Tag: Democracy

Of all the ills that afflict a democracy, a stubborn virus in the party system is the most lethal. Where politicians treat the party system

as their exclusive preserve, to do as they wish, it is hard for the system to self- correct let alone see that there is anything wrong. It could be worse when parties become like rickety “molues’ merely meant to convey political passengers to their next election destination irrespective of their belief, aim and purpose for seeking power.

Where  political parties degenerate into  cultic monopolies  reserved for a few anointed chieftains and their select acolytes, the party system festers to infect the overall polity with its own infirmities. A corrupt political party system can only lead to a devious mangling of democracy itself. It ss easy for a liberal multi party democracy to degenerate into a cultic autocracy manipulated by a select minority for state capture and authoritarian oligarchy. A devious manipulation of the political party system is the commonest source of authoritarian rule in most of Africa.

To a great extent, all the present hue and cry about the trouble with democracy in Nigeria begins and ends with the ills of the party system. There is of course a ruling party, the APC. I have lost count of the number of other parties in the system,  about 80, I understand! But of  the multitude, only two other parties, namely the Peoples Democratic Party and the Labour Party are most prominent. At least, this is the number that made themselves heard from the results of the 2023 presidential elections. Ideally, then, the APC as the ruling party should be feeling the heat of the other two major parties as ‘opposition parties’.  By the nature of democracy, the Nigerian public should get a constant feel of an effective policy alternative to the ruling party from the body of opposition parties. Yes indeed, from the general trend of discourse in our polity, there is indeed a ruling party from the perspective of governance and dominance of the political space. But no one seems to hear the concerted voice of an opposition set of parties. Both Mr. Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi as individual political leaders are consistent in criticizing the policies and programmes of the ruling party. It is doubtful if the parties they lead are acting and speaking like opposition parties rightly regarded and properly defined.

In Nigeria, once parties  are formed and registered, they are left to guide and guard the political process on the basis of their independence.  But our parties also use their independence to cultivate the ingredients of their own decay and even death. The concept of party supremacy is often invoked to insulate and protect the internal weaknesses and deficiencies of the parties themselves. The supremacy of  defective parties is the engine room of misrule and the decay of democracy.

In Nigeria’s tradition of multiparty democracy, it is common for the ruling party to predominate the political space with a myth of infallibility. Winner takes all. Other parties exist in name and skeleton, not in substance. The ruling party systematically swallows the others in bits and pieces, literally cannibalizing them.

Therefore, although many parties exist on the INEC register, there is only one effective party. That party is the ruling prty, the one that won the last election and controls the majority of the political space. In between elections, our system operates like a one party state except where the next most popular party controls a sizeable chunk of the political space. Thus, our political culture has tended to produce a pseudo one party system after each national election.

The tendency is for party members from the losing parties to seek to migrate to the winning side. Even as a deliberate ploy, the ruling party seeks to harvest or poach members from the opposition in order to maintain its ruling hegemony or whittle down the power of the opposition.

In recent times, concern has arisen within the political class over the aggressive expansion of the APC into territories ruled by the opposition parties. After the 2023 general elections, the winning APC dominates the political space: majority in the National Assembly; majority of state governors; majority in state legislatures as well as control of federal executive power. Correspondingly, control of the national economy and the power of patronage follow logically. In the process of wielding majoritarian power and influence, the ruling party acquires the swagger of one party.

Recently, chieftains of the other parties have cried out in protest that the APC, in its rapacious hunger for membership, seems to be gearing towards swallowing other parties and therefore laying the foundations  for a one party Nigeria. Alhaji Atiku, presidential candidate of the PDP in the last election, has openly leveled this charge. So have other party leaders and key politicians.

Vicariously, the opposition parties seem to be lending support to this trend.. They have failed to manage their affairs in a manner that should make them stronger as opposition platforms.

The PDP is caught in an existential factional fight between the disciples of FCT Minister Nyesom Wike and those of Alhaji Atiku. The party has no consensual executive. Similarly, the Labour Party with control of only one state governorship but victory in 12 states in the 2023 presidential race is torn in litigations. Mr. Peter Obi , the party’s presidential candidate in the last election along with Alex Otti, Abia State Governor are pitted in legal battle with the party executive, led by the disputed chairman, Mr. Abure. Mr. Abure has been contesting leadership of the party in court and has infact won pending appeal. Most of the other parties are not faring any better.

