Inquirer: The two leading political parties recently elected their flag bearers for the up coming presidential elections this year, what does this mean to Nigeria?
Oladele: It means decades of military dictatorship are yielding to a new age of liberal democracy, democratization and political freedom. It also means that as a multiparty state, electorates are being provided a platform to elect a candidate of their choice provided there are free and fair elections. This cannot be achieved under a single party state because opposition would be impossible or if ever there is one, it would be regarded as an act of treason as we see it in countries where we have sit-tight leaders who use electoral process as rituals to perpetuate their regimes. The nature of one party state was aptly discussed by Samuel Decalo in his paper: The process, prospects and constraints of democratization in Africa.
According to him, the Malawian leaders rendered opposition despicable when they argued that ?There is no opposition in heaven. God himself does not want opposition-that is why he chased Satan away. Why should Kamuzu have opposition?? Therefore, the beauty of Nigerian democracy is the multi- party structure that ensures pluralism of ideas and freedom of choice.
Inquirer: President Obasanjo and his PDP members almost turned Nigeria into a one party state by infiltrating into other parties like AD and ANPP. Not until AC emerged do we have what look like a credible opposition. Could this be described as a truly multi-party state?
Oladele: How credible is AC? I don?t agree with your analysis because the AC is a faction of the PDP that managed to emerge as a political party. Their disagreement with the PDP was not based on any policy disagreement but formula for power sharing. To the contrary, the forthcoming presidential elections may soon lock in two political parties, the PDP and the ANPP; hence I would say that the ANPP poses more challenge to the PDP than the AC. It is true that the PDP controls several states but that does not remove the fact that we have a multi-party democracy in Nigeria. We all have to fight for the sustenance and survival of minority parties because they are very crucial to our democratic structure. In most multi-part democracies, minority political parties represent, secure and protect the minority rights.
Inquirer: The over centralization of virtually everything in Nigeria, such as the police, control of mineral resources and other vital economic interest at the center put to question the federal system of government which Nigeria is practicing. Is this how things are done in other countries with similar system?
Oladele: The difference is in the type of federalism we practice. Nigeria practices traditional federalism while the U.S practices modern federalism and both have dissimilar features. The principal feature of modern federalism which is linked with the U.S is that sovereignty would be spread-out among different regions that constitute the federation with a view to adapting modern state that would achieve some of the goals of traditional federalism. In addition, if you compare the Nigerian federalism with that of the U.S, you would notice significant disparities which may be attributed to the fact that the American colonies were originally territorial republics and characteristically, Americans were opposed to absolute centralization of power in any appearance.
What we have in Nigeria is a traditional classic modern nation - state model which is based upon the principle that its sovereignty is indivisible and has to be concentrated in the center in order to be properly exercised. Nigerian federalism can also be described as a vital component of modern nationalism - a transformed medieval corporation. In all respect, the modern federalism such as the one we have in the U.S stands tangentially in conflict with the traditional centralized nation-state such as the Nigerian federalism.
What I am saying is that in U.S federalism, what was very important to the founders was the questions of power and sharing of power. On the issue of sovereignty, the founding fathers delegated sovereignty to the component states and gave the states full powers on those matters delegated to them in order to serve the interest of the community of states that comprise the nation state. So, while adopting federalism in Nigeria, we unwittingly adopted the classic modern state model, not modern federalism as we have it in the U.S. This is why we have the center so powerful and the features so clearly different from the U.S type of federalism.
Inquirer: Is the traditional presidentialism good for the nation?
Oladele: No type of presidential system is good for Nigeria. Every presidential system, be it traditional or modern has a tendency towards dictatorship because it concentrates so much power on the president. Winning the presidency is a winner take-all and because of the enormous power of the president, some political scientists, such as Fred Riggs, have argued that presidentialism has fallen into authoritarianism in every country it has been attempted. So, in a fledging democracy such as ours in Nigeria with our political culture, economy, lack of tolerance for the opposition coupled with the difficulty in impeaching an autocratic and overbearing president before the expiration of his term, I will not recommend a presidential system of any kind for Nigeria.
Inquirer: At the height of the third term agenda, many commentators believed there would be no elections. Do recently conducted primaries that led to the emergence of Mohammed Buhari (ANPP) Umar Shehu Musa Y?adua (PDP) and Vice president Abubakar Atiku (AC) change such believe?
Oladele: The third term agenda and party primaries are two different things. If the third term agenda had succeeded, there definitely would not have been any elections because no vacancy would have existed anyway. It is not as if the party nominations changed the believe, but because the third term project failed and the president had assured the whole world that he would retire to his farm when his tenure constitutionally expires on May 29, 2007, parties have to field candidates to run for the forthcoming presidential elections.
Inquirer: Does that mean President Obasanjo was forced to step aside like IBB going by what Attorney Femi Falana and Professor Wole Soyinka said in April and June in Chicago that the pro-democracy groups would mobilize the nation against Obasanjo staying a day longer in office?
