Fw: Prof. Ayo Olukotun's Column
Ayo Olukotun
WHAT WILL NIGERIA LOOK LIKE IN 2023?
by Ayo Olukotun
Nations, especially when governed by innovative and inspiring leaders can leapfrog into exemplary status, becoming a hub of impressive activities, from where the rest of the world can learn. Conversely, if the ‘beautyful ones’ as Ayi Kwei Armah expressed it, are absent from leadership positions, nations can stagnate, making a norm of mediocrity and underachievement, or disappear altogether, like the ‘lost civilization of Atlantis’, from the map of the world.
As Nigeria approaches another round of elections, a little over a fortnight away, with characteristic trepidation, it is instructive to prefigure the possibilities of regeneration or degeneration, of beckoning greatness or infamous diminution. Somehow, let us note, worst case scenario paintings such as, ‘Nigeria will cease to exist by 2015’, have, so far, not materialized, but they continue to mushroom in updated forms, even among thoughtful elder statesmen. For example, last month, while responding to questions about the prospects of ‘Igbo Presidency’ in 2023 (there is a similar agitation for Yoruba Presidency, by the way). Dr Chukwuemeka Ezeife, Chairman of Ohaneze Ndigbo Elders’ Council, and former governor of Anambra state, remarked ominously that, “Yes, we want Igbo Presidency but if by 2023 Nigeria has disintegrated, on what will the Igbo presidency float? I doubt if Nigeria will survive till 2023”.
Whatever one makes of Ezeife’s prediction, there is little doubt that the country is probably more divided - ethnic and religious polarities are more trenchant - than at any other time since the civil war. On Wednesday, to illustrate contending religious perceptions, the National Christian Elders Forum led by Lt. General Theophilus Danjuma (rtd), told the nation that what has become the Justice Walter Onnoghen saga can be situated within the context of Political Islam at war with Christian leaders. That view, which I find difficult to uphold, was countermanded by the Kaduna State Chapter for the Supreme Council for Sharia in Nigeria, which lined up behind the appointment of Justice Tanko Mohammed. In other words, in matters that are predominantly secular, religious interest groups are entering the fray in ways that play up religious bipolarity. So, rather than religion becoming a bulwark for the anti-corruption crusade, it reflects and refracts underlying and pre-existing tensions. It is a long story to rehearse how we got into this state of affairs, but in recent times, it may not be unconnected with the spectral murders of farmers in the Middle belt by sections of the Fulani militia protesting anti-grazing laws. The point to note therefore, is that from the perspective of unity and focus, underpinnings of greatness, the nation is in shambles and there are serious questions over its survival, and in what form. That question is for now, occluded by the forthcoming election but it can resurge intently, if, for any reason, the elections are mismanaged.
Whoever emerges as President in February will have to face up to the current disheveled status of national unity, which tends to undermine every effort to carry Nigeria beyond its limping condition. A related point concerns the current state of security which remains a sore point, not just with the recrudescence of the insurgency in the North east, but with kidnappings, gang wars, the relentless movement and encroachment of Fulani herdsmen around the Middle belt and the Northern part of Yorubaland, as well as sensational murders of political elites including military generals. If this trend continues, insecurity of lives and properties could escalate and become more direct threats to stability and livelihood. Beyond campaign slogans, there is a need to reinvent the institutions of the state, the security apparatus especially, as well as maintain a firm law and order mien that can curtail an increasingly vexing challenge fuelled by youth unemployment, demographic explosion, and poorly equipped security institutions. Hence, troubling uncertainties around the national question are overlaid by nuances of an imploding nation-state, buffeted by considerable internal disorder.
