2015 ELECTIONS: HOW TO MAKE NIGERIA THE WINNER
BY ABDULRAHMAN B. DAMBAZAU CFR PhD Lieutenant General (Rtd)
The theme “2015 Elections: How to make Nigeria the Winner” appears
simple, but I found it very complex and thought-provoking. Certain
assumptions could be made with regard to our theme today: first, that
although most of the elections conducted in Nigeria in the past had
presented some serious challenges, the 2015 elections are likely to
present much more serious challenges that could jeopardize national
security interests unless plans are made to ensure hitch-free elections;
second, that going by what has been speculated within and outside
Nigeria, there is the possibility that the country will disintegrate,
and the 2015 elections would probably be the platform for it unless it
is handled with care; third, that there is hope the 2015 elections would
provide the opportunity to strengthen Nigeria’s unity and uphold her
integrity; and fourth, that the 2015 elections would provide
opportunities to elect good leaders that would clear the path for
peaceful co-existence, security, and national development. Since this is
a dialogue, I will be raising a lot of questions in an attempt to
provoke discussions on how to make Nigeria the winner after the 2015
elections, which are just around the corner.
Winning itself in the
context of the 2015 elections has its own implications: what stage of
winning are we referring to, such as prioritizing into short, medium and
long terms; or are we looking at winning in terms of successful conduct
of the elections in 2015 in which they not only would be free, fair,
all-inclusive, and credible, but also free from the type of
post-elections violence we witnessed in 2011; or that the 2015 elections
would lead to the long awaited consolidation of democracy in which good
governance would be evident through accountability and transparency,
and the respect for the rule of law and human rights; or ensuring that
the aftermath of the 2015 elections does not lead to the disintegration
of Nigeria as earlier predicted by some US security analysts? Would the
2015 elections bring about a radical change leading us to economic
growth and political stability? Would they improve Nigeria’s corruption
image in which the Transparency Corruption Index (TCI) depicts Nigeria
as one of the most corrupt nations on earth? Would they improve
Nigeria’s poor governance image as depicted by the 2013 Mo Ibrahim Index
of African Governance (IIAG)? IIAG defines governance as “the provision
of the political, social and economic public goods and services that a
citizen has the right to expect from his or her state, and that a state
has the responsibility to deliver to its citizens.” The framework
comprises four categories: safety and rule of law; participation and
human rights; sustainable economic opportunity; and human management.
Nigeria’s 2013 ranking was 41st among the 52 African countries assessed.
Or would the 2015 elections provide the opportunity to improve
Nigeria’s status in the UN Human Development Index (HDI) from being
among the low developed to highly developed countries in the world? The
2014 Human Development Report (HDR), the latest in the series since
1960, ranks Nigeria 152nd out of the 185 countries assessed. In the
context of human security, what would be Nigeria’s post-2015 development
agenda? To what extent would the outcome of 2015 elections
significantly reduce the risks of terrorism to which Nigeria presently
occupies the 4th most risk position (even ahead of Somalia) in the world
according to the 2014 Global Terrorism Index; or to turn things around
in the world of cyber crime in which a computer crime and security
survey ranked Nigeria as the most internet fraud country in Africa and
the 3rd in the world. In other words, what is our target of Nigeria
being the winner in post-2015 elections? And at what point after the
2015 elections should we feel comfortable that Nigeria is the winner,
assuming we are able to identify the winning parameters and thus map out
her winning strategy?
There is no doubt that as we move towards the
2015 elections the political environment in Nigeria has been anything
but stable, accompanied by high tension signaling warnings of impending
political instability and violence, added to the criminal violence
resulting from such crimes as kidnapping, armed robbery, ritual murders,
and rape occurring all over. Already, over the past five years the
nation has been struggling with the Boko Haram insurgency in the
northeast that is threatening our peace and stability, and to a very
large extent, Nigeria’s sovereign and territorial integrity, bearing in
mind that some parts of her territory are already under the control of
the insurgents (according to recent reports, 20 out of the 27 local
government areas of Borno State are under the insurgents, with the flag
hoisted).