The opposition parties  are mostly torn by crises and instability. In that process, they are reinforcing the nation that our system has no credible opposition. The so-called opposition parties lack internal integrity or self defining identities to justify their independent existence in a multiparty democracy. In this atmosphere, only the APC wears the appearance of cohesiveness.

Even then, the cohesive appearance of the APC owes only to one factor: it is the party in power and has the monopoly of control of power ,patronage and pork. Outside that circumstantial exigency, the APC is as splintered as the rest. It is even more incoherent than the others in terms of ideas and a track record of governance and definable legacy.

Effectively, then, we are in a practical one party situation: the ruling party and literally no opposition parties. Intrinsically, there is no difference between all the major parties in contention in this democracy, whether ruling or not. There are no ideological or value differences among our parties. They are all acronyms, colourful flags and emblems with little intrinsic meaning. They have different names.

Our parties are populated by the same caliber of Nigerian politicians drawn from  a uniform national elite pool of unemployed college graduates, failed “charge and bail” lawyers, unsuccessful venturers and other  jobless middle aged hustlers, etc. This is why it is ever so easy for people to migrate from one party to the other with ease. No ideology. No core beliefs. No values. No commitment to any form of service to the people. No vision for the nation. Mostly an eye for financial returns wherever it may be found. Nigeria has earned a distinctinctio of being the only coumtry in which an individual can have breakfast in on party and end up with dinner in a totally different party without any qualms.

So, effectively, we have a political canvas populated by practically the same tribe of political animals. They are at best hunting for a party label to wear around their necks for the purpose of qualifying to contest the next election or being enrolledinto the next power grab assemblage.

Anyone interested  in testing this assumption should point out any differences in policies and programmes among the states on the basis of the parties in power in each state. Oyo state has been ruled by a PDP government for almost 6 years while its neighbour Osun has been ruled by the APC. What is the difference in style of governance, policy thrust or vision?

The common origins of the parties is best dramatized by the manner in which the former ruling party, the PDP, split up and eventually gave birth to the APC and others. Differences within the ruling PDP between incumbent President Goodluck Jonathan and the more progressive governors in the Nigerian Governors Forum had become intractable by 2013. While the PDP convention was going on at Abuja’s Eagle Square, The renegade faction of the party staged a walk out from the party at Eagle Square and trooped to the Yar’dua Centre where they birthed the New PDP (N-PDP) as an official faction of the party under the leadership of  politicians like Atiku Abubakar, Rotimi Amaechi and the inspiration of Muhammadu Buhari behind the scene. Politicians who went to  aprty convention in the morning as PDP returned home in the evening as N-PDP!

Subsequent political machinations culminated in the coalition of opposition parties that became the APC under which Mr. Buhari ran and won the 2015 election that brought the APC to power. Yet in spite of its origins, the APC which remains Nigeria’s ruling party has neither evolved a unifying identity nor a defining legacy of program in power to earn an identity.

But our system is only a one party arrangement by default. By strict definition, a multi party system in which one ruling party gobbles up others is not by technical definition a one party system. That terminology is still the preserve of authoritarian systems as the ones operating in China, North Korea and, to a large extent, Russia. The attributes of one party authoritarian systems are well known. Nigeria is far from that rigid formality. What we have is merley evidence of the lack of the discipline to practice multi party democracy in its ideal form. It is that ideal that needs to be revamped and strengthened.

Penalties for cross-carpeting need to be tighter. Opposition parties need to imbibe the culture of methodical and systematic opposition. Politicians need to understand how to lose elections and remain party members through a power tenure. Party membership ought to outlast one election cycle, Most importantly,  our parties need to spend time to evolve into embodiments of ideals and values. Those who sign up for party membership ought to subscribe to the ideas and ideals of these parties. The work of opposition parties ought to be as serious and rigorous as that of the ruling party.

The alternative to the ideas of a ruling party should be no less rigorous and credible than the prevailing ideas of the dominant ruling party. In the United States, when a Republican president is in the White House, the Democrats in Congress or governing individual states are no less rigorous and serious. Similarly, when in the United Kingdom a Labour Prime Minister is at 10 Downing, the Tories do not go to sleep or fall apart. They quickly rouse into an alternative government. If the opposition caves in or succumbs, liberal democracy risks degenerating into one party authoritarianism.