There is another front to introspect about in the context of what the country will look like in another four years, namely, the economy and the possibility that we can create wealth quickly enough to douse the rising poverty index and refute the appellation of having become the poverty capital of the world. Poverty, even in extreme forms, can be viewed in statistical terms. It is more telling when it is seen in human misery terms, the denial of opportunities, the acceptance of a relegated and abased sustenance, the frustrations of a desperate humanity living on the brink of extinction. Whatever economic model is preferred, if it ignores this dimension, it becomes an exercise in futility, and pushes Nigerians to the brink of a social tornado waiting to happen.
In order to reduce the possibility of disastrous uprisings and irritable excesses of a populace bearing the yoke of adversity, we must come up with a new paradigm of governance which totally does away with a circumstance in which legislators and office holders live in obscene affluence while the majority endure lives that go constantly from bad to worse. This is an agenda that have been much discussed but not implemented. There is much talk about reducing the cost of governance but no government hitherto has had the courage to actually implement it. If matters continue to drift in this area, it will translate into weak legitimacies for sitting governments, as well as constitute a challenge to the very concept of democracy.
As we look at the prospects of Nigeria in another four years, we must factor, the declining quality of lives occasioned by erratic and poor service delivery in virtually every department of social and economic endeavours. From underfunded and third-rate quality of education, through badly unkempt roads, ill-clad health institutions, to the perennial woes of electricity consumers, Nigerians have always had a raw deal. Government after government have promised amelioration without fulfilling it, with so much public money going down the drain. There are of course, a few exceptions to this unhappy narrative but they are too few to count. Another four years of misgovernance and statutory inefficiency will mean that the country will become far less livable than it already is. Considering the fact that several international reports suggest that Nigeria is one of the worst places to be born on earth, even when it is not in a period of war, foreshadows what may happen in the absence of a governance turnaround on the journey to 2023.
To be sure, some of the problems such as the price fluctuations of our major foreign exchange earner are foundational and cannot be solved in the short term. They belong to the category of issues about which we can do little beyond the diversification of our revenue base. But there are things we can change, for instance, by not maintaining the borrowing spree which has landed us back in the class of highly indebted nations, with associated consequences. In sum, what Nigeria will look like, or whether there would be a Nigeria at all in four years, is a consequence of the choices that we make or fail to make. The nation is on a leash. What can turn the tide is the quality of leadership, and of civil society that address themselves to ensuring that the worst does not happen.
- Prof. Ayo Olukotun is the Oba (Dr.) Sikiru Adetona Chair of Governance, Department of Political Science, Olabisi Onabanjo University, Ago-Iwoye
Ayo Olukotun
OUR ELECTION, OUR DESTINY
by Ayo Olukotun
In the coming week, Nigerians will go to the polls to elect a president who will govern for the four years between 2019 and 2023, as well as politicians who will constitute the National Assembly in the same period. This will be followed up on March 2 by elections to Governorship and State Assembly positions. Taken together, this is the sixth time in the period since 1999 when Nigerians will go to the polls. Also, it is the first election after the historic outing of February 2015, in which for the first time, an incumbent party and leader were defeated in what was widely regarded as a free and fair election. In that year, former President Goodluck Jonathan in keeping best global practices, willingly conceded defeat to his main rival, President Mohammadu Buhari, who is standing election for another four year term.
Elections, whatever their imperfections, go to the very heart of the democratic assumption by connoting the representative, competitive, and legitimacy-conferring aspects of governance. In the absence of direct democracy, modern elections are considered the next best way to ensure leadership succession, the exercises of choice by voters, and the building of a national political community around values of participation and the rule of law. Next week’s and other elections will decide several things, the first of which is whether the widely acclaimed elections of 2015 are an exceptional departure from the norm of rigged elections, which are a feature of our history since 1999. Put in another way, can the country repeat the integrity and the output of that election, which increased Nigeria’s soft power and won us plaudits from the international community? A related question is whether given the tension that has preceded the forthcoming election, polling would go on in an atmosphere of civility, peace and orderliness devoid of the violence that characterized previous elections. Before coming up with educated guesses to these questions, it is important to realize that international observers which are a crucial part of the apparatus for legitimizing elections, have arrived in Nigeria while the United States Government considered it necessary to send a former President, Bill Clinton, to hold meetings with the two primary contenders, Buhari and Abubakar Atiku.
