Zik Gbemre
It is really sad to see how many things happen in this country which ranges from the strange to the absurd and from the weird to the ridiculous, to the extent that often times, such things have become the norm and brazenly made acceptable for all and sundry to swallow. Nigeria is a place where both the government and the governed will often be seen engaged in acts that are prejudicial to the peaceful cohabitation of the diverse people and interests in the country. The politics of consensus candidates’ endorsement for public office positions is just one of those things in Nigeria that has jokingly gained grounds in recent times. Not that this practice is done in the interest of the entity called Nigeria, but rather, it is often driven primarily by ‘self-centered interests that are often to the detriment of the citizenry and the country’s preening democracy.
However, without mincing words and to put it bluntly; endorsement, anointing or imposition of political aspirants is detrimental to the principle of internal democracy within political parties and an affront on true democratic process. Therefore it must be stopped. When few people just gather in their closet meetings and decide to endorse, anoint and impose a public office aspirant on the people, and they do so with brazen skillfulness, using every available trickery, political maneuverings, including using state’s resources at their disposal to ‘buy’ crowds and mammoth supporters to justify their so called endorsement; then something is intricately wrong with both the political class of that society and its citizenry as well, especially if such a society is said to be practicing a democratic system of government. Seriously, the recent wave and popularity of endorsement of political candidates aspiring for one public office or the other can best be described as a mockery of Nigeria’s democracy.
Recently, the media was awash with the news that the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has endorsed President Goodluck Jonathan as its only flag bearer in the forth coming presidential election slated for February 14, 2015. It all began with the endorsement by the PDP Governors Forum. Thereafter came the Board of Trustee and the party’s National Executive Council. Then came Mr. President who openly declared his intention to contest the election, which according to the Transformation Ambassadors of Nigeria, was in response to Nigerians demands. They even went to the extent of telling Nigerians through the every available media outlet that over 17.8 million Nigerians have endorsed Mr. President to run for another term in office. While we would not want to bug ourselves with how they got these endorsements, the issue of endorsement in Nigerian politics has gradually gone to dimensions beyond what we see at the surface.
For those who do not know, the issue of endorsement of aspiring public office candidates was made very popular by the late General Sanni Abacha regime with his infamous ‘consensus presidential candidate adoption’ in the late 90s. Perhaps, a bit of history, as explained in a book (Multi-party Elections in Africa), written and edited by Michael Cowen and Liisa Laakso, will give us a clearer picture. We recall when the United Nigerian Congress Party (UNCP) decided to concentrate on getting Gen. Abacha to be their presidential candidate. But another political party, the Grassroots Democratic Movement (GDM), always the least connected to senior and well-placed government officials, disassociated itself from the agreement because it said its constitution did not provide for a consensus candidate. The UNCPs desire to ‘monopolize’ the candidature of General Abacha for the presidency was, however, not favoured by the General’s advisers as it implied that other parties would be free to present their own candidates. The risk of having Abacha compete with four other candidates was one which they were not prepared to take, especially as they could not be sure that, in spite of the machinery of state at their disposal, he would still win. Furthermore, although Abacha had built a reputation among Nigerians for his untrammeled brutality, he was not known to be an engaging public speaker and the thought of him addressing campaign rallies was one which his political and security advisers ruled out.
Moreover, politicians marginalized from the Abacha transition (from military to civilian), were actively regrouping, determined to make the self-succession programme as difficult and bumpy as possible. Two candidates; Tunji Briathwaite, a Lagos lawyer, and M.D. Yusuf, a former Inspector General of Police during Murtala-Obasanjo era, had emerged to openly defy Abacha and his advisers by declaring their determination to run for presidency of Nigeria on the platform of the GDM. Both of them not only addressed press meetings condemning the self-succession scheme, they also began to travel around the country to promote their candidature, promising Abacha a run for his money.
It was against this background that in April 1998, as maneuverings intensified to, once again, get the five registered political parties to settle their differences and jointly endorse Gen. Abacha as their consensus presidential candidate, the National Electoral Commission of Nigeria (NECON) issued a sudden directive asking them to convene their national conventions on the 16th of that month to select their presidential candidates. The UNCP was first off the block, holding its convention in Kaduna where it dully selected Abacha as its candidate. The CNC, National Center Party of Nigeria-NCPN and Democratic Party of Nigeria-DPN followed on the 18th April 1998 with conventions of their own held, respectively, in Makaudi, Owerri and Port-Harcourt, where they too dully endorsed motions adopting Abacha as their presidential candidate. Let us also mention here that these conventions and endorsement meetings were just the gatherings of self-centered political Elites of the society then, who, obviously, made such presidential endorsements without cognizance or contribution from the people they were supposed to be representing. The only party that was left was the GDM whose leadership was faced with the dilemma of how to handle the candidatures of Yusuf and Braithwaite, who had declared their interests in the presidential ticket.
