CHAPTER TWO

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

2.1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter reviews the literature on Electoral malpractices; its impact on good governance in Nigeria It discusses issues arising from the subject of discuss as viewed from different perspectives, with a view of giving a theoretical and empirical foundation to the study.

2.2 LITERATURE

Elections in Nigeria from 1999 till date have continued to recycle in a vicious violence and unimaginable manipulation especially from the political elites; this has attracted the attention of local and international community (Onu, 2005, Suberu, 2007). The challenges in restructuring the dilemma of electoral process in Nigeria from transiting power from ruling party to opposition parties peacefully has relegated good governance to the back pew (Rakner and Svasand, 2002). The history of elections in Nigerian state has been characterized by threats to statehood based on the manipulation of ethnicity as divisive mechanism for the acquisition of political power by political actors, the fragile nature of political cum democratic institutions is acquainted with poor democratic culture among Nigerian citizen (Omodia and Egwemi, 2011). The electoral process in first and second republics was terminated with coup d’état from the military juntas (Adegboyega 1981; Kurfi 1983). This tied good governance in the stagnant hands of political leaders and the saboteurs from the opposition parties on the basis of government in power to reconcile cracks in statehood due to electoral contest (Azelama, 2010). Dr. Okwesilieze Nwodo aptly captured the concept of election thus: Election is the birth of the future not the glories of the past, he stated this at 2011 People’s Democratic Party (PDP) Presidential convention, Eagle square Abuja during his inaugural speech after series of litigations that restrain him from parading himself as the national chairman (PDP news, 2011). Nigeria has witnessed four general elections in this fourth republic from 1999, 2003, 2007, 2011, with 2015 election around the corner, it appears that incumbency factor from the holders of power is a stumbling block to good governance. This electoral process is on the purview of the Independent electoral body known as INEC in Nigeria (Chukwu, 2007, Ajayi, 2006, Amucheazi and Ibeanu, 2008). The high handedness in manipulating the 1999, 2003 and 2007 electoral process by the ruling Party (PDP) and other political parties in all the polling centres nationwide is alarming, this has led to political killings, religious bigotry, industrial actions, insecurity and other socio-economic malady (Ayoade, 2008). The election was rigged with bitterness full of rancor, the ruling party (PDP) acted with desperation to ensure winner-takes-all syndrome with “do or die” affair for the interest of their party (African Report, 2007). Similarly, the 2011 elections were a beehive that democracy is a pre-condition for good governance, from what we experience before and after the elections this exercise move Nigeria to a greater height for instance the governorship and Senatorial elections that brought Governor Rochas Okoracha of Imo state and Senator Chris Ngige of Anambra Central senatorial district in 2001 is a clear testimony that peoples vote can count in Nigerian elections at all odds(Vanguard, January 10, 2012). The umpire body under the headship of Professor Attahiru Jega came with the reform to overhaul Nigeria electoral body and remove all the bad eggs especially the state resident commissioners who are bent on collecting “Fat-Brown-Envelops” to pronounce their pay master as winner of the election to jeopardize good governance. The services of academic Professors were employed in all the polling centers nationwide as collation and returning officers to sanitize the rot in the electoral body. After the total cleansing of the electoral body, the losers in 2011 general elections especially from the opposition parties decided to plunge the nation in a collapsed state because of their parochial and personal interest. In other words, one could convincingly say that there is hyphen and buckle between the quality of election that takes place in Nigeria and the quality of governance that emanate from such an electoral process on one hand, as well as poor governance on the other hand, especially in a heterogeneous state like Nigeria. The paper will examine power incumbency, insecurity as a challenge derailing electoral process and good governance in Nigeria.