Future historians will ponder why the nation is often so exercised and stretched to its very limits by every election, in contrast to many countries around the globe, including some in West Africa such as Ghana, where elections have become seamless and routine. For now, however, let us focus on the various communities and institutions that can make or doom the elections. Arguably, the most important is the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), whose performance or lack of it, will go a long way to determine whether the exercises will be free, fair and credible. There is a sense in which after a bumpy start, INEC has gotten its act together, stepping up the distribution of PVCs (there are still jagged areas in the actual collection), cleaning up the electoral register, and staying on top of the technological game by mastering the use of card readers. Hence, earlier elections at sub-national levels point to increasing clarity of logistical and infrastructural details, including the prompt arrival of voting materials and manual substitutes where card readers had failed. Considering that these elections were conducted in a few states, the commission will have to step up its game given that it is dealing with the sprawling territory of an entire nation. This should not be too difficult because it has had time and funds from domestic and foreign sources to prepare for the eventful days. Technocracy aside, INEC must be seen to live up to the billings of 2015 when its former chairman, Professor Attahiru Jega, wrote his name in history by resisting political interference in the elections. This is an area of crucial monitoring in view of allegations, true or invented, by the opposition, that there are covert plans to fiddle with the outcome of the elections. The political parties should be admonished to be responsible and patriotic contestants playing by the rules and taking the larger interests of the nation into consideration. At the end of the day, even those who win must have a nation to govern, while those who lose should have a place to return to so that they can plan for future elections. It would do no good to resort to acts of thuggery, vote buying, hate speeches, or irresponsible behavior, all of which have been dominant for much of our history.
Worthy of mention is the role of the security agencies whose impartiality is vital to the conduct and success of the elections. Indiscriminate arrests, the failure to maintain law and order, or blatant one-sidedness can undermine the integrity of the elections, and should be avoided at any costs. The current controversial deployment of police commissioners around the country may require a second look, given that, once the security is drawn into the fray, it would be difficult to perceive their role as that of neutral umpires. The police are unlikely to mass up in the huge numbers obtained in the Ekiti election for example; indeed, the challenge will be how to administer security without spreading themselves too thin around the country. This is an opportunity for the recently appointed Inspector General of Police, Mohammed Adamu, to prove his mettle. Important too, is the role of civil society, national and global, represented by domestic and international observers, and other non-governmental organisations, whose watch-dog role must be escalated and maintained throughout the duration of the elections and beyond. The political society usually acts out of cynical self-interest, not caring for the larger good. This is the time therefore, for civil society and election monitors to step into the neutral space that cannot be filled by politicians.
The voters represent a cardinal segment of the process in that their apathy or non-compliance with the rules can undo the elections, or at least, diminish them. They are enjoined, in pursuit of their civic responsibilities, to show up in large numbers, not minding the frustrations that now and then complicate the electoral process. It is not enough to vote, they must stand in readiness to defend their votes and to ensure that results reflect the voting trend. In 2015, only roughly 44% of registered voters showed up to cast their votes in the Presidential election. That figure translates to a meagre 16% of the country’s population suggesting low turnout and a disturbingly high number of citizens who are either apolitical or switched off what Emeritus Professor Akin Mabogunje frequently describes as ‘the rascality of politicians’. This itself is a topic for another day, but democratic renewal mandates the building up of the civic space and an active citizenry, who through participation, can turn matters around.
The final point to note is that, since there are no perfect elections anywhere in the world, political gladiators are enjoined not to be bad losers, but to accept defeat, once the process complies substantially with existing rules and tenets of fair play. This is a test of statesmanship but it will determine whether we are growing in democratic comportment and civility, or regressing. May the best candidates emerge victorious.