There is a shrinking feeling about it all. With each off -season election that is conducted and results announced, we feel smaller and more unfree as a polity. Our elections bring about more insecurity; unpopular electoral outcomes require goons and thugs to protect illicit incumbents.  And of course a larger number of  election related court cases spring up to create work and money for an army of lawyers and judges. The state of alienation of the majority of the people is palpable. The elation and celebration is mostly among the minority of those who happen to have ‘won’ in this particular election. For the rest, the majority of consequential electorate, it is an overwhelming sense of betrayal, of being hoodwinked and ousted from what was meant to be a general celebration of democracy and collective empowerment.

As we conduct more elections, the size of our voter population seems to be shrinking. In fact, it seems to be running in inverse relation to the longevity of our democracy. The more the number of years we celebrate as a “democracy”, the smaller the voter population seems to be running. After 25 years of unbroken democracy, our sense of democratic participation and involvement seems to be thinning out, shrinking as we conduct more ‘successful’ elections. In short, many more Nigerians now feel excluded from the process of leadership selection than they did in 1999.

It is worse. In order to guarantee more security on election day, the population of policemen, soldiers, State Security Service personnel, civil defense personnel and other para military personnel swamp voters, candidates and election officials. The atmosphere is one of a garrison event. Voting venues sometimes look more like  mini garrisons with uniformed personnel in full battle gear menacingly on patrol in election venues. You wonder who the “enemy” is really as these personnel brandish assault rifles and handguns. . These scenes hardly remind you of  a ritual in praise of freedom to choose leaders. People are frightened. Sensible people either stay away to be safe or avoid these scenes of undeclared war. In any case, more often than not, the end results that are declared often run counter to the real expressions of the wishes of the people. Even if peoples’ express  wishes are reflected in the results, those ‘elected’ do whatever they wish, not what the people voted for.

The frightening prospect about Nigerian democracy is that fewer and fewer people are coming out to vote. People register and obtain voters cards for identification purposes, not necessarily for voting. You never know which bank or government office might need a voters card for identification! Otherwise, people register as voters and prefer to stay home  and safe on election days!

Recently, in rapid succession, off -season governorship elections have successfully held in Edo and Ondo states . In spite of charges of rampant vote trading and other minor familiar bad behavior among political mobs, the elections largely testified to a degree of democratic commitment. The announced results have since formed the basis for a peaceful transfer of power from one gubernatorial dispensation to its successor. The aggrieved have since proceeded to courts and tribunals in a shameful tradition that only castigates the sorry quality of our elections. To that extent. democracy can be said to be alive and well in Nigeria. We hold periodic elections. Elaborate logisitics are laid out. Big money is often wasted. Results are announced. Election officials and political hacks cash out and go home richer from a season of harvest. Some even build new houses.

Yet for all the appearance of democratic progress, Nigeria may be sliding more into minority rule than progressing with democracy as majority rule. The most classic definition of democracy is the rule and triumph of the majority as a result of credible elections. Yes, the majority is a statistical dominance which overwhelms the minority. It presupposes that those qualified to vote participate in the ballot and overwhelm the minority in a triumph of the majority. Majoritarian prevalence is the essence of democratic rule. If however, the reverse obtains, a situation in which the minority prevails over the majority and their electoral verdict comes to determine who rules, then we may have enthroned a curious  minority rule. Something  is wrong when an exercise that was intended to serve majority rule ends up repeatedly enthroning minority rule.

In both Edo and Ondo, the new governors were elected by less than 25% of the registered voters. In Edo, only 24.49% of the 2.6 million registered voters cast their votes. Similarly in Ondo, less than 500, 000 or 25% of the registered 2 million voters cast votes. Other registered voters either stayed away or could not be bothered that something important was taking place in their states on the election days. This trend merely accentuates a trend that had gathered steam in the 2023 presidential election.

In the 2023 presidential elections,  only 26.72% of registered voters cast their votes mostly for the three main candidates with a smattering of votes for the other numerous candidates of the nearly 80 parties. That dismal turnout and the overall result cast a pall over the election and its confusing nature has lingered and tormented the incumbency of Mr. Bola Tinubu as president till date. For good reason, Mr. Tinubu is viewed more as a ”minority” leader on account of being sworn into office on the basis of less than 9 million votes in a population of over 80 million registered voters and a national population of 200 million odd people.

Literally about 24.9 million voted in that presidential election in what is a 44 year low in voter turnout. Tinubu got 8.8 million votes to be sworn to rule over a nation of over 200 million with over 80 million registered voters!