The GDM finally decided to meet in Maiduguri on 19th April 1998. The choice of Maiduguri as the venue for the GDM’s convention was immediately contested by critics of the Abacha regime who insisted that is was a calculated move to guarantee Abacha’s victory given that Maiduguri was the place from which his parents originated before settling in Kano; some of Abacha’s strategists gave credence to this concern when they stated that they were sure that the ethnic Kanuri of Bornu State would ‘flood’ the GDM convention in order to deliver a ‘landslide’ victory to the military ruler. Added to this was the thinly-veiled threat of violence and mayhem that was issued if, somehow, Abacha was not declared winner. It was against this background that, as the debate raged on the proposal tabled by pro-Abacha elements at the convention for the party’s constitution to be amended to allow the nomination of a non-party member for the presidency. Braithwaite withdrew his candidature, insisting that pro-Abacha elements, including the party leadership, had determined to prevent a free and fair contest. Braithwaite argued that his continued participation would only serve to give a gloss of legitimacy to an outcome that had already been pre-determined in Abacha’s favour. Yusuf, however, decided to stay in the race with Abacha nominated on the floor of the convention as a second candidate. As the party debated the merits of the two candidates, proceedings were disrupted by a combination of state security agents and hired hooligans who created an atmosphere of generalized confusion, beat up some delegates and shouted calls for the quick endorsement of Abacha. The convention was temporary suspended, to be reconvened in the dead of the night with the hall consciously packed full of pro-Abacha participants, some of whom were, allegedly, not even registered convention delegates. As expected, Abacha ‘won’ the ‘election’ scoring 1,356 votes against Yusuf’s 408. Thus it was that Abacha became the GDM’s candidate for the presidency. Yusuf and Braithwaite immediately headed for the courts to challenge the ‘victory’; they were joined by veteran anti-military campaigner and human rights activist, late Gani Fawehinmi. These challenges were, however, swiftly dismissed by the Judges who heard the cases. We all know how the story ended in the months that followed with the sudden death of Abacha, and of cause, his political ambition.
Looking at the above, we can see that it is the same thing that is playing out in the Nigerian politics of today. A situation where once the tenure of any public office holder is about to end, they use every available machinations and state resources at their disposal and unthinkable political maneuverings to ‘buy’ their way back to office, even when it is glaringly clear that they have not performed as expected. Hence, endorsement of public office candidature has been made popular today because it is seen as the best way of creating the impression that they have been chosen by the people, when in reality, that is not the case.
A dictatorship is not only when a military ruler or an individual ‘lords’ it over the general populace, but it is also when a political party has practically done the unthinkable to remain in power without given any room for opposition and fair play in a supposed Democratic dispensation. This is the exact situation in Nigeria since 1999 with the overbearing tendencies of the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). Many have wondered, and are still wondering if Nigeria is still practicing a multi-party system of government that has over 28 registered political parties. This is so, going by the domineering and overbearing tendencies of the ruling People’s Democratic Party (PDP), that is priding itself as the supposed largest political party in Africa. From all indications, the PDP, right from inception, is gradually but steadily ‘conditioning’ this country towards being a ‘one party system’ of government with its undemocratic practices.
What is, however, clear from the experience of electoral politics during the Abacha years is that the transition programme, born, as it was, out of a highly authoritarian, neo-fascist environment, amounted to little more than an attempt to prolong military rule using the façade of elections that neither offered choice to the citizenry nor the prospects for an opening up of the political space for opposition activity. If anything, the political space available for autonomous citizen action was increasingly narrowed as the implementation of the transition programme progressed. It is little wonder then that voters turn out was consistently dismal throughout the transition programme; most Nigerians were not persuaded that the prolongation of military rule under Gen. Abacha, together with the loss of their most basic freedoms, was a price well worth paying for whatever promise of national stability and unity, the then regime tried to market as its main objective. Isn’t that the same things we see all around us today with Nigerian supposed civilian administration? We have been promised ‘heaven on earth’ during their political campaigns but once in government, it is a different thing we see all together. The saddest part is that Nigerians have some to the knowledge that their votes truly do not count during elections and where they do count, election results are brazenly manipulated to serve desired parties, hence, the observed general apathy towards voters turn-out during elections. But how long are we going to continue with these undemocratic practices.