There is also the issue of recognition and ownership of
Nigeria, and one may not be far from reality to assume that Nigeria is
still struggling to be recognized as a nation by those who reside in her
territory. To be the winner at anytime, Nigeria requires collective
ownership to the extent that the approximately 170 million “citizens”
see themselves first as Nigerians rather than clinging to their various
ethnic and/or religious identities. We identify ourselves on the basis
of our religion and ethnicity, and the only time we are Nigerians is
when we identify ourselves at international borders holding the
travelling passport. No wonder we find it difficult to conduct
successful census that would enable us plan for development as a nation,
mainly because we argue over which religious group, section or tribe is
more in number, without focusing on the quality of the population.
Today we talk of ethnic nationalities and the urge for
self-determination for each ethnic group. No doubt there are people who
do not believe in Nigeria as it is currently structured. Similarly,
there are those who believe that the amalgamation of the north and
south was either a genuine mistake or a deliberate gerrymandering by the
British colonial government in line with its interests; still there are
others who are convinced that the north and south do not share anything
in common culturally, therefore it is impossible to live together as
one nation; others feel that Nigeria is too large a country, therefore
would prefer an arrangement that would give each region
self-determination; and yet there are even those with separatist agenda,
such as Boko Haram, NDPVF, MASSOB, MEND, and OPC, who believe that
everyone should go his separate ways for whatever reasons they hold.
From the foregoing picture, what has become very clear is the fact that
the unity of Nigeria has been under intense threat, and with the current
divergent political interests and the combative nature of most
politicians in pursuant of do-or-die politics, what would likely be the
picture post-2015 elections? As a matter of fact there are people who
threatened to put the country on fire if their preferred candidate does
not win the presidential election. How can Nigeria be the winner after
2015 elections against the forces of anarchy, violence, and
disintegration? What should be the strategy for this winning agenda? The
2015 elections represent just the peak or high point of this contest,
but there are many other factors that come to play in deciding the “how”
to make Nigeria the winner.
The 2015 elections are not going to be
the first in Nigeria, but there are signs that they would be the most
critical in Nigeria’s history. These elections would hold in a highly
charged political environment, a situation that began within the last 15
years but apparently reaching its peak currently. Although there are a
number of differences between the current situation leading to the
scheduled February 2015 elections and those relating to past elections
in Nigeria, the most serious one however is the fact that at no time in
the history of this country did we find ourselves so divided along
religious and ethnic lines than now. Most politicians rely on the
strength and efficacy of using religion and ethnicity as tools for
political mobilization by taking advantage of the strong religious and
ethnic sentiments among Nigeria’s populace. Hardly do politicians argue
on the basis of the issues reflecting national interests and national
development, and to a large extent, the bulk of Nigeria’s population
neither understands nor appreciates the implications of such political
manipulations. Furthermore, capitalizing on Nigeria’s unequal wealth
distribution system, a rich natural-resource country but with over 70%
of the population living below the universal poverty line, politicians
have also introduced money as an additional tool for political
mobilization. People are ready to do anything for money, including
selling their votes and killing political opponents. It is very clear
the extent to which politicians have used money to establish private
“armies” used for political violence with the clear mandate by their
masters to maim or kill whoever they consider an enemy, using all kinds
of weapons (including small arms and light weapons). The last 15 years
have witnessed the gradual militarization of politics which gave birth
to, for example, the Borno ECOMOG, now transformed to Boko Haram; all
manners of armed “cultists” groups, especially in Rivers; the Niger
Delta militant groups, such as NDPVF and MEND; the Yan K’alare of Gombe;
Ombatse of Nasarawa; the Area Boys of Lagos; the Egbesu Boys in Niger
Delta; Sara-Suka of Bauchi; Bakassi Boys of Cross River; Yan Daba of
Kano; Kauraye of Katsina; etc.
