Reforming Nigeria’s “Electoral Reform”
Reforming
Nigeria’s “Electoral Reform”
One of the issues generated by the so-called liberalization of party
formation in the recent is the proliferation of portfolio political parties on
the one hand, and centralization of political posts and governance around
handful political parties on the other. As a result of this, the nation’s
electoral body, INEC recently, banking on a clearly undemocratic electoral law
provision planned to deregister some political parties, which it considered
unviable. This has received a mute response from many so-called civil society
practitioners and entrepreneurs, and self-acclaimed opposition (or is it
progressive) political parties, many of whom were quick to shout on top of
their voices of the need for electoral reform, especially when their interests
are in jeopardy. Indeed, before the undemocratic attempt at curtailing
electoral rights, the much-trumpeted electoral reform committee set up by
Yar’Adua/Jonathan government had made some funny recommendations including
setting up of political party registration organ that will ‘supervise’
political parties. This organ is expected to play the role of disciplinarian to
the (students) political parties, so that they can ‘compete’ vigorously, with
rewards given to the best students, in form of recognition, et al. Therefore,
the mute indifference of many of those hitherto calling for electoral reform is
not accidental; many have had their interests protected. It is also noteworthy
that some of the recommendations of the electoral reform committee, especially
the undemocratic ones, were easily implemented by the pro-rich legislature, as
contained in the 2010 Electoral Law and the ‘amended’ constitution.
Agreed that there are so many frivolous political parties within the
system, but does this confer the right on INEC to limit people’s choice? In the
first instance, that some political parties are not functional electorally does
not imply that those that are winning elections represent the true wishes of
the people. In the real sense, all the ruling political parties in the country
are several sides of the same dice in terms of programmes, policies and even
politics. Tell me which of the ruling political parties has openly rejected the
official looting of the nation’s treasury through extravagant and criminal
emoluments of political office holders. Which of the ruling political party,
which has member (s) in the legislative assemblies, has ever called on such
member(s) to openly reject the outrageous salaries and collect workers’ salary?
Which political office holder from any of these ruling parties is having
his/her child or children in public educational institutions? Which of the
political parties is opposed to privatization, commercialization, deregulation,
etc, all of which are meant to divert public resources and wealth into the
private accounts of politicians and big business people (many of whom collapse
public enterprises and institutions in the first place)? It is no accident that
there is hardly a Rubicon stopping any politicians from flirting across
political parties – the latest being Nuhu Ribadu’s (PDP – ACN – PDP).
That these ruling parties are winning elections is in itself a product
of the corrupt and monetized electoral process systematized into the electoral
laws and the constitution. For instance, according to the 2010 Electoral Laws
(and indeed those before it), candidates are allowed to spend billions for
campaigns and electioneering. This is nothing but legalization of corruption as
glaringly, only looters and big business people, whose interests are diametrically
opposed to those of the oppressed people who will flood the electoral process
with their looted money. With the generalized poverty (with over 70 percent of
the population living in penury), it is easy for the corrupt politicians and
big businessmen (and women of course) to still commit part of their looted
wealth and ill-gotten profits to procuring favours, by pretending to be
undertaking philanthropic activities. This is aside their control of the
instruments of propaganda including the media. Therefore, the electoral law is
clearly made in favour of the rich. It is not strange then that there are no
provisions in the electoral system that compels public scrutiny of the wealth
of the contestants including publication of their list of assets and wealth.
The only thing you have is funny provision that a convict cannot contest, in an
era where politicians easily purchase ‘justice’ on the counter; where the
watchdogs themselves are part of the gamut of racket that is bleeding the
country white.
This is aided by the pro-rich constitutional provisions that made
participation in the political process by the poor and working people nearly
impossible. For instance, the constitution, which makes election a popular
activity, allows the looters and bankrupt politicians to get away with their
horrible acts, with its stringent conditions for recall of politicians. Also is
the provisions in the constitution that mandate workers to resign from their
work, if they are to contest elections while big business people on the
contrary are only required to put the running of their businesses in ‘blind
trust’ (and we all know what this means: disguise); and not to discontinue with
such businesses. Rather than prevent corruption, this provision is actually
meant to help the big business people, otherwise why are workers not allowed to
take a leave from work to contest and return to their duty posts after
election, as being witnessed in the academic community. The constitution with
this provision, aside tilting towards the rich and big business people against
the workers, is making a profession out of holding public office.
