The Feasibility of
Nigerian Parties Becoming Democratic
Jibrin Ibrahim,
Daily Trust, 18th November Trust, 2016, Deepening Democracy Column
This week, I was at the National
Institute of Policy and Strategic Studies in Kuru attending a retreat on
strengthening internal party democracy in Nigeria. The basis for the theme is
that political parties are the key actors in the democratic game but our
parties refuse to practice democracy within themselves and this trait weakens
their capacity to engage in democratic practices with other parties and with
citizens. Internal party democracy refers to the inclusiveness of members in
the decision-making processes and deliberations of political parties. The processes
include the development of party programmes and manifestos, the election of
party leaders and the most contentious, the nomination of candidates to contest
for elective posts.
The practice in Nigeria is that
political barons and godfathers take decisions on behalf of party members who
have no say in the running of party affairs. It is actually an aberration to
talk of party members in Nigeria. Membership cards are given to barons and
godfathers who keep them until the need to use them arises, usually for a party
convention. At that point, the godfathers would bus their “members” to the
venue and give them the cards with instructions on who to vote for and payments
for their services. It is therefore a straightforward patron-client
relationship in which the patron pays for the services of his clients.
Precisely for this reason, almost no party convention since 1998 has been a
democratic opportunity for party members to take decisions and to make choices.
The fraction of the party machine with the most control simply produces the
outcome they desire and the other fraction or fractions are disenfranchised and
go to court or jump to another party. This process means parties are not sites
of democratic action but are simply arenas where the said barons use the
resources at their disposal – money, thugs, control of security agencies etc to
impose their will. This practice makes parties not only undemocratic but also
weakens them because they lack legitimacy and the respect of their so-called
members.
In 2012, the former National
Chairman of the Peoples’ Democratic Party, Alhaji Bamanga Tukur warned that:
“It is an illusion for the party’s members to think that the PDP will rule
Nigeria forever, if there are no reforms that will enable the party to deliver
good governance to the Nigerian people” (Daily Trust, 29/7/12). The party, he
said, was engaging in a major drive to recruit new members. Of course it never
happened. The party neither sought for members nor delivered good governance
and it was roundly defeated in 2015 by the APC. The crisis that occurred in the
Ondo APC gubernatorial primaries recently was a clear indication that the APC
has no lessons to give to the PDP on the matter. In 2013, I was involved in a
comparative assessment of political party capacity in the country and one major
finding we had was that no political party in Nigeria had any idea, not even a
rough idea of how many members it had. The notion of a party member is a non-existent
category in Nigerian politics.
As is well known in the literature,
the search for party members and supporters is the motive force of democratic politics.
How then do we understand the Nigerian situation? In democracies, parties are
reliant on members and supporters to elect them and for that reason alone
respect their members and allow them to decide on candidates for elections.
Democracy after all is about the popularity principle so parties know that if
they do not accept the most popular candidate chosen by members, then they are
likely to lose elections. Francois Holland was the powerful general secretary
of the French Socialist Party when his wife, Segolene Royal contested against
him and won in the 2007 Convention for presidential candidate. He was bitter
but he led the campaign to support her in the elections even if his bitterness
made him walk out of the marriage. She lost the elections, lost her marriage
but Holland stayed back in the party and was able to secure the next nomination
and win the elections. In Nigeria, leaders who lose walk out of the party to
join another because they have lost. The real problem however is that in most
cases, the winner also did not win so no one can take the moral high ground.
One of the challenges of Nigerian
politics is the penchant for everybody to seek to be part of ruling parties. In
the 18-years since parties emerged in the Forth Republic, most of Nigeria’s
political class have been in and out of the PDP. Their current destination is
the APC. At the height of PDP power, the party dismissed all of its members. As
the then Chairman of PDP, Col. Ahmadu Ali explained: “The PDP is full of
members who fraudulently obtained their party membership” – Tribune,
23/11/2005. As they all obtained their membership fraudulently, he dismissed
all of them and asked then to reapply. For weeks, the PDP enjoyed the
distinction of being the only ruling political party in world history without a
single member. After a “thorough process of screening” suitable members were
recruited to organize the rigging of the 2007 elections.
Nigerian parties have been groomed
into the culture of not having members because for much of our history,
elections were rigged not won or lost. Nigerian Parties can afford to sack
members because they are not about democracy and elections. Nigerian elections were
occasions in which the outcome has been the subversion of the democratic
process rather than its consolidation. Especially during the 2003 and 2007
elections, the polls were not opportunities in which party members and
supporters expressed political choices through voting who they wanted to rule
them. The elections were massively rigged and the ruling party could not have
been in need of members because it could deliver votes without having party
members.
The political terrain has however
been changing significantly. For the first time in 2011, the elections were
better than the preceding ones. The 2015 elections were even better and for the
first time in our history, an opposition party won the elections. When
elections are free and fair, political parties need members and supporters as
that is the basis on which they can win elections. The popularity principle
then comes into play. One of the key issues that emerged in the Kuru retreat is
that the parties have not realized that the situation has changed and that
henceforth, the need to have members, respect members and allow freely chosen
delegates determine the outcomes of conventions. The ruling APC might be
working fast towards its destruction and defeat in the next general elections
if it does not edify the principle of internal party democracy.
Nigerian parties must take up the challenge of democracy. Parties must
begin to actively recruit members and above all respect them. In a democracy,
parties must be owned, financed and controlled by members rather than
godfathers. The godfather syndrome makes it impossible for true accountability
to members to be practiced in parties. The fact that one or two individuals
bear the cost of running campaigns and funding of other party activities leads
to a privatization of both party and state machinery because government
officials would naturally owe allegiance to the political godfather who “put”
them in office rather than to the ordinary citizen. Our parties must learn to
change. One of the most frustrating aspects of the Kuru retreat was that while
all parties were invited, the APC and PDP did not attend. In a sense, they are
the two parties that have the most need to change their ways even if they are
too arrogant o realise it.
Jibrin Ibrahim, PhD
Senior Fellow
Centre for Democracy and Development
16 A7 Street, CITEC Mbora Estate,
Jabi/Airport Road By-pass, P.O.Box14345, Wuse
Abuja, Nigeria
Tel - +234 8053913837
Twitter,@Jibrinibrahim17
Facebook,Jibrin.ibrahim