The conventional wisdom in established democracies is to reduce low voter statistics to low voter turnout. Thereafter, all manner of explanations and academic explanations are sought for low voter turnout. What  however is breeding in Nigeria is not just low voter turnout in an established democracy. It is a deepening malaise.  It is a progressive mass apathy, a turning away from democracy. It is a vote of no confidence in democracy and  its serial disappointments over the years.  People have been losing interest over time to elections and their efficacy as instruments for democratic change.

An election may change the personae that drives a democratic government. But elections in Nigeria have failed serially in improving the quality of governance, the quality of live of the people. If we reduce the essence of democratic governance to   the qualitative change in the lives of the people, then elections must mean more than periodic rituals. They must mean the use  of elections to replace  a less effective an ineffective government with a more effective one. In it all, democracy and the elections that power it must be a change mechanism  to empower a more effective governance in the delivery of good governance. If periodic elections fail to empower leadership that brings about positive change in the life of the people, then elections begin to lose their import and meaning.

In recent years, people are more excited by the entertainment value of the ritual of election season.  There are the massive campaigns, mass movements, the garish party -inspired costumes and of course the gifts, cash handouts, items of “stomach infrastructure” and other inducements to drive partisan followership. Outside these fleeting elements, the actual ritual of voting means nothing. Most people have already  concluded that  the elections will not fundamentally change their lives from the perspective of real governance action.

At best, the ritual of democracy and elections becomes a class thing. The elite tend to see elections as the business of the lower classes, those who are gullible, who can be enticed with petty cash inducement, small gifts, and empty promises . These are people who can afford the time and inconvenience to go out and wait endlessly in the elements to cast a vote and justify their petty inducement packages. The elite are too busy with other important things and cannot afford the inconvenience. In any case, their existential conveniences have been guaranteed by their social and occupational entitlements and position. They reduce good governance to material good things. Why queue to vote if you have water, electricity, a car, personal security guards or some left over cash to send junior to a nice school? Active political choice at election time is therefore left to active party members, the few that can be mobilized, induced or bought to vote for chosen candidates.

On election day, the elite wait in the comfort of their cosy homes while their servants, gatemen, divers, cooks, stewards, nannies and other menial and servile dependents troop out to vote and decide on who rules the next dispensation.  When subsequently the governance process goes awry and society fares poorly, the elite leads in the criticism and complaints. This is the contradiction of Nigerian democracy.

The vast majority of people , namely, the elite, the rural and urban majority are alienated from the electoral process. People spend years going through a democratic ritual of elections without seeing any positive changes in their life circumstances. Nothing changes. Therefor, over time, the majority of people see little or no point in subsequent elections. The outcome is a succession of  ‘minority’ governments over time.  This is the underlying logic of the recent results that we have seen in recent times. Our low voter turnout means the prevalence of minority rule, government by the minority over the majority.

Yet, it is the verdict of this  statistical minority that goes to determine the outcome of our elections. This minority elects the next president, the next set of governors, legislators , local government officials etc.  In effect, we have a democracy controlled by a statistical minority left to rule the lives of the majority. The result is a succession of minority governments with the majority of the populace left to grumble and complain for the next four or so years.

A statistical minority government does not exactly fit the conventional definition of  “minority “ rule. We are used to minority rule by minorities defined in terms of ethnicity, race, caste or class. That is usually a political ruse  deliberately foisted by a political elite that wants to dominate power as in Apartheid old South Africa or America before universal suffrage and the end of slavery.

Statistical minority rule such as we are witnessing recently in Nigeria is something else. It is the result of  the disfigurement of  democracy by political and social manipulation and usurpation. In an assumed democracy, if a ruling elite is empowered by a demographic minority to rule over the majority, it is the fault of democracy itself. If democracy fails to deliver good governance, the life of the people worsens over time and democracy itself is endangered. The minority can be manipulated to commandeer the electoral process to produce  results that place minority governments in place.

But these minority governments cannot in themselves guarantee or protect democracy as a value system. It is the delivery  of good governance alone that can ensure majority participation and mass election participation. Democracy can only mean majoriy rule when governance guarantees good governance for the majority. It becomes the business of the majority to troop out to protect and defend democracy with their votes.