Oladele: History will always repeat itself. I believe that President Obasanjo must have been motivated to embark on his third term agenda by the U.S political antecedents of the 20th century that saw President Franklin Delano Roosevelt being elected to four terms in office as the U.S president. Of course, President Roosevelt was the only U.S. president to have served more than two terms because the Congress quickly moved to pass a law pegging the presidential term to two straight terms of four years each after him. The U.S political situation at the time helped President Roosevelt to achieve his ambition unlike in Nigeria of 21st century whose mood would hardly tolerate two terms. That was what I think happened in addition to the anti-third term forces.
Inquirer: What should Nigerians do to see that free and fair elections are held this year?
Oladele: One of the fundamental issues confronting Nigeria today is the critical question of free and fair elections which are very germane to the enthronement of a legitimate and credible government. Voters registration must be updated by the INEC, the ruling party in every state or even at the federal level must ensure that all the political parties are given freedom to sell their programs to the electorates and to canvass people.
In addition, the electorates must be given sufficient information and education about all the contestants that would afford them the opportunity to make informed decisions and vote for candidates of their choices. Parties must avoid conducts that undermine safety of voters such as intimidation and political harassments. Another thing Nigerians expect in order to ensure free and fair election is an independent INEC that is impartial and free from any political pressure or influence.
However, there are some other things that would have to be guaranteed on the day of election in order to ensure free and fair elections. For instance, votes have to be counted accurately, people have to be prevented from double or multiple voting which is very rampant in previous elections and which has necessitated restriction of movements on election days, voting periods have to be the same; that is, voting should start and end at the same time throughout the country, people should be vigilant against stuffing of ballot boxes with fake ballot papers that do not reflect the voting pattern of the voters and ballot boxes must be protected from being stolen after the elections particularly during their transition from the polling stations to the centers where votes would be collated and counted. While these are not exhaustive, it is my view that if they are in place, the electoral process would produce credible and fair results.
Inquirer: Unsolved political killings are still going on in Nigeria. What is right and wrong with Nigerian Police?
Oladele: I will say the criminal justice system in totality; the courts, the police, the prisons system and the politicians should take the blame for the spate of violence, not just the Police. This was the same position I took during my interview with the Vanguard Newspaper late last year when I was asked a similar question. The truth however, is that, because the police are the most noticeable part of the criminal justice system, they account for the major portion of the blame and this is why much of the attention and focus are always on them. The police represent the bridge between law, order and anarchy and where the police system is weak, anarchy will infect the society like a plague. When the criminal justice system has sacred cows, the untouchables, a mafia-like society will emerge. In Nigeria today, it is a fact that police have been limited in their investigative and arrest powers due to political interference which have in turn, tied the hands of law and order.
The police, being the agency established by the constitution to protect lives and property must resist political pressure and take better anti-crime measures. Unfortunately, the Nigeria Police are often manipulated by the political class and as long as they continue to do so, they will always be caught in the crossfire of criminal justice system, particularly, when there is a breakdown of the system. This is why I said in my earlier interview with the Vanguard that political assassinations will continue unabated as long as previous cases remain unsolved. People will always have the tendency to be lured to crime either for the sake of money or power, but if we have an effective criminal justice system, the temptation can be greatly reduced. The police must therefore, observe procedural safeguards, avoid executive or political interference and respond to society?s demand that they apprehend and prosecute criminals, no matter how highly placed. Punishment is still the basic response to crime and there is no conclusive evidence that punishment does deter crime.
Inquirer: In many countries of the world, detectives and not Police chiefs that carry out investigations on murder and other crimes. Why is the Nigerian system different?
Oladele: Every society has its own political and administrative structures and I would not blame Nigeria for not having a separate agency for investigating crimes or for not having a separate investigative organ for detectives. It is not unusual for governments to have detective units fussed within the police department.
For instance, the London Metropolitan Police Service, popularly known as the Scotland Yard, is famous around the world and has a unique place in the history of policing. Scotland Yard has become internationally famous as a symbol of policing. It has both uniformed officers and uniformed detective officers that have general law enforcement duties. In most cases, uniformed officers specialize in various fields such as chemical analysis, handwriting and fingerprint identification, while others work with special units, such as horseback, canine units, special weapons and tactics or emergency response teams. Detectives on the other hand, are plain clothe investigators who gather facts and collect evidence for criminal cases. They conduct interviews, examine records, observe the activities of suspects, and participate in raids or arrests. Detectives usually specialize in investigating one of a wide variety of violations, such as homicide or other violent crimes. Like the Scotland Yard, the Nigeria Police Force has detective and homicide units and their inefficiency is not due to the fact that they are not given an autonomous department as we have it in some other countries.
As I said earlier, we should not just look at the form or structure of the Police system in determining their efficacy as there are so many anti-system players in the country that make effective crime investigation and policing difficult. This will continue to be the case even where we have a separate department for detectives until such a time that we eradicate those things that make our system dysfunctional.
Inquirer: Don?t you think a state or regional police or even city police as it is applicable here in the US solve the issues of law and order and security in the country instead of a single police force?