An incumbent president running for re-election who has lost parts of his country to Islamist rebels and whose administration has been hit by waves of massive corruption scandals arguably has reason to worry. But Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan, who launched his re-election recently, has repeatedly defied expectations in his rise through the country’s ruthless political world. The re-election campaign was launched with Boko Haram controlling more than two dozen towns and villages in the northeast and the day after a suspected member of the Boko Haram group massacred nearly 50 students in a suicide bombing during morning assembly. While we are yet to recover from this, another suicide bomber claimed many lives in a College of Education. Despite Nigeria’s vast resources, this administration like its predecessors, has failed to connect Nigeria’s masses with the nation’s huge oil and gas wealth. Despite being Africa’s top oil producer, most of the country’s over 170 million people live on less than $1.50 a day and only receive a paltry supply of electricity. Yet, in the midst of this confusion that only favours the political class and society Elites, political leaders are still being endorsed to run for another term. They even go to the extent of creating the impression that such candidature endorsement is well-embraced and supported by all and sundry.
No doubt, the endorsements have shut the door against other aspirants in the PDP who are known to have nursed presidential ambitions. Proponents of endorsement argue that a sitting-president deserves the right to the ‘option of first refusal’ as it is done in other civilised climes. This school of thought is quick at pointing to the United States of America, the model from which we copied our democracy; but will not compare the maturity of minds that operate the American constitution as against those of Nigeria. The Nigerian politician derives joy in looting and pillaging our common wealth while sycophants sing his praise with the loudest of instruments. To him, the common wealth is his personal fiefdom; as such there is no accountability. The opposition or his/her critics are seen as frustrated elements, who, at the worst of times, should be harassed and intimidated with the state apparati. Juxtapose that with the American politician who thinks about the long term future interest of his country and desires to serve in altruism, not personal interest; will resign for seeming ineptitude, public outcry or criticism and will be read to go to jail if found to have unjustifiably tampered with public funds.
In America, not until 1977, did the two parties – the Democratic and the Republican – adopt the policy of first refusal following internal dynamics. It is true that a serving president may deserve the right to the option of first refusal but it has to be done within the context of the Nigerian constitution and the party’s guiding principles. In all the notoriety that was associated with the Olusegun Obasanjo’s presidency from 1999 to 2007, he never manipulated the PDP machinery to get endorsement for the party’s ticket; rather he won his re-election bid by first defeating Dr. Alex Ekwueme and others in the party’s primary during the convention leading up to the 2003 election. Much more, many well-meaning stakeholders in the polity believes that the endorsement, as championed by the PDP Governors Forum is far from altruistic and not in the national interest but anchored on selfish consideration. By this endorsement, the presidency may have been boxed into a tight corner, where it would have no option than to do the biding of the governors, most of whom are out-going. It is known that some of these governors want to be in the Senate, come 2015, therefore, the presidency and the party National Executive Council will have to ensure that they get the party ticket in return. Besides, they are also known to have anointed successors in their various states and would equally want the presidency to endorse same. Where then is internal democracy within PDP?
Already, many well-meaning Nigerians have spoken against this politics of endorsement in the country. The All Progressives Congress (APC) for instance, has strongly condemned the endorsement of President Goodluck Jonathan as the sole candidate of the PDP for next year’s presidential election, to the exclusion of all other candidates, calling the endorsement nothing but a mockery of democracy. In a statement issued in Lagos by its National Publicity Secretary, Lai Mohammed, the party also said the endorsement came at a great price to Nigerians, considering the obvious deals that were struck to make President Jonathan the sole PDP candidate. It said the parody of democracy that the endorsement represents has exposed the shameless hypocrisy of the PDP, which is ever so eager to accuse other parties of lacking in internal democracy: ”Obviously, those fellows in the PDP have never heard of the saying that those who must come to equity must come with clean hands. PDP, where is your own internal democracy now that you have turned your party into a fiefdom controlled by one and only one person only? While endorsements are part and parcel of democracy, they are never done to the exclusion of other candidates. This is simply not democratic. When then, candidate Barrack Obama was endorsed by his party’s bigwigs to contest the US Presidency; the party never excluded Hillary Clinton from its primaries. That’s how it is done,’’ the APC said.