Nigerian politicians have perfected the art of reducing almost everything to  situational comedy. They just put us through a fortnight of celebrations on the altar of  democracy.  That is about the only  word that unites them in their diversity of costumes and intentions. It was a somewhat entertaining two weeks of pageants, dramatics and empty rhetoric about the great Nigeria achievements in the realm of democracy. Free food was in abundance at the Villa and choice restaurants where the attendees did not have to pick up the bill. Thjere were the usual parades by the contingents of the police and military who found time off chasing after bandits and criminals to display and entertain their pay master.  It all went well except that some secueity oversight allowed Mr. Tinubu to slip and fall off the stairs to his parade inspection vehicle. Thank God it went well and ended up with the Presdient entertaining his guests with his peculiar “dobale” twist to a bad fall!

Characteristically, the executive and legislature staged a combined comic strip and entertained us to a huge day time gala of speeches about the feat of twenty five unbroken years of democracy. It was also on the 29th of May, a day that marked the attainment by the Tinubu administration of the age One. At some point, no one knew exactly what the politicians gathered at the National Assembly were celebrating.  Was it their own growing irrelevance? Was it Mr. Tinubu’s empty one year in office? Or was it  the sorry plight of the people whom they say voted them into office? Up to this point, no one can say exactly what the conclave of shame at the National Assembly on 29th May was all about.

Twenty five years of unbroken democratic government was indisputable and clearly called for some noisy observance. At least we could count a succession of dispensations from Obasanjo to Tinubu over this period. Goings and comings every four years, each regime adding to the legacy of infamy and the chronicle of shame and serial looting.  At least the ones whose tenure expired went away even if sometimes reluctantly. Others replaced them in a relay race that we are not likely to forget in a hurry. Similarly, no one could deny that the nation has borne the burden of the Tinubu administration for the last twelve months. And no one can fairly deny Mr. Tinubu of not amking a difference in his avowed pledge to continue from where Mr. Buhari left off.

Buhari left the Naira at 480 to the dollar; Tinubu has improved the figure to N1,500. Buhari left the price of petrol at less than N300 per liter; Tinubu has raised it to N700.  Nigerians are now more axed for nearly everything than at any other time in our history. In fairness, the celebration of these “gains” of’democracy  belonged more to politicians and the political class than to the beleaguered people of Nigeria. Therefore, in a Freudian affirmation of their sense of ownership of the bash, the president and the National Assembly decided that it was worth only their in house celebration as an exclusive club of beneficiaries.

So, the president did not bother to address the nation on 29th of May. After all, it was twenty five years of the triumph of political ascendancy and another one year of yet another relay lapse. He wisely opted to address a joint session of the National Assembly in what turned out to be an odd mix of comedy and farce. It was crowned by the inauguration of the ‘old’ national anthem as the anthem of the  ‘new’ nation in the making under Mr. Tinubu.

Never mind that a clear 85% of those assembled were probably toddlers when the old anthem was jettisoned 48 years ago. Forget also the fact that over 90% of them did not know the exact wordings of what they were foisting on the nation by an untidy legislative fiat. They moved their lips and the police band came to their rescue with a halting rendition of the old anthem which they probably rehearsed on that morning.

Two weeks later, it was June 12, the National Democracy Day as decreed by Mr. Buhari in reprisal against his nemesis, Mr. Babangida of Minna. June 12 is a day set aside for the remembrance of the June 12 1993 presidential election which ended in a fiasco of an aborted transition to civil rule. Of course June 12 was an episode in democracy in Nigeria, albeit a very remarkable one. On that day, an autocratic military junta organized what has become the most credible democratic election in Nigerian history.   Credible election; free, fair and accurately reflective of the popular will but put together by a dictatorial regime as part of an audacious series of political experiments. The contradiction can never be lost on us. In life and in history, sometimes unintended good comes from dark places.  Was it not Shakespeare who insisted that sometimes, the instruments of darkness tell us the truth!

What unites the various celebrations of democracy that we have just witnessed is a certain self -deception and superficiality among the political class.   Both the politicians gathered in the conclave of lies in Abuja and the public at large know something in common. Everyone knows that Nigeria is not yet a democracy properly defined. The politicians know that democracy is more of a convenient nomenclature for what has been happening here in the past twenty five years.  It is merely a superficial mantra that they use to excuse their serial betrayal of the people in order to gain unfettered access to the commonwealth and fleece the rest of us in an organized crime syndicate.

Curiously, the popular masses of Nigerians also know a fraud when they see one. They know that Nigeria is only ‘democratic ‘ during isolated episodes and moments on the political calendar. During election seasons, Nigeria suddenly explodes in a colourful durbar of democratic frenzy. The nation becomes a democratic country as people temporarily forget the autocratic impositions and high handedness of the preceding four years.  It is time for travelling theatres of political jesters. The circus hits the circuit.  It is time to don colorful party costumes and sing creative political songs. It is time to dig up the language of “stomach infrastructure”, to hide Naira notes or a few miserable dollar bills inside loaves of Agege bread for distribution to those who have not had a meal in the last few days.

