ZHUL-QI’DA 18, 1429 A.H.
THURSDAY NOVEMBER 14, 2008
Print This Page 
Democracy under threat?
By Kabiru Mato
I agree there is a very little motion in government at the centre. What we will however not take away from the government is that it is introducing a new model related more to the tenets of western liberalism than the thrash which we saw in the Obasanjo days. As Father Mathew Kukah once said, democracy is not limited or central to the provision of roads, electricity or any such reagent of growth; it has more meaning in the character of those who rule, lead and those who are led.
If between 1999 and 2007 the nation witnessed unprecedented abuse of the rights of the citizens and plunder of the numerous resources that accrued mainly from the high prices of oil in the international market, and yet much noise was made by those in power and their infallible lieutenants, what the nation has witnessed since the coming of Umaru Yar’Adua has been cautious optimism in the management of affairs of the nation and its resources.
I would see this as a tremendous progress in view of the abuse that we witnessed in the hands of General Obasanjo and those who know it all. I am not encouraging government to be dead slow. I think the machinery of state craft needs to be re-lubricated so that there may be free movement of decisions and implementation so that the restive Nigerians would see the dividends of democracy on ground.
Those who are in offices must realise that the agitation by citizens is anchored on the quest for development. There is the need to witness changes in their lives that are characterised by inadequacies in the midst of abundance. We thus can hardly understand any language from government unless that which will uplift the living conditions of the people by improving their quality of life. That is the first and most important meaning of democracy.
Our attention this week is focused on the imminent threat that the nation's system is facing in the hands of some of us who ordinarily are asking for good governance and moral rectitude. My view on the seeming elitist rage over the immunity clause is that we are missing the target. It is not a problem with the constitution. It is our problem as a people who are impatient and not desirous of building structures and systems.
Why don't we as a people insist on building very lasting legacies that would outlive us? A system that will be self-propelling and can tolerate the strong and the weak if they find themselves in positions of authority? Unless that is done, the nation will continue to groan in darkness.
Why would anybody think that it is necessary to probe, any governor or president who is accused of corruption immediately the suspicion or allegation arises? Why did the framers of the constitution opt for a tenure of four years and renewable only once? This is to ensure that any such executive can only run but never hide. But the instinct and mentality of vengeance in us wouldn’t allow us to work on the tide of time so that the system is first and foremost deeply entrenched for the good of the nation.
That was why Nuhu Ribadu, blinded by the opium of that transient thing called power, went public with his view that allowing the courts or abiding by the rule of law would reduce the efficacy of the EFCC in handling those he called corrupt officials. He clamped down on all his suspects who were thieves mostly seen as Obasanjo's enemies or those he disliked. Now Nuhu is in the same court he flagrantly disregarded and disrespected asking for one form of protection or the other.
So is his other friend who thought might be right, and became what Marx called a serial non-respector of the courts. He went to court to seek protection against a Senate committee that probed his administration. What a life! All these happened less than two years after they left office.
The message is that regardless of how well we mean for this country, the attention should be on building a system that will be lasting and not just raising issues and sensation about things we feel strongly about. Nigeria has always been known to have several social crusaders as much as it has dozens of crooks and criminals parading themselves either as people in authority, Malams, clergy or even as social crusaders.
It is confusing to try to understand who is the honest Nigerian, as it is difficult to say with accuracy who is the saint. The way out is to ensure that we build a system that we consciously know will outlive us. A system that will meet the standards of practice as seen in other senior democracies, not to continue to capitalise on the sentiments of the unassuming majority of our citizens by continuous confusion and misinformation.
Regarding the immunity clause, my views about it are simple. It has to remain. It is not an issue reducing good governance. Nigerians must learn to be patient and keep their facts close to their chests until at the end of a tenure of either four or eight years. Then we can raise issues with anybody we have evidences against. Removal of the clause would definitely lead to chaos and anarchy.
The parliament, seems to be under siege, especially the House of Reps which is the most vibrant and exuberant. In the first eight years of civil rule, the Senate was faced with one form of crisis or the other. In the last one year, the House has faced one major problem and some Nigerians are trying to brew another one now on the issue of cars bought for committees of the House.
I frown at sensationalism. It is not always the best way out of quagmires. Nigerians are at liberty to raise alarm over issues they feel concerned about, especially when it affects representatives and those that are represented. It is not right for anybody to assume more importance than the rest of the country, no matter how strong or knowledgeable that person is.
The allegations by Festus Keyamo are partly the expression of his fundamental rights as a citizen of the country, but it is unbecoming of a learned person to reduce such a very important allegation to a circus in Nigerian television and other media. The political implication of that is that he is pitting the nation against the parliament. What happens if the information he has is faulty? Would he have the capacity to cleanse the damage his allegations would have done not on the individual officers who run the house, but the integrity of the institution of legislature?
As the late Tai Solarin would always say, I too don't dance to the tune of the multitudes. On matters like this, I prefer to be a loner. Why would the legislature pass the Freedom of Information Bill into law if Nigerians can rise and accuse them of any kind of misdemeanour and are listened to? In the end, if such allegations are unfounded, people let them go scot-free after having caused so much psychological damage to the personalities and reputations of people in government.
If I were a member of parliament, I would not support such a bill unless there are sufficient provisions to sanction whistle-blowers who do so falsely or out of mischief. The business of governance is the victim in all these circus shows.
While I do not condone acts of corruption, what is clear is that we must build sufficient avenues to raise issues through the legally acceptable procedures on any matter we feel very strongly about. This will assist in directing the course of governance. There is no individual, even if he is the president, who can jump up and claim he must remove a speaker or any such elected officers simply because he wears the cap of moral rectitude.
The lawyers who are into this kind of games are too focused on the legal implications of their actions, giving the political implication little or no attention at all. The system cannot succeed unless all factors are taken into consideration in the minute-by-minute operations.
There is the need for Nigerians, no matter how much we feel about what is going wrong in our governments, to build a culture of order and procedure and behave in a civil manner so that any issue, no matter how controversial it may be, is resolved with little shock on the system.
Unless we are careful, we may threaten the current system instead of strengthening it through our actions and attitudes. Let there be caution so that we don't cause unnecessary bruises on the system in place.