The party said the price being paid for Mr. Jonathan’s endorsement by Nigeria is simply too heavy, considering that the PDP governors who spearheaded the endorsement have now secured perpetual immunity from prosecution by anti-graft bodies, including the EFCC and the ICPC; the automatic tickets for all first-term PDP Governors, whether or not they have performed, the automatic tickets for all PDP governors running for the Senate, as well as the free ride back to the Upper Chamber for Senate President David Mark. ”It is now an Open Sesame for the PDP Governors, who have no prying anti-corruption agencies watching over their shoulders. They can now simply see the commonwealth as an extension of their deep pockets. The endorsement is also a vote of approval for the proceeds of corruption that have been powering the noisy and outrageous Transformation Ambassadors of Nigeria (TAN),” it said.
Another issue (which the opposition APC is seriously guilty of), that has the prospect to predispose the society to calamity in the aftermath of the forthcoming general elections apart from the fact that it is an open endorsement of corruption by elected officials is the exorbitant price which political parties in Nigeria placed on their nomination forms. The prices range from N27.5 million for presidential aspirants in APC, N22.5 million in PDP to N10.5 million for sitting governors aspiring for a second term and N5.5 million for fresh governorship aspirants. Sitting Senate aspirants N5.3 million, fresh Senate aspirants N3.3 million. Sitting House of Representative aspirants N3.2 million, fresh House of Representative aspirants N2.2 million, etc. down the line. Responding to the avalanche of criticisms trailing the policy the chairman of APC, Chief John Oyegun was reported to have justified the high cost on the premise that it will differentiate the men from the boys. This is a warped logic that is totally unacceptable to all decent human beings and needs to be corrected without delay before it does grievous harm to the tenuous peace and security that remains in the country and erode confidence in Nigerians because of its danger of misleading the youth and the inherent potential to project us all before the international community as a nation of rogue mercenaries. Money does not make a man. What make a man are his character, integrity, learning and attitude.
Public service is a selfless service hence those who offer themselves for public service at any level should not for any reason be made to pay through the nose. What do the political parties need so much money for? To organize rallies throughout the federation falls within the purview of the political parties which seek fund from members of the public through fund-raising campaigns. Is it to buy cars to be given to select influential individuals in the society including traditional, community and opinion leaders to woo the electorate in their favour, as any political parties in Nigeria would want to, or is it meant to raise war chest? Both acts are a circumvention of the Electoral Law. Too much money can have adverse effect on the entire political system. It is for this reason that a ceiling is placed on how much fund political office aspirants and parties receive from the public as donation in more ordered societies like the UK. Considering this negative development, it is about time the National Assembly revisited the issue of the maximum amount that should be allowed by individual politicians and the parties as not to render politics in Nigeria the exclusive preserve of moneybags.
The cost of contesting an elective position in Nigeria places a huge financial burden on the candidates and need to be scaled down drastically to encourage all who possess those salient leadership attributes required to move the nation forward at whatever level they choose to operate from, to come forward. The other day the media was awash with the reports of a House of Representatives aspirant in Lagos State caught vandalizing petroleum pipeline at Ifote Village in Obafemi/Owode Local Government Area of Ogun State. The 59 year-old suspect, Wahab Junaid confessed to the police that he was pushed to crime because he needed money to actualize his political ambition having been favoured to contest the Ibeju Lekki Federal Constituency in the 2015 elections. A system that breeds scoundrels to occupy public offices is in dire need of overhaul.
After all said and done, the crux of the matter is that the politics of endorsement and the premium importance given to money are not good to the development of Nigeria’s Electoral process. It will only continue to serve the selfish interests of some selected and privileged few in the political circles. While we continue to earnestly pray for elections to really count in Nigeria and represent the true heart desires of the generality of the people, we equally make this clarion call to all Nigerians to realize the powers they have in their hands with the Voters Card and come out to vote (regardless of distasteful past experiences), for people they truly believe will make a difference in the polity. An African adage has it that when you see your neighbour eating a rat and you fail to caution him insisting its none of your business, when he begins to cough at night you will not be able to sleep yourself. The time for all to rise and in one voice demand an end to the unbridled corruption of the system is now. We ask that the right thing should be done.