On the other hand, although one may
argue that the process of politicization of the military began with the
January 1966 Major Chukwuma Nzeogu’s coup which led to the termination
of the First Republic and the beginning of an extended involvement of
the military in politics, it is equally worthy to note that the last 15
years of the current democratic dispensation has witnessed a deeper
politicization of the military and of course, the police. Both
institutions have been distracted from their constitutional and
professional responsibilities into carrying out tasks that seem to be
geared towards regime security, rather than national security. Though
there was an attempt to re-professionalize the military beginning in
2003 using a framework designed to transform the Nigerian Army over a
ten-year period, there appears to be a derailment, though not in the
form of direct involvement of the military in governance, rather it had
to do with the deployments of the military to perform tasks that are
outside their constitutional responsibilities. Almost all the states in
Nigeria have maintained Task Forces, a combined military and police
outfits, funded by the State Governors and deployed to conduct routine
policing duties, a situation that is detrimental to the constitutional
functions of the military in particular. By and large, if the initial
phase of the transformation project designed to end in 2013 had
succeeded the army would have improved on its professionalism, culture
and values; curbed waste and corruption for greater efficiency; meet
both local and international obligations at less cost; repositioned to
effectively deal with its traditional roles based on new fighting
concepts and broad range of threats; and developed lighter, lethal,
sustainable, and rapidly deployable and responsive force (see Framework
for the Transformation of the Nigerian Army in the Next Decade, Volume
1). Today the performance of the military against the Boko Haram
insurgency has been below expectation, a situation that has been tied to
both tangible and intangible factors such as discipline; inadequate or
inappropriate equipment; poor leadership; and quality of personnel and
troops morale. The professional conduct of our armed forces and police
is being questioned by the international community following the
accusations of human rights abuses; and our sincerity in dealing with
terrorism is being doubted for various reasons. The situation is
gradually reversing the position the Nigerian military held in the
immediate past as one of the best in the world as a result of the
leadership role we played in the Congo, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Chad,
Somalia, Sudan, and a host of other countries under regional and UN
peacekeeping missions. It was not long ago in 2009 that the UN
Peacekeeping Department honored the Nigerian Military with the
accreditation of pre-deployment training package at the Nigerian Army
Peacekeeping Center, the first in Africa to be so accredited, with the
capacity to train two battalions simultaneously. With that accreditation
we were in position to train UN peacekeepers from anywhere in the
world, but I am not sure if that would be the case now. It is
instructive to note that the military is one of the major instruments of
national power, and no country can afford losing it. The insurgency in
the northeast has exposed our weak capacity and lack of clear political
will to deal with the situation. Would the 2015 elections lead us to an
era in which this instrument of national power could be strengthened and
made robust?
Now to the 2015 elections themselves which are
not only central to this dialogue, but also significant in making
Nigeria the winner. Of course elections are very important in democracy,
especially in emerging democracies, like ours. It was the former UN
Secretary-General, Kofi Anan, who said that “when citizens go to the
polls and cast their votes, they aspire not only to elect their leaders,
but to choose a direction for their nation” and according to him, only
elections with integrity can bolster democracy, while flawed elections
undermine it. I agree with Kofi Anan’s assertion, but how do we ensure
that the 2015 elections in Nigeria would turn out to be of integrity in
order to avoid undermining our nascent democracy? How do we conduct
elections with integrity using the so-called “stomach infrastructure” by
attracting votes with 5kg bags of rice? How do we ensure elections with
integrity in a situation in which almost all the outgoing Governors,
regardless of party affiliation, anoint their chosen successors prior to
elections, thereby disregarding people’s choices? And those who still
have the opportunity to seek re-election for another term are given
automatic ticket, regardless of their performance, thereby not only
blocking other contenders from exercising their rights to participate,
but also denying people the right to choose their leaders?
Closely
linked to the success of the 2015 elections is the role of INEC in the
conduct of free, fair and credible elections. There are quite a number
of challenges the INEC is now facing, thus: if we have to count on our
past experiences, there is some level of certainty that attempts would
be made at various levels to rig elections, and the INEC would have to
contend with how best to prevent it; likewise, previous elections were
accompanied by logistics inadequacies, and it is hoped that INEC has
done a lot of work in this regard so as to avoid delays in the movements
of elections materials in particular; already there are problems with
the Permanent Voters’ Card (PVC) and the registration of voters, and
with the way things are going, there is likelihood that a large number
of Nigerians (including me) would be disenfranchised; funding is another
area of challenge, and INEC has made this known to the public several
times that the government has not be able to provide it with adequate
funds; and the fourth challenge has to do with the current insecurity in
the country, particularly the northeast. How can Nigeria be the winner
if these challenges are not addressed?