Furthermore, the 2006 Trade Union Act undemocratically prevents
workers’ unions from using their union funds for political purposes, even if
workers democratically agree to this. This is an attempt to prevent workers and
the working people from contending power electorally with the big business and
moneybag politicians, having seeing working people’s political strength. In
fact, until it was combated at the law court, workers were previously prevented
from participating in elections as contestants. It is not uncommon today to
hear some politicians in power ‘warning’ workers not to engage in partisan
politics, as if politics is only the prerogative of the looters’ class.
More important is the constitutional provision that disallows
independent candidature and smaller, issue based and community (and even
ethnic) political parties. So terrible is the provision that made political
parties to have their headquarters at the federal capital, while their
leadership must have a federal character. It is worth stating that this federal
character principle is a fraud. By federal character, it means you must have
presence in all the geo-political regions, when it is a fact that major ethnic
groups dominate these regions. Meanwhile there are estimated over 260 ethnic
groups in the country. Thus, the idea of federal character is faulty from the
start. The framers of the constitution, in a show of fake nationalism, wanted
political parties to have presence in two third states of the federation; avoid
sectional slogans; etc. However, they did not recognize that nationalism should
not be denial of different cultures, and suppression of their political
expressions, but indeed their recognition and right of expression with
voluntary willingness of the various ethnic and tribal groups to collaborate
together with a common purpose through democratic process. This fake
nationalism has not however prevented ethnic politics but rather aggravated it
with various moneybag politicians using ethnic card to hold stake in the
distribution of ‘national cake’. At least we are familiar with “it is the turn
of our zone, tribe, etc to present to rule”!
On the contrary, such provision has prevented the working people from
building their own political future, from the grassroots to the national level.
More than this, it is easy for moneybag politicians to unite across ethnic
lines when their interests of maintaining extravagant lifestyles and introduction
of anti-poor policies are at stake as shown on the issue of fuel price hike.
For the poor people, it is a case of lack of alternative political platform to
challenge the power of the ruling elite. Indeed, most of the so-called
non-functional portfolio parties are set up by various sections of moneyed
class at state, regional and national level, which use them as substitute
whenever they fall out of favour with their colleagues. Many of these parties
cannot contest governorship elections in most states, while local government
elections are mere disguised appointments by the ruling parties at the state
levels. However, some of these obscure parties will suddenly resurge to
prominence whenever any of the disgruntled moneybag politicians put their
looted wealth into them. Therefore, the current arrangement of party
proliferation is only in the service of the rich few. Of course, there are
genuine political parties, especially those of the Left. However, the
undemocratic constitutional provisions that prevent independent candidacy and
smaller, community and issue based parties, have made it difficult for these
parties to operate effectively and be able to combat these anti-poor
politicians.
Allowance for these local, community and single-issue parties and independent
candidature can make the working, oppressed people to start to organize a clean
politics, as campaigns will be less monetized, and issues concerning
communities will be easily discernible. It will be possible to pull little
resources together and mobilize oppressed people on issues and programmes
concerning communities. For instance, a local party that campaign for popular
education in communities, or one that campaigns against privatization and other
neo-liberal policies can come up and gain echo. It can also be easy to mobilize
people on their strength at local, state and regional levels to combat
corruption. It will be possible to have local parties that campaign against
huge salaries for politicians while also demanding that public officials should
have their wards in public schools as a way of showing their commitment to
revamping public education. In summary, politics will be brought to the
people’s doorstep. While this will give plurality to the people, it will reduce
the charade of portfolio parties. For the working people, this will be a huge
relief, as it will allow them to start to organize from grassroots while making
efforts at building a pan-national political platform, to combat the anti-poor
moneyed class politicians.
However, for the various ruling capitalist politicians, it will be the
beginning of their doom, as it will signal the effort of the working and
oppressed people to break from the stranglehold of the moneyed class. While of
course, this simple democratic etiquette is guaranteed in other capitalist
economies, the failure of Nigeria’s capitalist political class to allow this is
a reflection of their parasitic and clearly weak nature. Although, at periods
of serious revolutionary ferment, where the working and oppressed people have
been radicalized by politics (for instance, if the Occupy Movement in US and
Europe should develop into a radical, left-wing political platform), the major
capitalist political structures will mobilize all their resources to reverse
all the democratic gains won before. At such situation, the mass consciousness
will be the major decider of the course of history. However, that Nigeria’s
political class is dreadful of this simple democratic ethic is a reflection of
their totally parasitic and backward nature.
