STRAIGHT TALK BY OBINNA F. NWACHUKWU
When I hear words such as ” the President, this Governor, or that Governor, or this Local Government Chairman, is, or are ,… the ” Leader ( s) “of the party, I laugh . I quickly say to myself ,this is a peculiar Nigerian contraption.
Words such as these, exhibit either ignorance of , or impunity, with regards to the observance , of our laws, and lack of respect ,as well, with regards to the structures of political parties in a democratic dispensation.
In like manner, I hear of things as “dividends of democracy ” , as if the democratic dispensation is a “going corporate concern”, in which the profit motive is the prime motivator, which drives its establishment, and running . What would one not see , or hear , of, in Nigeria ? It is a funny country .
Democracy is a borrowed western concept, which we try to set up, and operate here, albeit, with the usual Nigerian character .
The word ‘democracy’ was popularly conceptualised by Abraham Lincoln in Gettysburg as ‘the government of the people, for the people and by the people’. To many people, anything short of this definition is considered the opposite of democracy. It is a system of government under which the people exercise the governing power, either directly or indirectly through representatives in a periodical election. However, democracy means different things to different people, despite the multiplicity of concepts and its contradictory nature. Nevertheless, the essentials of democracy allow free discussion, free association and periodical elections, and continuous participation of the people in the Government. The success of democracy demands: a certain level of ability and character from the common man; rational conduct and active participation in the government; intelligence to understand public affairs; independent judgement; tolerance; and unselfish devotion to public interest
Unfortunately, we do not always copy well, and it most often turns out to be something else, other than what we borrowed, initially .
In classical democratic theory and practice, there is nothing like a “party leader, ” whose leadership is outside the party structure and hierarchy.
A party has its structure, usually headed by a Chairman, or whatever title he/she may bear. Then you have the various officers of the party, who are responsible for the smooth-running of the party, in order for it to achieve its goals and objectives, which includes , providing an alternative government , through periodic, regular, and competitive arrangements, or election. Hence, the party Chairman is the “leader”of the party.
However, as we said earlier, the party aims to provide alternative government, in a competitive, elective arrangement.
Those who represent the party , in the electoral processes, and even when the party wins an election, and establishes a government, are mere agents of the party ,in an agent/ principal relationship, ( in strictly legal terms), wherein , the “Principal ” , in that relationship , is the “Party ” , while the “Agents”, are all those elected/ appointed , into government, who ( in all understanding), are not independent, existing on their own , but are mere Agents of their Principal ,( the party ) .
The Agents ( elected/ appointed), are in government , to implement the plans, policies, manifestos etc. of their Principals ( the Parties ) , who the said agents are supposed to report to.
They are accountable to the party , and by that,, indirectly to the people , who voted their party in.
This arrangement partly, explains why our system is a
” winner takes all ” system.
Unfortunately, this is not how Nigerians have made the system operate.
We have a situation, whereby the whole thing is turned upside-down, like a person, standing on his head. This is wrong .
Here, the Agent ( Elected/ Appointed ), becomes, either deliberately, or inadvertently , the “Principal “, while the real Principal, is relegated to the position of an Agent.
In this situation, the party seems to be led by the Elected, or Agent , such that the Elected , i.e. the President, or the Governor, begins to act, ( not as Agent of the party) ,but as the Principal.
The party leader is then referred to as the President. The Governor, ( if it has to do with state level ), does not become accountable to anybody, ( except to himself ) , while even the Electorate themselves, are seen as people who can be and usually are manipulated , to what the President ,or that Governor wants.
Thus, the party becomes a mere “platform for elections”, in obedience to the provisions of the law, which serves as a mere decoration, and nothing more.
This partly explains ,as well, the absence of ideologies in the political parties.
The ideologies become those of the supposed Agent, the elected, who ,unfortunately, neither serves as the Principal, nor reports to anybody. The plans, goals, objectives, and manifesto of the party become those of the President or the Governor,( as the case may be ) .
Both neither report to, nor are controlled by , any nobody. And this is wrong which explains why most of the major political parties are non-ideological.
It also means that at the elections, the attraction for choice by the electorate, are the individuals, (and not the parties ) , strictly speaking .
Another disturbing issue with our political system is the absence of or manipulation of internal party democracy. Despite the constitutional considerations and provisions of section 221-229 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, which made provisions for intra-party democracy, the activities of political parties in Nigeria lack internal democracy. Internal democracy encompasses two instruments of intra-party democracy: organisation of free and fair elections, and a periodic election of party members and its representatives – equal and popular participation of its members, and equal representation of interests. This ranges from the nomination of candidates to party primaries, alliances and many others. The mistake of the Nigerian ruling class is its failure to build a strong and socially stable system for a democratic practice to take root was clear in his assertion that Nigerian political parties are likened to a paradox, due to the lack of democratic principles such as internal coherence and discipline. What is obtainable is the opposite: this absence of internal democracy poses a stumbling block to a sustainable democratic process. Nigerian political parties have neither risen above ethnic considerations nor observed internal democracy in its structure, organisation and its politics, but have been bedridden with crisis and become an avenue for corruption in the country. Politics has become a profession to the detriment of public interests, and a source of primitive accumulation and profit maximisation .
Regrettably, political parties in the country have adopted the role in contemporary democracies as aggregators, mediators, and solutions to collective action problems. Politics provides a platform for political aggregation, organising and coordinating votes, a vehicle for solving collective action problems, and it facilitates the activities of political actors. The question of internal democracy in Nigerian political parties is of paramount importance for the development of a political and democratic process in a contemporary society. The health and strength of a Democratic Party system serves as a determinant factor and success of any democratic experiment.
There is also the issue of the so-called, ” dividends of democracy “. I will give the honor for the concoction, or coinage of this terminology, to President Obasanjo, during his tenure as President , whom I observed , first used it.
This usage ignores certain intangible and intrinsic characteristics of the practice of democracy. Democracy is democracy , and it cannot be equated to tangible things such as “dividends”, ” profit and loss “, ” balance sheet ” ,etc because the popular definition, or description of democracy, says it all , that it is about, ” government of the people, by the people, for the people ” .
Whatever is enjoyed from it , cannot be considered, equated , in terms of , “dividends” or, ” loss.”, or ,” balance sheet “.