I want to emphasize the
significance of security during elections, but in particular the 2015
elections. The INEC would conduct the 2015 elections in an environment
that is confronting serious security challenges that are unprecedented,
due to the insurgency in the northeast where a significant number of
Local Government Areas could still be under the control of the Boko
Haram as at the period of elections; where a sizeable number of
Nigerians have been displaced from the homes and scattered in various
make-shift camps and other places. In other places such as Taraba,
Plateau, Kaduna, Benue, Zamfara, Nasarawa, and Katsina, there are people
displaced as a result of either ethno-religious crisis or clashes
between herders and farmers, also resulting in the displacement of
significant population in the affected areas. According to a joint
report by the Internal Displaced Monitoring Center and the Norwegian
Refugee Council providing 2014 Global Overview, approximately 3.3
million Nigerian are displaced due to all kinds of violent crises (the
figure must have increased by now). We must note also that there is
equally a significant number of Nigerians who are refugees in the
neighboring countries of Chad, Niger and Cameroon. Furthermore, the fact
that a good number of these displaced persons and refugees are eligible
voters, how can Nigeria be the winner of the 2015 elections without
these people being able to exercise their rights to vote? How about the
over 200 Chibok girls and other abductees who are still missing, and
what is their fate? Can Nigeria still be the winner while these girls
remain captives in the hands of the Boko Haram terrorists?
Examining
the current challenges, particularly the challenges of insecurity in
Nigeria as a whole, and the insurgency in the northeast in particular,
there are people who think that the elections should be postponed. If
this should be the case, then this dialogue we are holding today becomes
irrelevant. Therefore, we should also attempt to look at the
alternative scenario in terms of the impact postponing the elections
would have in the polity. If the elections were not to hold, what would
be next line of action in terms of ensuring peace and stability? Would
the suggestion of postponing elections not introduce another set of
problems? Although some people have suggested an interim government or
government of national unity, who would such a government and what would
be the nature of its composition? While I do not expect Nigeria to be
an instant winner with just the 2015 elections, the elections would
certainly lay a strong foundation for ultimate victory if they are
violent-free, and perceived to be free, fair and credible. This goal can
be achieved through the combination of efforts by INEC, Security
Agencies, Political Parties, the Media, and Voters themselves: First,
INEC must not only be neutral, but must be seen to be neutral and truly
independent, by ensuring that no contestant is shortchanged; that there
is a level playing field for all parties, so that no party is
disadvantaged; that the electoral laws are fully adhered to and
enforced, while violators are sanctioned accordingly; that adequate
logistics arrangements are made to ensure that election materials are
delivered accordingly, in addition to strict adherence to timings and
programs; and any attempt by any participant either as individuals or
parties to rig the elections should be rejected. A situation in which
the people believe that elections are not free and fair, governance
becomes difficult, if not impossible, due to the fact that political
leadership would fail to be recognized by those who feel betrayed, as
such would continue to struggle for legitimacy until next elections.
This is even more serious when complaints are not addressed and resolved
either politically or legally. Second, security agencies have a
tremendous role to play in support of INEC by ensuring that they not
only provide adequate security during the elections, but that they also
remain neutral. Not only that security agencies must as a matter of
necessity stick to their constitutional role to ensure that law and
order are maintained, but they must also not allow themselves to be used
to intimidate voters. Third, the role of political parties in driving
the campaign in orderly and peaceful manner is very significant in the
success of elections process. Where national interests are threatened,
for example, parties must put aside their differences to work together
towards protecting such interests against violation. Parties must stick
to the rules of the game and avoid mud-slinging or casting aspersions
against political opponents. It is equally important for the political
parties to maintain focus and avoid statements that would overheat the
polity. Fourth, the media (both electronic and print) is a very critical
and vital institution in this project. As a public agenda setter; a
gate keeper on public issues; a watchdog of political transparency and
fight against corruption; and a fourth estate which provides the needed
checks and balances in relation to the three branches of government; the
media has a crucial role to play in national development. However, to
succeed in their role, the media must be professional and objective,
therefore must avoid bias, sensationalism, propaganda and distortions,
particularly in a society like ours with many fault lines. For the 2015
elections, the media must lead the civil society in ensuring that the
elections are free, fair and credible in the overall interest of the
nation. Fifth, Nigeria will win if the voters themselves vote freely to
elect credible people not on the basis of religion, ethnicity or
monetary inducements. Voters must not engage in any acts of violence and
brigandage that could lead to the destruction of lives and properties.
