Monetisation and force in Nigerian politics
By Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa
Being extracts from a paper delivered by Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa at a symposium organised by Christian Association of Nigeria, (CAN) Mainland Chapter at Yaba Baptist Church, Lagos recently
MILITARISATION is derived from the word 'military', which, by Longman's Dictionary of Contemporary English means 'used by or connected with war or the army, navy or airforce.' When a structure is militarised, it is one that has a lot of soldiers and weapons in it. It then sounded unreasonable to imagine an atmosphere whereby Nigerian politics is militarised. After a careful deliberation with one of the officials of the Mainland Chapter of CAN, we both agreed that militarisation of Nigerian politics in the context of this symposium should be taken to mean the involvement of military officers in Nigerian politics and also the deployment of soldiers to heat up the political process. We then extended our definition to 'monetisation' as the complete take-over of the Nigerian political structure by moneybags.
State of Nigerian polity today.
The Fourth Republic no doubt has been a game for retired military officers. The President is a retired soldier while the Vice-President is a retired Customs officer. In the Senate, a large percentage of its members once served in the Police, Army, Navy or Airforce. A retired army officer leads even the opposition. This was deliberately planned by the military as a way of ensuring its continued dominance of the political landscape in Nigeria.
General Abdulsalami Abubakar had toyed with the idea of remaining in power in 1998 but he shelved it when he sensed that the mood in Nigeria then was clearly anti-military. He then careful drew up a transition programme that would certainly lead to the emergence of a military officer as leader. He capped this up with a Constitution that would produce a civilian dictatorship. In Nigeria today, especially as it is under the 1999 Constitution, the President is a lord unto himself. For instance, he alone appoints vital officers in the Electoral Commission to organise an election in which he would feature as a candidate. And this is just one instance out of the many absurdities of the 1999 Constitution.
The emergence of General Obasanjo in the political landscape of Nigeria served a virile impetus for other retired military officers to launch fully into politics. Since 1999, the major actors in the political front have all been involved with the military in one form or the other. This has had far reaching consequences for the polity.
First, retired military officers have unlimited access to weapons and indeed money, all probably looted from the nation while serving in office. Second, the mentality of barrack dictatorship has eaten so deep into these officers that it becomes impossible for them to imagine any opposition, how much less to relate it. So the two options they have adopted in silencing the opposition since 1999 is either to eliminate them through violence or to push them out through the influence of money. This basically, is the origin of militarisation and monetisation of Nigerian politics. It is propelled simply by the doctrine of self-preservation.
The negligence of INEC.
Under and by virtue of section 225 (1) of the 1999 Constitution, every political party shall submit to the Independent National Electoral Commission and publish a statement of its assets and liabilities. By section 225 (2), every political party shall submit to INEC a detailed annual statement and analysis of its sources of funds and other assets together with a similar statement of its expenditure. Under section 226 (1), INEC shall every year prepare and submit to the National Assembly a report on the accounts and balance sheet of every political party. By paragraph 14 (2) of Part 1 to the Third schedule of the Constitution, INEC shall monitor the organisation and operation of the political parties, including their finances. By paragraph 14 (2) (d), INEC shall arrange for the annual examination and auditing of the funds and accounts of political parties, and publish a report on such examination and audit for public information and paragraph 14 (2) (f), it is to monitor political campaigns and provide rules and regulations which shall govern the political parties.
In very simple terms therefore, the life and death of the Nigerian political system is in the hand of INEC. The body has been clothed with all the powers that it requires nipping violence and monetisation in the bud.
In all the provisions of the Constitution relating to the nomination and qualification of candidates for election, there is no mention of any monetary capacity to enable a candidate contest for a particular position. In all the elections that it has organised so far, INEC introduced an indirect policy of monetisation by requiring candidates to pay a particular sum of money in order to be eligible to contest for a position in an election.
Happily, the National Conscience Party (NCP) successfully challenged this apparent illegality in court and won. But the political parties had taken a negative cue from INEC by levying their candidates exorbitant and prohibitive fees in order to be eligible to participate in the primaries. It then becomes clear that if INEC had lived up to its responsibilities to enforce even half of the provisions of the Constitution quoted above, then it would have at least minimised if not totally eliminating the hydra-headed twin monsters of militarisation and monetisation.
What the monetisation of the polity has achieved is to emasculate the will of the people by ensuring that the best candidate does not win. This has in turn led to the emergence of spectacular mediocre in the political arena, which in turn impacts, decisively on the quality of leadership.
Complicity of the electorate.
The immediate recipient of the consequence of militarisation and monetisation is the electorate. The retired military officer will not distribute arms to his children or indeed members of his family to engage in any form of violence, knowing well that the unexpected may happen. It is the poor electorate that are turned to guinea pigs and thugs during electoral campaigns.
In the same vein, politicians do not offer their family members and associates the peanuts that they dangle before the electorate for political support. Politicians are known to have wrapped N50 notes inside a loaf of bread in order to woo voters. Some insult the electorate by throwing money at them on the street. It is quite pathetic. Once the electorate is educated to a stage where they are able to exercise their franchise prudently, then the issue of militarisation and monetisation are half solved.
The way forward.
I strongly believe that active participation in politics by genuine born again Christians will have a lot of positive impact on the sanitation of the polity. Being the lights of the world, Christians are expected to set standards for the rest of the world. There is also the need for CAN to embark upon mass education and enlightenment of the electorate and indeed politicians on the authentic source of power. Once power is not ordained of God, it cannot last or be converted to achieve any lasting result.
So Christians can be involved physically by active participation or spiritually through intercessory prayers as stated 1Tm.2:1-4. Christians must be warned to desist from collecting money from corrupt leaders to pray for them or patronise them or encourage them to become regular guests in their programmes.
Reform of INEC.
There is need for an urgent reform of the electoral body. The INEC as presently constituted cannot achieve the desired result of a clean and stable political process. The present INEC cannot perform the basic functions assigned to it by the Constitution.
Vigilance of the electorate.
Unless there is a conscious effort by the electorate to call the bluff of the retired military officers and moneybags, it will be difficult to eliminate the ugly incidence of militarisation and monetisation of the political process.
Mistakes have been made in 1999 and 2003 but it would seem that a more calamitous mistake is already being made in readiness for 2007. Presently, all the gladiators for 2007 are retired military officers. Certainly there must be some other people capable of ruling this country progressively, otherwise we would not have secured independence from the colonialists, when there was no military.
The electorate should gear up to confront the retired military officers. We have a duty to conscientise and mobilise our members in our various churches so that they may be more alert to the dangers of militarisation and monetisation. This was the approach adopted by Nehemiah when, after various failed attempts by previous leaders, he mobilised his people to rebuild Jerusalem in just 52 days.
- Adegboruwa, lawyer, human rights activist, is acting publicity secretary of the United Action for Democracy (UAD).
`
|
