A Case Study of Nigeria's Democratic Experience, 1999-2007
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY 1.0. BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY Countries in transition to democracy are grappling with many contending models and concepts of democracy and governance. The debate over these and their applicability to African specificities and peculiarities is intense as in Nigeria. This study is a product of one of such intellectual engagements. In Nigeria, the euphoria for democratic change has become imperative that even military and civilian regimes have been influenced to embrace democracy. Moreover, democratization processes and discourses on democracy in Nigeria and other African countries have also been influenced by the swift currents of globalization and events around the world, especially the demise of the Soviet Union and Socialist democracy in some African countries influenced by Marxist-Leninist ideologies. Since the onset of what Huntington (1991) dubbed as the ―third wave of democratization‖ in the late 1970s, intellectual pre-occupation with the concept and institutions of democracy has increased dramatically, especially in Africa, where a long history of brutal authoritarianism, and its systematic displacement since the 1990s, have raised serious concerns about the trials and tribulations of the processes of democratization. Hence, the New Partnership for Africa‘s Development (NEPAD) in 2001, in its document stated that democracy and good 1 Page governance are inevitable in Africa. NEPAD, therefore, in its Article 81, made proposal on democracy and good governance as follows: . A series of commitments by participating countries to create or consolidate basic governance processes and practices; . An undertaking by participating countries to take the lead in supporting initiatives that foster good governance and; . The institutionalization of commitments through the New Partnership for Africa‘s Development to ensure that the core values of the initiatives are abided with. To cultivate democracy and good governance, Article 83 of NEPAD‘S document states that leadership will engage in targeted capacity-building initiatives which will focus on: . Administrative and civil services; . Strengthening Parliamentary oversight; . Promoting participatory decision-making; . Adopting effective measure to combat corruption and embezzlement and; . Undertaking judicial reforms. Another novel inclusion in the democratization and good governance processes is the Africa Peer Review Mechanism (APRM), which functions through the Heads of State Forum. The APRM is meant to help uphold and standardize democratic and governance processes across the continent. According to the document on Article 84, the Heads of State Forum on the New Partnership for 2 Page Africa‘s Development will serve as a mechanism through which the leadership of NEPAD will periodically monitor and assess the progress made by African countries in meeting their commitment towards achieving good governance and social reforms. The assumption that underpins these NEPAD‘s initiatives is that, through a process of self-assessment, African leaders, including Nigeria, will ensure that the standards that are expected of democratic governance are upheld in all participating states. The effectiveness of these initiatives will depend to a large extent on the collective moral pressure that African leaders can impose on their errant peers (Oche, 2004:64). The contradictions, which have arisen from democratic transitions and processes of democratization, have led to increased interrogation of the relevance of the prevailing criteria specified by NEPAD. Paradoxically, democratic transition programmes in Africa in general, and Nigeria in particular, have been problematic. Though, various reforms had taken place in most African countries, the issue of corruption has evaded solution. Moreover, the phenomenon of flawed elections in Africa, failing to meet the minimum criteria of multi-party democracy as proposed by Schumpeter (1942), Ranney (1975), Dahl (1989) and Huntington (1997) has been a major challenge of democratization in Africa and Nigeria in particular. The result has engendered pseudo-democracy or what Bates (1994) has described as ―democracy without democrats.‖ 3 Page The central argument of the thesis is that though democratization process may have opened up the closed political space, democracy is still under threat and far from ensuring popular empowerment of the Nigerian people. 1.1. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM The need to examine the historical and political foundations of democracy arises because they seem to be crucial in analyzing and explaining the democratization experience of Nigeria between 1999 and 2007. Though democratization process may have opened the closed political space, democracy is still under threat, in view of the fact that Nigeria emerged from prolonged military rule with profound legacies of militarizm and militarization of the polity. Democratic practice, as experienced in Nigeria in the period being investigated, seems to be in partial compliance with the NEPAD‘s initiatives. Furthermore, there are, unavoidably, social, economic and political implications of the periodic eruption of violence witnessed in Nigeria‘s experience. The occurrence and persistent violence perpetrated by ethnic militia groups, such as the Oodua People‘s Congress (OPC), the Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta (MEND) and police/para-military units are evidences of militarized polity even in the context of democracy. Moreover, within the Nigerian pluralistic society, there are deep cleavages, cutting across ethnic, religious and socio-political lines as a consequence of which there is virtual absence of consensus on the fundamental issues that are necessary to unite Nigeria into a nation-state and for the promotion of 4 Page democracy. This condition has not been helped by the existence of large groups of people especially amongst the political elite who have not adequately imbibed democratic values and beliefs. The consequences of the foregoing on the Nigerian people have been negative. Hence, among the Nigerian people are wide-spread perception of deprivation, alienation, inequity, marginalization and neglect. This has been popularly seen as a lack of democratic dividends. The consequences are disillusionment and frustration on the part of the discontented and the resultant manifestation of violent behaviour against the state and its symbols of authority putting democratic rule under threat. From the foregoing, it becomes clear that discourse on democratization and sustenance of democracy in Nigeria needs to be fundamentally re-examined, so that illuminating ideas on how to promote democratic values and practices can be addressed. Hence, the need for this inquiry. 1.2. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY The objectives of the study are to: (i) Identify the challenges posed by militarized polity against democracy; (ii) Evaluate the pattern and institutional foundation laid by the military regimes for democratic process in Nigeria between 1999 and 2007; (iii) Examine how the democratization process has influenced national consciousness and the political participation of the citizenry; (iv) Assess how Nigeria‘s democratization experience has prepared the political elites for governance; 5 Page (v) Examine how democratic practice in Nigeria has promoted democratic dividends, good practice, political stability and economic development. 1.3. RESEARCH QUESTIONS This research is guided by the following research questions: (i) What are the implications of militarized polity and economy on democracy? (ii) To what extent did the democratization process lay institutional and behavioural foundations on which democracy can be sustained in Nigeria? (iii) How has the democratization process affected the level of national consciousness and political participation of the citizens? (iv) To what extent has Nigeria‘s political elites imbibed democratic values for quality governance? (v) To what extent has the political environment produced democratic dividends and economic development? 1.4. RESEARCH ASSUMPTIONS This research work is based on the following assumptions: (i) That democratization process is a change from the military dictatorship to democratic governance; 6 Page (ii) That democratization process is seen from the perspectives of setting up civilian institutions, rules and practices that would result in preparing political elites for democratic governance; (iii) That the democratization process would promote national consciousness and participation of the citizenry in democratic governance; (iv) That political elites would imbibe democratic values and beliefs for good governance; (v) That the development of democratic values and culture would promote the enabling environment for the realization of democratic dividends and political stability. 1.5. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY The following are the significance of the study: (i) This study will enable stakeholders to understand the nature and character of the Nigerian State in pursuit of democratic process; (ii) It will provide the basis for evaluating the progress of the democratization process in new democratic nations such as Nigeria; (iii) The findings of the study can also serve to promote national consciousness and popular participation of citizens in the political process; (iv) It will enable political elites to have in-depth understanding of how to sustain the pursuit of democratic governance; (v) The extensive critical survey of the literature will expand the scope of knowledge in the