"NIGERIAN DEMOCRACY: MATTERS ARISING By DR LEONARD SHILGBA
Democracy is a form of government which is participatory and very much influenced by popular choices. The popularity of choices is not founded on some obtuse virtue that may be woven around them but rather on the numerical strength they acquire through the number of people that own them. The power of choice in a democracy is not openly acquired, thereby comes in the issue of suffrage. In most democracies age and sex are important determinants; this also could be viewed as discriminatory.
Democracy is not the sublime form of government devoid of black spots. It is however the most popularly accepted evil among so many other evils of similar mould in human history of experimental governance. The major attraction of democracy is the opportunity of choice and participation in governance. Democracy compels me to make a choice between a given spectrum of options; and my choice could be to choose none. Democracy requires me to trust my affairs to other people who are called delegates or representatives; hence, democracy is also a representative form of government.
Democracy accommodates all views while allowing the popular ones to carry the day. In a democracy, expression of unpopular views should not be vilified. Like I said above, popularity of a choice is only in its numerical strength. A culture that is intolerant of contrary views is hardly democratic. Moreover, there should be no feeling of shame if my espoused view or position is defeated by the principle of popular choice at a period of time. Defeat or victory in democracy is only for a time. Victory and defeat are un-identical twins in the household of democracy; and there is no democracy without them. Everyone afraid of anyone of them should stay away from the household.
I have observed that in Nigeria, the clichés "undemocratic forces", "enemies of democracy" "champions of democracy" etc are used so freely and carelessly without regard to meaning. Recently, Nigerians debated so lively the constitutional amendment proposals made by a committee of the National Assembly. The proposal that got the greatest attention was that which sought three terms of four years each for the Executive arms of government at State and Federal levels. Some people were in support while many Nigerians were against it.
What to me was the beclouding of an otherwise democratic exercise was the descent into pure hate and deliberate misrepresentation of opinions. Why should those who supported three terms of four years each for the Executive be branded undemocratic while opponents called heroes and heroines of democracy? It is hard to understand why the achievements and image of President Obasanjo should be vitiated simply because of the failure of the tenure extension proposal to sail through.
Senator Adolphus Wabara, former Senate president, said that those who supported tenure extension for the Executive should "step aside" from their elective positions. No suggestion can be more ridiculous in a democracy! If our democratic practice is so intolerant of divergent views and opinions, then what right have we to call ourselves true democrats? Senator Idris Kuta suggested that May 16th (The day the constitutional amendment debate was thrown out) should be declared Democracy day in the Senate; he also singled out one Senator from the South-South, whom according to him (Senator Kuta) stood up for democracy while by implication, other Senators from the zone did not behave like democrats. This is balderdash and absolute nonsense.
I should think that every Nigerian has the right to propose a bill or some amendment to any portion of our constitution. A proposal as the word suggests is just that; it is not a unilateral imposition. The popularity of a proposal or idea at a time does not mean it will always remain so and vice versa. Let us learn to appreciate the beauty of debates without bitterness.
What transpired during the constitutional amendment debates did not make democrats or anti-democracy villains. It was simply a democratic procedure whose conclusion was truly a victory to democracy-that is the culture of democracy-without bloodshed. Let us stop displaying unbelievable ignorance. We have democratic institutions which we are sometimes afraid of using when predictable outcomes cannot be determined. Some people had called on President Obasanjo to renounce tenure extension without giving the opportunity to test the popularity of the proposal in the National Assembly. What we have now is a proof that if we have faith in our democratic institutions, we shall not need to fear ambitions of people. We shall only have to put them to a democratic popularity test.
Everyone in Nigeria has a right to dream and hold political ambitions; the timeliness and acceptability thereof shall be tested through the democratic laboratory. If I have a political ambition, I should not be upbraided for this; I only need to submit it to the public test represented appropriately and constitutionally. The point is that no democrat or villain has been created through the recent democratic exercise at the National Assembly. Opportunists should shut up and tell Nigerians what plans they have for the people and how they would fulfill those for the collective benefit of the people rather than go about mouthing some phony victory to "consolidate democracy".