While more enlightened capitalist classes, having being threatened by
mass struggles, prefer to liberalize at least to some degree the political
space as a way of limiting sudden outburst (even Egypt that just emerged from
autocratic rule), Nigeria’s political class is so weak and bereft of initiative
and justification to rule, to allow such liberalization. They have destroyed
the nation’s economy to the extent that they know that on an averagely open
ground, they will be defeated and rejected by the politically organized working
and oppressed at all levels. Hence, the collective decision of all capitalist
politicians not to allow these simple democratic reforms. While some of the
opposition parties claim to support the call for constituent assembly (or is it
sovereign national conference) to redraw the nation’s constitutional
foundation, they will not support this on the ground of liberalized political
process that will allow for independent candidacy and existence of issue based
and localized political party formations.
Therefore, the question of liberalization of political space cannot be
achieved through appeal or correspondence to the parliament or ruling class in
general alone. It is part of the collective struggle of the oppressed people to
liberate themselves from the political stranglehold of the capitalist class.
Therefore, while the working and oppressed people strive to build a
pan-national political platform to wrest power from the moneyed class organized
in ruling but ruining political parties in Nigeria today, they must use all
available resources at their disposal to break all undemocratic guidelines
either in the constitution or the so-called ‘reformed’ electoral law. It should
be understood that even if the working people build their own party, and are
sure of defeating the moneyed class, electorally; the current political class
would use all legal and illegal, covert and overt means to fight the working
people tooth and nail. This further underscores the fact that the working people
must know that the process of liberalizing the political process in their
favour must be conducted in a class and revolutionary manner.
For instance, while the labour leadership is urged to convene political
summit comprising the working people’s organizations, youth and student
movement, peasant movement, petty traders, artisans and professional groups,
pro-labour and left organizations and parties, etc, that will chart a political
course for the oppressed people; pro-working people activists organizations and
labour unions must begin the constitutional struggle. This will mean while
writing petitions and position papers (including bills) to the appropriate
government organs; they will start mobilizing people for mass actions to put
effect to such campaign for liberalization of the political process. This can
also help in crystallizing a conscious mass of workers’ and youths’ movement
needed to raise the banner of independent working people’s party. At the least,
such campaign will help to raise the political consciousness of the oppressed
people, and make the question of small, community and localized political party
on the front burner, which can serve as a mobilizing process for building a
mass working people party on a national scale.
It will however be futile if the orientations of such community parties
and indeed a pan-national working people’s party are tailored toward the same
pro-business orientation of the moneyed class. It is only economic and
political programme that seek to commit public resources to public work
programmes that can serve as vital alternative to the corrupt politics of the
big business class. This will mean that such parties will campaign for mass
public work programme to build new schools and renovate existing ones to standards,
with employment of tens of thousands of teachers and other support staff. This
will be linked with other programmes like public water programmes; mass public,
cheap, decent and environment friendly housing programme; mass road
construction as a subset of a larger integrated transport system; mass, poor
peasant oriented but mechanized agricultural and food security programme;
improved, free and integrated health infrastructures, among others. By
equipping public works department/ministry of works with adequately equipped
manpower and equipments, it will be possible to end the regime of dubious
contracts; public resources will be saved which can be useful in undertaking
these programmes. Also, reducing the bourgeoning high cost of maintaining
political office holders by cutting their wages to that of skilled workers,
will liberate resources needed to implement these programmes.
Inasmuch as local political parties can set example at local levels on
how a working people can effective run a pro-poor people government, a
pan-national party of the working and oppressed people is ultimately needed to
put this into full realization. For instance, it is only a pan-national
revolutionary government of the working and oppressed people that can
nationalize the commanding height of the economy under the democratic control
and management of the working and oppressed people; a fundamental task needed
to liberate the resources and wealth of the country in the interest of the
working people. The task of building of this party rest with the labour
movement, which aside being the rallying point of the oppressed people’s
struggle also has a national spread across ethnic divisions.
Kola Ibrahim
(08059399178, kmarx4life@gmail.com, kmarx4live@yahoo.com)
P.O. Box 1319 GPO, Enuwa,
Ile-Ife, Nigeria
Comments
Post a Comment