Nigeria's Critical Election by Ayoade John A.;Akinsanya Adeoye A.;

Author:Ayoade, John A.;Akinsanya, Adeoye A.; [Ayoade, John A.]
Language: eng
Format: epub
Publisher: Lexington Books
Published: 2012-08-15T00:00:00+00:00

6

Politics, Friends and Foes in Bayelsa State

Henry Alapiki

Introduction

Elections are properly regarded as the central means of instituting modern democratic government. This is because in a democracy, the authority of the government is derived from the consent of the governed. The most universally acclaimed mechanism for obtaining and translating that consent into government authority is the holding of genuinely democratic elections. As Chukwu notes, “all modern democracies hold elections but not all elections are democratic.”1 A democratic election would characteristically be competitive, periodic, definitive, free and fair. The main attribute of a democracy is that those holding political offices do not have automatic security of tenure but can be challenged and even displaced in accordance with the will of the people through a wide range of lawful institutional mechanisms. However, rather than being a political asset and a legitimate force, elections in Nigeria have become a political liability and a source of instability.2 Claude Ake succinctly explains how the experience with competitive electoral politics in Nigeria has brought the worst in political thuggery and brigandage. He points out that unmediated and unrestrained violence has led to wanton destruction of lives and property. Indeed, several other scholars have described electoral politics in Nigeria as a game akin to warfare.3

The 1999 General Elections was organized by the departing military government of General Abdusalaam Abubakar. It was conducted with rules emanating from an undemocratic process with the intention of instituting civilian rule. It was the 2003 General Election that was expected to strictly comply with democratic rules. Rather, it was more of an “arranged” election in favour of the ruling party, ostensibly, to prove that democracy has come to stay. It was generally believed that the votes of the people did not count. The over-riding aim was to ensure a “successful” transition from one civilian government to another. The third election, which took place in April 2007, has been described by academic experts, judicial tribunals, election observers and the wider public as the “worst” election in Nigeria’s postcolonial history. Even late President Umaru Yar’Adua, who was the main beneficiary of the “travesty” promised that no future election will be like the 2007 experience.4

Fortunately, in the buildup to the April 2011 General Elections, pro-democracy forces within the government and in the civil society mobilized to pressurize for more transparency in the electoral process. There was a noticeable public awareness of the importance of elections to good governance and political accountability. This public perception was reinforced by the political disposition and promise by President Goodluck Jonathan that “every vote will count” and the appointment and confidence reposed on the new INEC Chairman, Professor Attahiru Jega, to conduct a “free and credible election.”

Thus as the April 2011 elections drew near, there was euphoria; there was enthusiasm. The candidates themselves exercised their freedom of speech to present their views to the electorate. The usual media activism in Nigeria was at its height as the press exercised its freedom to disseminate information. In Bayelsa State, as the April 2011 elections approached, the campaigns intensified.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.