We have suddenly had "champions of Democracy" overnight just on account of their opposition to what they called "Third term agenda". The recent debates on constitutional amendment were just a normal exercise in a democracy. We Nigerians can be easily distracted. Instead of asking hard questions from aspirants to various political offices come 2007, we are bogged down with "celebrating the defeat of Third term agenda". I must confess that not a few Nigerians (University graduates of course) are very ignorant about democratic practice. It is not uncommon to hear Nigerians during phone-in TV programs say things like, "You are a disgrace to the young generation" when young politicians who are guests on such programs say things they don't approve of or espouse ideologies they don't share or support personalities and positions they are averse to. We have this military mind set of which we are surprisingly unaware. We are very derogatory in the use of language. How can we expect civilized and "democratic leaders" when we Nigerians are not what we want our leaders to be?
The wise democrat is he who exploits provisions (call them loop holes) in the grand norm called the Constitution of his country for his benefit and country's. You may disdain him for all you care, but cannot fault him constitutionally. He is like a lawyer who searches for loopholes in the law to win litigation cases. People who alert of a design to extend President Obasanjo's term in office but cannot tell us how, should spare us the worry if they cannot properly educate us. The fact, however, is that if we passed up a good opportunity to amend the portions of the constitution which the majority have deemed necessary just because we were averse to tenure extension, then any future exploitation of some loopholes contained therein by some clever politicians in the near future should be blamed on us.
We shall soon look back and agree that our emotions were too effusive to make a clear judgment. The beauty of democracy is that while the majority have their way and the minority their say, both partake in the consequences of the majority decision. I will be remiss not to point out that throwing out the whole constitution amendment exercise was foolish. We assume the next President, Governors and legislators at State and National levels will make constitutional amendment their priority; they will not!
To have credible elections in any democracy, mutual trust among interested parties is vital. Having listened to comments by Nigerians, I have come to the conclusion that not many are optimistic that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) can conduct free and fair elections in 2007. I also believe that not many Nigerians will support postponing elections indefinitely until we can trust ourselves enough. Therefore, what do we do? Some have suggested option A4 used in the 1993 general elections, while others have suggested a modification of that system. INEC has expressed its decision to use the secret ballot system with some electronic methods which include electronic voters' register that will capture biometric data of voters, electronic verification of voters at polling stations, and electronic transmission of results. Some politicians are quick to suspect a "secret agenda".
My position on this issue is that the problem is never methods but manners; we Nigerians have bad electoral manners. When Nigerians are ready for free and fair elections, we shall have them. President Shehu Shagari said in 2003 that all political parties rigged the elections; it was then a matter of who out-rigged the others in a State or the whole nation. Usually, people out-rig their opponents where they have the greatest influence and support. Because of lack of requisite trust for credible elections, even though a politician could ordinarily win in an election, they would for fear of their opponents rigging to defeat them, go on to rig just for protection of their legal votes. Therefore, rigging is a product of fear born out of mistrust.
In the 2003 elections, many Nigerian and foreign commentators agreed that President Obasanjo won; the problem was the margin and level of victory. Some blamed this on the overzealousness of supporters. I have not come across a rational commentator who claimed that Gen. Buhari won that election. The exaggerated margin of victory came about because of the fear factor I am talking about. Just like the fight against corruption should be our common fight, the desire for credible elections in Nigeria should be practically shared by Nigerians.
Political parties must do their home work well or shut up. If they cannot recruit trustworthy Agents at the 120,000 polling stations for the 2007 general elections, they should blame themselves. INEC has only 5000 employees, which amounts to a ratio of 1 INEC employee to 24 polling stations in Nigeria. INEC must therefore hire Nigerians who are not their regular employees to ensure credible elections are held. If we have smeared elections next year, the people to blame are Nigerians, not INEC or the government. If we are ready as Nigerians to defend our votes, that can be done. But I must point out quickly that we should not expect elections in Nigeria to be more credible than Nigerians are in their businesses, academic work, sports, etc.
If Agents of political parties cannot be bought with money by opponents, then we can have credible elections. Since it is known that most rigging takes place at the point of collation, the electronic transmission of results should be monitored by all political parties. This is what I suggest:
The electronic collation rooms should have representatives of all political parties present.
As results come in with the endorsement of party Agents at the polling stations those representatives should also endorse.
INEC should then announce them in the presence of party representatives. Those released online should also be endorsed online by the party representatives.
If a representative protests those electronic results, it must only be because the polling Agents did not endorse them.
Where there are disagreements or violence at a polling station, those results shall be wholly cancelled.
The burden will then be on political parties and all Nigerians to ensure credible elections. INEC will just be an umpire just like JAMB and WAEC. Wherever there are disputes, INEC should not hesitate to cancel results there.
Good morning Nigerians. May we not live in yesterday."
.The president we want
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
.The president we want 
Quote
Bookmarks