Oladele: Generally speaking, control of crime and maintenance of law and order are the major duties of the police. Even if you have state police and the anti-system players are still there, you would only have succeeded in transferring the problem from one structure to another.
Whether centralized or decentralized, we have to remove the barriers to the criminal justice system and change our policing system from traditional approach of responding to crimes to a more proactive preventative approach. Even in the U.S where police is decentralized, if they decide to bring it under one federal agency or department, it will still be effective because the law is no respecter of persons and the police officers perform their duties without fear or favor. Therefore, before we begin to think of decentralizing the police, let us remove those things that I called anti-system players. Then we can proceed to the next level.
Inquirer: In the US alone, there are about five million Africans; majority of which are Nigerians but they cannot vote in the up coming elections except they visit home. How do we reverse that?
Oladele: How do we reverse it? Urge your legislators to enact a law that would give Nigerians abroad the right to vote through absentee ballot system. However, on a more serious note, given our situation in Nigeria today and our political culture, I would not recommend absentee ballot system at this time.
Absentee ballot system has a lot of problems because they are not secure, not many of them would get counted, and they can get lost in transit or switched. In addition, since we don?t have adequate census of Nigerians abroad, any government in power can manipulate the figure to rig elections. In practical analysis, they cost more and take much longer time to process. I don?t think it is a good idea to open windows of opportunities for election riggers.
Inquirer: The UN recently promised to help Nigeria hold a free and fair election, is this the right way to go?
Oladele: Any way that promotes free and fair elections is a good way. Therefore, it is a welcome development. Having said that, let me just say that the UN has always been involved in Nigeria?s election processes though at observers level. I still don?t think that the UN can do beyond that as it does not have the capacity in terms of personnel to be much more actively involved beyond that.
Inquirer: Vice President Atiku recently moved to the US shortly after his face-off with the president and his former political party; if you meet the vice-president, what advice will you offer him?
Oladele: Did he move? Well, I understand that he came to the U.S on vacation. I understand also that he has a wife in the U.S too, so I think the wife deserves the right of visitation otherwise the Vice-president would be guilty of exceptional depravity as a husband. Let's face it, this man is facing a lot and he deserves a time out.
Back to your question, I believe that both the president and his vice have some irreconcilable, fundamental and deep rooted disagreements. I have already made my position known on this matter in a separate legal opinion that was widely published by the press, including your organization.
The issues involved are too many and legalistic to be discussed here; but I would advise the vice-president to resign. When this type of situation happened between President Roosevelt of the U.S and his Vice, John Garner over disagreement on policy matters and President Roosevelt?s third term agenda, to the point that the duo became political enemies, John Garner resigned as vice president despite his popularity among his fellow democrats.
Many things have gone wrong in the whole process, from the president to the vice-president and because the two of them obviously no longer relate well, they have become strange bed fellows. Unfortunately, the president cannot resign for his vice, so in a situation like this, regrettably, it is the vice that is usually sacrificed. Candidly speaking, if I were him, I would not have waited this long just because I feel betrayed by the President because I brought more people into the party than the president did. Since he has risked his position to defect to another political party that has given him a bigger fish to fry, their presidential ticket, he should also move a step further by taking the honorable decision to resign as the vice-president. I believe the National Assembly should be able to deal with this matter more dispassionately when the matter is brought to the floor of the House for debate.
Inquirer: Nigeria?s political structure has been continuously criticized since 1999 when democratic government returned to the country. Attorney Femi Falana alluded to it last April when he said the constitution vested too much power in the president. Any noticeable changes noticed from your end?
Oladele: I hope you are not looking for a Falana V Oladele answer? (Laugh).The power of the president is predicated by the nature of the system we operate. Nigeria wanted a strong central government and that is what we?ve got. Under this arrangement, one man, the president, is in control of one-third of Nigerian government and appoints his aides with the power to hire and fire. He is the commander-in-chief of the country?s armed forces and if he wants, he can militarize the nation.
He also has the power of veto. No doubt, the power of the president is enormous. However, the president is not granted absolute power by the Constitution. The presidential system unlike what we think is not a system that gives the president unconditional power and authority. There is no such thing. The power of the president is limited by the congress or the National Assembly in order to ensure checks and balances.
The National Assembly has at its disposal many significant powers to balance presidential power but the reason why they cannot exercise their powers is that we often have members of the National Assembly that have been compromised and corrupted by the presidency. And because their hands are not themselves clean, they do not have the political will to check the president as they are always confronted with moral questions each time the president acts beyond the scope of his power.
Inquirer: In 2003, shortly after the current Oba of Lagos was installed, he said that the future was bright for Nigeria. Can we still say the same thing today?
Oladele: Yes, but we need to take care of business first by erecting democratic infrastructures without which constitutional rights and civil liberties would not be feasible. We also have to stop running the government like what has been called "the tragedy of the commons"- a situation in which everybody wants to take a fortune from the government without any intentions to give a brass farthing back in return.
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('comments'); });
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('content1'); });
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('content2'); });