The Direct Capture of Peoples Mandate in Nigeria: Conceptualising the Specificities of the 2007 General Elections

[xv] www.CIVICUS.org

[xvi] ActionAid Nigeria, DevNet, CIVICUS and UNDP (2007), Civil Society in Nigeria: Contributing to Positive Social Change. In the study, civil society was examined in four dimensions: Structure, Environment, Values and Impact. The structure of civil society describes and analyses the overall size, strength and vibrancy of CSOs in Nigeria. It examines the extent of citizen participation, depth of citizen participation, diversity of citizen participation, level of organisation, inter-relations and civil society resources. The external environment in which civil society exists and functions include legislative, political, cultural and economic context, relationship between civil society and the state as well as the private sector. The values practiced and promoted within the civil society arena include democracy, tolerance or protection of the environment. Impact examines how active and successful civil society organisations have been in fulfilling several essential functions including public policy influence, holding state and private corporations accountable, responding to social interests, empowering citizens, empowering marginalised people and meeting societal needs.

[xvii] Ibrahim, J. (2003), Democratic Transition in Anglophone West Africa. CODESRIA Monograph Series.

[xviii] Igbuzor, O. (2005), Op Cit