Some of the most bizarre things about the practice of democracy, as a form of government, have happened in Nigeria. Perhaps, this is why many people believe that the concept of a government of the people by the people and for the people, as expressed in Nigeria, is fast kicking the bucket at a pace never before contemplated. This has been seen in the ongoing debacle between the former governor of Rivers State, Nyesom Wike, and his handpicked successor, Siminalayi Fubara. Between the two, something nasty, and unbecoming, about the practice of democracy in Nigeria was exposed with delightful glee.
For instance, an elder of the state, supposedly so, stood before television cameras to proclaim a guilty verdict on the governor for disagreeing with his predecessor, on the argument that the immediate past governor single-handedly installed the incumbent and also installed the three senators representing the state at the Senate as well as the 11 members of the House of Representatives for the state. He also publicly proclaimed that the same former governor was responsible for the installation of all local government chairmen in the state as well as all members of the State House of Assembly. I am deliberate in recalling the elder’s exact use of the verb ‘install’.
Following that, a youth leader, who also identified himself as a lawyer, publicly proclaimed that having been “installed”, like all other political office holders in the state, the incumbent governor ought to remain loyal to his ‘installer’ just the same way and manner all those who benefitted from the installers magnanimity, in his dispense of the power to install, must also show, and remain unreservedly loyal. In other words, the installed must remain forever tied, by loyalty strings, to the installer.
So far in this discourse, I have refrained from using the word ‘elected’. This is because the word spoken, and expressed, in support of the ex-governor was ‘install’. In the argument, and intended meaning, the former governor installed everyone who holds a political office that should be democratically elective. This, in other words, suggests that no such thing as an election was held in that state on February 25, 2023, and March 18, 2023. By implication, the people of the state, for whom government is a trust, did not freely entrust their powers through the voting process, to anyone –not the governor, not the senators, not the House of Representatives members, not the House of Assembly members and not their local government chairmen. It was just a franchise exercised between the installer and the installed. Just one man sat somewhere and decreed, or, proclaimed their installation. That was it.
A further implication of this is that the people of the state, as voters in a democratic process, were relevant only to the extent that they were used as tools in the installation process. Their votes became just a necessity in the process of the justification of a decision previously taken by an installer to install some persons who, in turn, would masquerade as elected representatives of the people while, in actuality, representing the interest of their installer, pay homage to him and are answerable to him only. An extended implication of this leadership installation enterprise is that since those who now masquerade as elected representatives of the people, were not elected by the people, they owe the people no explanation, or account, of their stewardship knowing that the people lacked the powers to install or uninstall them.
Sadly, this leadership installation enterprise is not limited to Rivers State. It has become a phenomenon in the expression of elective democracy in Nigeria. It is a trend that has stripped the people -whose voices, expressed through their votes, ought to count in the leadership selection process which makes democracy a government of the people, by the people, and for the people- of their power to decide who leads them. This is why many Nigerians are getting increasingly disappointed with the practice of democracy.
Interestingly, this has been the trend of democracy in many parts of the world. Even the developers of the idea behind elective democracy or people power, have progressively come to see it as mob rule. In mob rule, as in democracy, the majority takes the vote. That majority may be a bunch of mongrels. This is why in many political jurisdictions; a few people decide who takes the leadership mantle. In the USA, we see this in the influence of the Electoral College in determining who becomes President. In China, we see the impact of the Politburo and Politburo Standing Committee of the China Communist Party in creating a leadership class from which a President is selected. I admit, however, that in none of these political jurisdictions does a predecessor work very hard to remote control or determine the operations of the office of a successor irrespective of the role he/she played in the installation enterprise.
Greek philosopher, Plato, argued that democracy prioritises wealth and property accumulation as the ultimate good. Plato’s disgust with democracy is practically evident in Nigeria’s expression of that form of government especially in a situation where the wealth of a state is seen as belonging to the governor, who is also seen as being at liberty to share it as it suits him. This encourages a system where the wealth of a state is dispensed between those who are loyal as a taunt against those who are not loyal.
Perhaps this is why Prof. Obiora Okonkwo, in November 2023, advocated for the regeneration of thought to create a new democratic leadership culture that is Afrocentric; one which takes in all the vital elements of Africa’s traditional leadership values. He had said, while speaking in a keynote address he presented at a two-day international hybrid political conference of the Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka that “for democracy to take firm root, bring an end to forced transitions and answer to the yearnings of the people for development, African states must begin to institutionalise behaviours that endear democracy to the people.” According to Okonkwo, there is the “need for Africa to develop a model of democracy that reflects its cultural values and systems; drawing from the continent’s pre-colonial governance structures.”
Logically, he argued that “African countries should prioritise the strengthening of democratic institutions, including electoral commissions, judicial systems, and oversight bodies. These institutions need to be independent, transparent, and accountable to ensure fair and credible elections; building trust in the electoral process can help reduce the likelihood of problematic transitions and post-election violence, encouraging inclusive governance and inclusive political participation is vital for reducing election-related tensions; investing in civic education programs can help to inform citizens about their rights, the importance of peaceful elections, and the consequences of election violence.”
There may be no other ways to resolve such situations that have made many people conclude that democracy is dying in Nigeria, than these.