By Moses Adeniyi
Discourse over Nigeria’s independence has since the jubilee celebration in 2010 cotinued to assume topical dimesions. The generation of traffic of political reactions may not be unconnected with the course of thoughts on the awakening of consciousness to the falls of expectations as at the rounded figure of half a century commemorating a golden jubilee. Many Nigerians have had the course since then to get on their toes to begin vociferous movements in protest against the state of the nation after half a century of independence.
The narratives of the nexus between democracy and development across the developed world, as was told to and seen by many Nigerians, had formed an impetus of doggedness which drove many Nigerians through the struggle for the course of nationalist movements. The echoes of the dream in their faculty of perception have had to keep many fighting to the last of their breath. The same push could be traced to have taken full course in the fight against the draconian-authoritarian reign of the military juntas for over three decades. The state of nation as of the golden jubilee which is now quite over a decade, no doubt was largely undesirable to many Nigerians. It would become of no less contest considering the topical dimension which the issue addressing the question of how fair situations can be compared between then and now.
While inconsistencies within the political climate have seen disruptions by military incursion into the Country’s power architecture leaving Nigeria with no less than three republics between 1960 and 1999, with the fourth coming forth at the wake of 1999 till date, it is a subject of myriads of perspectives how the political instabilities have intertwined to shape the definitions of the profile of democracy in the Country. The trajectory of coup and counter coup as well as failed attempts have all gone into history as days where the democratic profile of the Country were put to hold as the authoritative patterns of military rule saw the days where Nigerians were subjected to the political atmosphere of draconian modus of administration were decrees and force were the reigning vibes of governance.
The censoring of the media, the strangulation of fundamental human rights and the suspension of civil rule where right to justice through judicial mechanisms of the court system – the last resort of the common man was put to hold – were the operations of force that many Nigerians in silence were lamenting over. The more courageous activists who took the course of contending against the system with firm grip had pushed the course at the expense of their lives. Many who were hunted severely resorted into hiding, while pushing from the background the course of freedom. Those who were jailed still tell of the narratives of their ordeals.
From the first military coup in January 1966 through those of the July 1966 counter coup which ousted Aguiyi Ironsi; that of 30th July 1975 which ousted General Yakubu Gowon and brought in Brigadier Murtala Muhammed; the aborted 1976 Dimka coup; the December 31st, 1983 coup which brought in Major General Buhari as Head of State; the August 1985 palace coup which brought in Major General Ibrahim Babangida; the alleged Vatsa coup of December 1985; the 1993 coup which ousted the interim Chief Ernest Shonekan civil government and brought in the draconian Sani Abacha military rule and the General Abubakar Abdulsalam transition government which handed over the course of the fourth republic since 1999, the narratives have remained more of sordid experience than a trajectory of developmental course.
Political theorists have continued to identify linkage patterns of the ravages of military rule to the formations of the present political configurations of the Federation. The fact that constitutional draftings have been dominated by the military juntas since independence, have had the course of colouration that the path of the Federation is much a definition of the crafting of the military. The discourse remains a strong one with reflective assertions. The position of the 1999 constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria which is still the statutory instrument defining the structures of the political architecture prevailing in the Country, gives reflection to the argument that Nigeria is largely a definition of military crafting. The argument of critical observers has remained that the woes of the Federation could be traced to the architecture handed over by the military which, by and large, are irreconcilable with present demands and the firm tenets of democracy. Hence, the arguments have remained on the frontline that the constitution under force being a product of military crafting, is largely counterproductive to drive a developmental democracy as observed in other climates of the developed world.
The argument has been further given justification with the parameters of such factors as the composition and delineation of the Federation. Such subjects as the creation and character of the 36 States of the Federation, their relationship with the Federal Government and the roles of other subunits, in this case the local governments, have remained issues shrouded with controversies. The contended over concentration of power at the centre, the Federal Government, has been noted to be a deliberate creation of the military which was the force of governance character maintained with the military orientation of embodying all powers under a centralised dimension of rule – a system which has continued to take course. Although recent realities appear to defy the workability of such patterns under a complex federal system, the sensations of the military orientation embodied in the constitution have not left the chance for a decentralised structure to take course. Such calls as restructuring, fiscal federalism, state police and community policing, resource allocation, revenue sharing formula, and federal character principle among others, owe their controversies to the orientation of the military syndrome patterned into the constitution.
The rigidity of having constitutional amendments amidst other sectional interests and sentiments, has continued to leave in force a constitution whose framing patterns are largely inconsistent with the prevailing realities of an over growing complex federal system. While the federal systems of the developed world which Nigeria boasts of taking after their examples have continued to operate a constitution which gives expression to a system of decentralised structural patterns, permitting the component units the luxury of broadened provisions to legislate upon to propel developmental democracy, the clustered interests which have clouded the subject of having a national conference to effect constitutional changes have made the move towards such development more of a theoretical call.
A close reflection towards redefining the character of the structural configurations of the Federation was the 2014 Confab (National Conference). However, the subject of political interests would be noted to have played out as the coming of another administration, the President Muhammadu Buhari-led All Progressive Congress’ government, have only swept the reports of the conference under the logs of files. Despite the recourse of calls pointing some resolutions of the conference to have in content strong answers to some of the ravaging woes of the Country, which are products of systemic rots in the structural configuration of the Federation, the subjects of interest have remained the force of thought givng reflections of absence of political will to drive same for onward implementation.
Recently, rancorous voices have continued to brew political storms building traffic of disturbances in the Country. The cause and effect assessments of political analysts have trailed the nailing cause of the calls for dissolution and secessionist movements reverberating in the Country, to the over centralised Federal structure which has left behind a system ridden with localised turbulence which the inability of the Federal Government to address by reason of the force of distance and pressure of burdens, have heated the political with dissenting forces. The extension of such secessionist movements from the South-East and South-South to the South-West recently, have begun to reflect the clustering of strings of political deformities which the rots in the prevailing systems have been accruing. While the Movement for the Actualisation of the Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB) founded in 1999 has far existed for long since the fourth republic, as a secessionist movement for the South-East, the Independent People of Biafra (IPOB) movement which kicked off in 2012 has grown with disturbing campaigns to push their thrust through despite hurdles. The movement which has a broader outlook extending beyond the South-East to the South-South zone, the Middle Belt states including Benue State and Kogi State, has continued to expand its outreach with declaration of sit-at-home orders which recently have been taking toll in the South-East.
Recently, the call for the Yoruba Nation movement has been given the breadth of attention by factors of dissents which political forces in the Country have not aligned to resolve. The secessionist campaigns appear to be attracting more sympathy as more Nigerians keep losing trust in the prevailing political class over disappointments from inability of successive administrations to meet their expectations as they have believed a democratic system would effect.
The force of political culture in the Country appears to largely remain within the edges that tilt closer to systems of uncivil patterns, than a democratic culture. Issues of corruption, deficiencies in the electoral system, driven by do-or-die politics, and the power drunk syndrome, are still largely pronounced in the Country. The maladies which are far from the practice of a democratic system, have left a climate where the prevailing dispositions are hostile with cultural patterns under which it becomes strangulating for democracy to thrive. While elections have routinely been taking course to effect the demands of a representative government, it is pertinent to note that democracy does not stop at the platter of the provisions of electoral platforms. Deep seated political cultural patterns, such as absence of clear cut ideologies which has continued to deform the charter of party politics in the Country, remain at the top of concern. As Nigeria marks 61 years of independece, it is apparent therefore, that though Nigerians are acquainted with the development prospects and relaxed climate which democracy calls forth and desire same, yet they have not politically adjusted to the political culture that produces the climate for democracy to thrive.