Fire on the mountain: Being typically and equally engulfed, as every other Nigerian presently is, in the mind-boggling revelations of alleged corporate fraud, incompetence, brazen criminal mismanagement and regulatory failure in our banking and finance industry (which includes the stock market), it is relatively easy to perceive the near hysteria which the expose has brought closer to the surface in virtually every Nigerian. With vital issues such as the total failure in the power sector, and the economic quagmire the country finds itself in, resolute internet trawlers (or netizens as they are known in the modern world) such as myself cannot but help notice calls for revolution, mass slaughter of the elite, and so on, as solutions to the nation’s problems.
I even heard a similar call on radio once! Being a skeptical bystander, I happen to know my fellow countrymen as being extraordinarily long on words and almost correspondingly short on action, especially as most of those calling for this drastic actions are safely ensconced overseas and have the luxury of recommending solutions from which they stand to benefit but also from which they stand to sacrifice little or nothing of their material or financial wellbeing. Yes everyone has relatives in Nigeria, but . . . .
Since I am highly fearful of what a revolution would entail and am (admittedly) deeply reluctant to participate in the sacrifices (including bloodshed) this would require (though who knows what could happen if the country reached its breaking point?), I prefer instead to suggest, or add to what has already been suggested in the form of civil solutions to the Nigerian crisis.
Run! Where?: A lot of rational thinkers have suggested the need for political reform. Others have spoken of the formation of political movements to offer viable alternatives to the status quo. Understandably, the beneficiaries of the present order cannot be enthusiastic about change. However, for the vast majority of Nigerians, the need for it is absolutely non-negotiable.
Corruption is obviously one of the biggest problems in this pseudo-democracy where leaders do not feel they are answerable to the public for their actions or lack of it. The structures of government, institutional framework that allows things run smoothly, a set of rules guiding the running of government, is sorely lacking in Nigeria. Yet, elections are mandated to be held, with a change in personnel in several critical departments, more than twice a decade. Without strong institutions such as law enforcement, the judiciary, and other bureaucratic departments, huge amounts are wasted pursuing what can collectively be labeled as bad strategy.
Wetin cause am?: Nigeria was initially administered according to the British model of government before switching to the American style it now adopts. This means that the basic bureaucratic structure is essentially similar to British norm, while policy formation to govern the bureaucracy is American in concept. Thus, it is basically a hybrid arrangement. The problem is, we have adopted the negative portions of both these systems and merged them into a Frankenstein of unworkability. The only usefulness it serves is to bilk the nation’s resources to unaccountable ends, while citizens continue to suffer neglect.
In our elections to executive office, the whole process revolves round electing one person to office whereas hundreds of positions of vital importance are filled without an iota of public scrutiny simply because the present setup favours a ‘strong’ political party ‘sweeping’ the elective positions in a particular entity. Be it a state or the federal government, it often happens that the party that wins the executive also wins the legislature. Worse still, in the legislative arena little or nothing is known about the personalities running for office even to their names (except in a few occasions)! Thus a setup emerges where only the aspirant governor or president is well known before an election. Since one man cannot handle all the administrative, developmental and other sundry functions required from an executive administration, a majority of those who will be responsible for the effective running of a government are anonymous before an election (most times even to the governorship and presidential aspirants themselves!) thus the allocation of posts is done after a party may have won an election as a means of horse-trading and repayment of electoral ‘favours’. This inevitably leads to corruption.
Hinging a political and electoral system on a one-man franchise becomes very difficult in a statewide setup and virtually impossible in a national one. This is because of the nation’s size and diversity. A common means of overcoming such problems hitherto has been recommendations from a sociocultural outfit (such as the Afenifere in the Southwest or Ohaneze Ndigbo in the Southeast) which propels a hitherto unknown personality to limelight and eventual office, as happened in the case of Afenifere and Governor Bola Tinubu of Lagos State in 1999. Another means is the virtual foisting of a candidate on the populace by an already popular outgoing governor, such as happened in several states and the Federal Government in recent elections. That the Lagos experience ended in a pleasant experience of good governance does not excuse the virtual lottery in which the process ended up, as no-one knew who would be the party candidate for the ‘ruling’ party in Lagos State until a few weeks to the election! Inevitably, such a situation means that the intended candidate is held hostage to forced pledges of corrupt endowments to his ‘political godfather’.