Democracy season is time for known miscreants to prance around the country promising what they themselves do not even understand. Some ‘political animals’ even attend crash evening school lessons to try and understand the meaning of  words like “policy”, “programme”, “democracy dividend” and “constituency” etc.

Soon afterwards, the elections are held. People win and others lose. Some contestants win and lose at the same set of polling centres depending on whose version of the result you get first. No one in Nigeria wins an election or loses an election. In Nigeria’s democratic tradition, every one who contests an election  presumes him or herself a winner.  In advance, they measure the drapes of their new official abode. Some rehearse the dance steps for inauguration day. Others rehearse the pompous  speech mannerisms of their envisaged high office.  ‘A governor does not speak like an ordinary mortal!’  The men encourage their ambitious wives to rehearse the dance steps of “Madam Excellency”. Self delusion is one distinguishing feature of Nigerian democracy.

Among conflicting claimants of victory in Nigerian elections, there is a common greeting: “Let’s meet in court”! If you were declared loser, they tell you: “Go to court!” or “Go and hug a power transformer!” The theatre soon shifts to the courts where an avalanche of jobless lawyers and thievish judges are lying in wait to make a killing. There are enough contested political offices whose elections must end in court. So, judges of Tribunals, Courts of Appeal and even the Supreme Court enter a season of harvest. Any Nigerian judge worth his salt who is assigned to adjudicate on election disputes must be a fool if he or she fails to change his decrepit old car ready for retirement at the end of an election cycle.

Not to talk of some strange sacrosanct animal created by the government to count the ballots and declare a result. It is a strange animal now called INEC. In political matters, it has the power of life and death. Its adverse declarations have sent many a politician to early death through cardiac arrest. People lobby and bribe to be made Resident Electoral Commissioners in states. All it takes to become a billionaire is to declare the richer candidate duly elected.

So much for the comic theatre of the absurd that Nigerians call elections and politicians dub democracy.  In other places, elections are contested by parties. Parties stand for ideas and ideals. Those ideas make sense only because they address a current adversity or concern among the people. In Nigeria, parties have only acronymas. Whatever those acronyms stand for do not concern the people. The good politicians are the ones who switch parties like dirty underpants. A democracy that has thrived for a quarter of a century without identifiable political parties is a fraud.

In Nigeria’s democratic  tradition, prties are not held accountable fr misrule. In fact, a party that misrules and mismanages the nation is rewarded at the next election. Mr. Buhari ran Nigeria aground under the banner of the APC. But the 2023 elections returned the APC to power at the federal level and majority of the states in addition to a clear parliamentary majority. A democracy whose electoral outcomes reconsolidate a previous bad government can only be a negative definition of democracy.

In a proper democracy, the institutions of democracy are clearly defined. They are credible political parties, an independent judiciary, a free press and an apparatus of state that is dedicated to the state and not to passing regimes. On the contrary, what we have in Nigeria is a situation where once elected into office, an incumbent privatizes the apparatus of state as well as the insitutitions of democracy. The new sovereigns become embodiments of the state and above the law. In the ensuing state of “my administration”, an incumbent rises to the status of an overlord. The president rises to the status of a king, jettisoning the republic constitution on the basis of which he was elected. Governors become emperors  and the people who queued in the sun to cast those votes become canon fodder. A democracy that rewards the freedom of the citizens with greater insecurity needs to be re-examined. If the dividend of a particular democracy is hunger and unemployment queues that get longer by the day, we need to take a second look at ourselves.

Even when their tenures expire, Nigeria’s democratically elected incumbents are now in the trade of empowering their surrogates in the now fashionable role of political god fathers. This ends  up enthroning  a virtual oligarchy until the surrogates revolt in nasty  and scandalous palace coups.

The challenges of transforming Nigeria into a democracy are daunting.  A democracy that degrades the lives of the people with each passing tenure is suspect. A democracy that spends more money on servicing its own  form than the content of the peoples lives is overdue for a drastic review. The questions are many.

How do we convert our democracy into an instrument of development? Why is our democracy producing more poor, miserable and desperate citizens with each passing tenure? How do we convert and transform our political class from consuming locusts into  productive agents of development?