Matchets, knives and daggers are not the weapons of voters, but rather
the most potent weapon for the voter is his or her vote which he or she
must use wisely to vote for the candidate of his or her choice.
Post-2015 elections Nigeria cannot be the winner if the current
insecurity environment is sustained, particularly the threats posed by
terrorism and insurgency of Boko Haram in the north. Every day we live
with the hope that the insurgency in the northeast would end using
multi-dimensional approach so that the future would not experience such
threats that have had devastating effects on our lives. How can Nigeria
be the winner when the vast majority of people live in perpetual fear?
Freedom from fear is not only a fundamental right in human security, but
it also compliments the freedom from want. Unfortunately both freedoms
are under serious threats. Educational institutions, markets, worship
centers (such as mosques and churches), and motor parks, that are the
major areas in which the bulk of daily activities of Nigerians are
concentrated have become the main targets of terrorist attacks. Such
attacks cripple the educational system; immobilize the movement of
people; deny people the means of sustaining their lives; deny them their
fundamental right to practice their faith; and above all, deny people
the right to decent living (the insurgency has taken away their food,
housing, education, and healthcare). In the southeast and south-south,
people cannot move freely due to the fear of kidnappers and violent
cultists. In the south west, ritual killers are lurking around for
unsuspecting victims, especially women and children. How can Nigeria be
the winner if the people residing in her territory are experiencing such
hurtful disruptions of their daily lives? According to the first UN
Human Development Report (1994), human security involves a “process of
widening the range of people’s choices” in which “people can exercise
these choices safely and freely, and that they can relatively be
confident that the opportunities they have today are not lost tomorrow.”
How can Nigeria be the winner if the choices of the people residing in
her territory are narrowing instead of widening?
Beginning 1999, it
is now 15 years of democracy in Nigeria, but we are yet to consolidate
it. We have already discussed the first step towards consolidating
democracy, that is, free, fair and credible elections. Next, is the
issue of good governance manifested in clear observance of democratic
tenets, imbedded in adherence to the rule of law; respect for human
rights; accountability; transparency; inclusiveness; and popular
participation. Next, is strengthening of democratic institutions, and
ensuring that there are adequate arrangements for checks and balances
among the executive, legislature and the judiciary. Although there have
been major challenges in the last 15 years, the Fourth Republic has been
the longest so far in Nigeria’s democratic experiment. Is there any
possibility that the 2015 elections could usher in the path for
democratic consolidation in Nigeria? Yes, there is. But this is only
possible when the right people are elected: people who are competent and
of high integrity; people who are focused and selfless; people who are
courageous and loyal; people who respect human rights and appreciate the
rule of law; people who would be transparent and are ready to be held
accountable; people who understand the essence of human security; people
who are ready to once more make Nigeria the giant of Africa; people who
appreciate that without peace and security there will be no
development; and above all, people who believe in Nigeria as a united,
indivisible nation. These are the kind of people that would guarantee
Nigeria’s economic, political and social stability to put her on the
path of sustained growth and development.
I have attempted to
suggest a path to follow in order to make Nigeria the winner come 2015
elections. While this may not be the only path, I believe following what
I have provided for this dialogue will go a long way in ensuring that
we at least achieve very reasonable level of peace and stability. I do
hope that my points would encourage or provoke enough discussions in
this dialogue. Thank you.