The informal ‘zoning’ principle adopted by the ruling party in the Federal Government purportedly helps to whittle down the horde of aspirants from around the country angling for the post of President of the Federation and thus makes the process more manageable. The problem with this setup is that, for it to work, the nation is held hostage to a single political party. Even if the zoning principle were enshrined in the Constitution today, limiting the options available to the nation for President to a single ‘Geopolitical Zone’ (whose idea was that anyway!) every eight years, is a poor way to achieve the best out of a well endowed country such as Nigeria. This means that for a certified ‘good’ governor such as Governor Babatunde Raji Fashola of Lagos State to aspire for the post of presidency at the present rate, he would be a sprightly 86 years old (the prime of his life you no doubt would agree) before he could be legally allowed to run!
A solution?: I had heard, a few years back, a call from some quarters for a reversion to parliamentary democracy. It was predictably shot down by the beneficiaries of the status quo. The plaintiffs cited the huge cost of running a presidential system as a reason for calling for the change. As you would guess, that exact reason is why most members of the ruling party want it to stay! How else would they recoup the huge funds expended to attain electoral office? Since such calls, together with others for establishment of state police, resource control, devolution of most taxes to the state governments, etc., are seen as weakening the absolute power of the ruling party over the rest of the country, it is safe to assume they will not be wholeheartedly adopted by the incumbents
An alternative I would suggest is an adoption of the principles of a parliamentary system by the political movement we all know needs to be formed (if it hasn’t been already) to peacefully take power at the ballot box from those who currently have it and achieve the Nigeria of our dreams. Since (arguably) it would be extremely difficult to find an individual Nigerian who can feasibly win the Nigerian presidency simply by the strength of his popularity (with the questionable exception of MKO Abiola, a Yoruba, who was co-piloted by Babagana Kingigbe, a Hausa Fulani) in a free and fair election, presenting a team of aspirant executives contesting election on a single platform and tasked with handling various portfolios could help to demystify the whole process. Currently, in a country with little or no platforms or frameworks for governance and with extremely weak institutions, it is unreasonable to expect that every aspect of policy in a state or federal government should be encapsulated in one man’s brain as is done in Nigeria (directly mimicking the US method, but without its obvious resources, checks and balances). The role of the executive is so broad that the candidate may not even have enough knowledge of how the system works to answer the public’s queries and concerns adequately.
Following parliamentary substance in presenting the party leader as executive aspirant, while other member of the team are put in charge of other portfolios such as finance, health, agriculture, works and infrastructure, housing, information, internal and external affairs, defense, policing, and so on, will help to propagate the aspiring regime’s ideas and ideals better to the public. This way the team is assessed holistically as opposed to the individual as is currently the case. This can help to overcome the challenge presented by the large country and its vast number of ethnic and tribal divisions, especially if members of the team (in a national campaign for the presidency) are drawn widely from various corners of the country and with each portfolio containing a senior and junior position to provide a place at the table for more comers. The political payoffs, which may then inevitably occur, should be limited to less vital positions of authority or if possible, just lucrative contracts which must then be carried out properly. Assessing a team helps to propagate ideas and tether the political debate to issues. Also, financing a campaign becomes easier with a committed team of professionals in place who have similar vision and determination to pull the country away from the precipice it currently finds itself. It also presents a more credible platform for the public to invest small campaign contributions (as is the case in the US, UK, etc.). It would not take too much for such a team to overcome the odds and build the national following and momentum to clinch power at the center as well as in many states of the federation. The question of rigging would also be addressed to an extent since the public who are financially committed to such a team would be more willing to defend their votes having bought into its idea.
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('content1'); });
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('comments'); });
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('content2'); });