2.3 HISTORY OF ELECTORAL PROCESS IN NIGERIA

The Nigeria political independence of 1960 was championed by leaders like Herbert Macaulay, Nnamdi Azikiwe, Obafemi Awolowo, Ahmadu Bello, S.L Akintola and Anthony Enahoro among others. The post-independence government was parliamentary type while the politicians were busy fanning the embers of disunity because the regions were collectively managed to weaken the centre. When the electoral violence of 1954 and 1959 erupt with its regional hegemony via Northern People’s congress (Northern bloc); National Council for Nigeria and Cameroon (South east bloc) and Action Group (South west bloc), this resort to tribalism and assume a pathological character (Awa, 1964:93). In an attempt to secure foothold in regions outside their control they strove to the opposition creating a tensed political environment which led to conflagration. In 1962-1964 thuggery, crossing of party loyalties, corruption and intimidation was injected in the electoral process of south west Nigeria. The elections came with many political alliances like Nigerian National Alliance an offshoot of Northern People’s Congress under Saruduana of Sokoto and Nigeria National Democratic Party of Chief Akintola, NCNC by Dr. Okpara, NEPU and UMBC, Action Group of Alhaji Adegbeniro in the aegis of UPGA. This proceed of 1964 general elections, incumbent regional governments quench the opposition parties to campaign at their jurisdiction (Nnadozie, 2007). The 2nd Republic of 1979 came with five registered political parties, Great Nigeria people’s party (GNPP), National Party of Nigeria (NPN), Nigeria People’s Party (NPP), People’s Redemption Party (PRP), Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN) and Nigeria Advance party (NAP) all are reincarnation of 1st Republic political parties. UPN emerge from the Action group with dominance of Yoruba enclave under Chief Awolowo, NPP emerge in two political families GNPP and NPP from the political base of NPC. PRP was a reincarnation of NEPU, Nigeria Advance party has no regional garage but attempt to experiment what could not succeed in Nigeria. “The NPN as the ruling party followed by other parties contrary with the spirit of constitution was not national party (Kaur 2002:8). All the parties registered with FEDECO has formal requirement as reflected in the election results, for instance UPN clinch south west, NPP secured south east, PRP takes slot in Kaduna while GNPP emerge victorious in Bornu and Rivers (Osaghae 1998:118).The political violence cross over 1979 and 1983 general elections, the 1993 general elections acclaimed to be free and fair was nullified by General Babangida on allegation of irregularities from umpire body National Electoral Commission (NEC) against all odds from the electorates (New breed 1993:35). In 1999, the Nigeria electoral process was on the march again with President Obasanjo and PDP cohorts implanting violent in the polity, at the expiration of the first tenure from 1999-2003, Uncle S-h-e-e-g-e-e as fondly called came with PDP rigging machinery to buy INEC, Judiciary and security agencies over for sit tight in governance even seek for 3rd term to maintain the status quo. There are cases of inter-communal clashes, political uprisings, sharia-induced unrests and economic sabotage, ethno-based organizations from Afenifere, Arewa, Ohaneze, Ijaw union became pronounced. The 2007 election was a repeated violence, the level of killing and intimidation was high and ones aspire as a candidate for any political office result to assassination and other unprecedented scale of violence (IFES-Nigeria, 2007). Human Rights report that there has been violent in Nigeria’s April 2007elections, campaign in many areas is beset with political killings, and bombings armed clashes between supporters of rival political factions (Human Rights Watch, 2007). The 2011 elections present an opportunity for Nigeria commitment to credible and transparent elections, the election is by and large a potential time bomb for further conflict in Nigeria. Aside the PDP, other parties like Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN), Congress for Progressive Change CPC, All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP) and the Labour Party (LP) are showing no signs of relenting and are all fired to challenge PDP at all levels. And with the candidacy of former chairman of the anti-graft commission (EFCC) Mallam Nuhu Ribadu and the former Head of State General Buhari set for a decisive period in its electoral history (Africa Report, 2007).. A close look of political parties especially the ruling People’s Democratic Party (PDP) reveal high level intra-party strife, disintegration and violence. Campbell (2010) argued that the party has no internal discipline, political platform or principles, and this generates unpopular enthusiasm. Some faction of the political elite mostly from the North are very disgruntled with the power equation in PDP and are not willing to compromise for the incumbent President Jonathan as the PDP flag bearer. This formation persuaded General Babangida to step aside for former Vice President Atiku Abubakar to improve northern chances of wrestling power out from the incumbent Jonathan. The current intra-party crisis is unavoidable and there are chances of anti-party activities in days and weeks to come. However, as Campbell assert that a divided PDP pose problem to security and stability of Nigeria (Campbell, 2010:2).

2.4 THE UGLY SIDE OF ELECTORAL PROCESS IN NIGERIA

The sad scenarios of 2011 elections indicates that almost all the serving governors designed ways to muscle out opposition in their respective areas of jurisdiction. The intense heat led to loss of lives and properties roping opponents into political crimes. The incumbency trend of some governors has not given a breathing space required for political actors to campaign and sell out their manifestoes. In Abia-state, the apparatus laid a siege on the house of immediate past governor of the state and was turned upside down in search of arms and kidnap victims, two former deputy governors who are aspiring to be governor in 2011was allege to be sponsoring kidnappers for the elections. The political thugs believe to be acting on the sponsorship of incumbent governor of the state was in a political rally but opposition group came and brutalize party supporters who attend the events. In Ebonyi-state the serving governor place an embargo on All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP) campaign rally on a Friday but the intervention of federal government resuscitate the planned rally live on Monday the following week. In Bauchi state, there was a law prohibiting opposition party from pasting posters in state capital and local council headquarters or else they incur the wrath of the law under state terrorism act. The Congress for Peoples change (CPC) campaign rally in Niger state was stopped as the chief servant kept denying having master minded the ugly trend, in Suleja near Abuja the ruling party (PDP) met bomb blast at the venue of their political rally which claim six lives and many others injured. In Oyo-state, it is no longer a news that former governor and serving governor are rubbing shoulder over act of media jingles on state own radio, where the immediate past governor was asked to pay triple charge to air their campaign jingles. In Lagos state the opposition parties was barricade from displaying their candidate poster on a bitter note but the publicity secretary of Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) denied that such act never took place. In Kwara state the political colony among two small elephants from the same biological offspring fought for governorship seat as incumbent and successor, a blood brother and his sister in a political field of play on the likes of south- American football titans “Brazil and Argentina team” with their father as “Big elephant” serving as a centre referee and match commissioner, unleashing mayhem to its citizen at the expense of one political family, now the grass is suffering it but the national assembly and security agents from Abuja wade into the matter and caution them over such mayhem. In Enugu state, it was war between the PDP national chairman and serving governor on who lords party machinery in the state, this ignite some cognitive melodrama in the field of PDP presidential primary on 13th January 2011 with legal battle of interlocutory injunctions but unlucky for the PDP national boss he was barred from the convention ground not to preside over the ceremony and at last he was quizzed out from Wadata plaza office by the south east caucus of the party, this led to impromptu resignation and his deputy takes charge of the party on acting capacity for onward development. In Bayelsa state, it was the same business as usual in Otuoke-ogbia kingdom the terrain of Mr. president, the chieftain of Labour party Chief Timi Alaibe is eyeing the seat of governor on the aegis of bombing, assassination and all sorts of killing. Imo state was a movie to watch as the serving governor and political philanthropy show case their popularity in the scene. There was less brutality in Sokoto, Adamawa, Cross River, Bayelsa and Kogi state because of court of jurisdiction on the completion of their tenure as state chief executives while Anambra, Edo, Ondo, Ekiti and Osun states was in a relax mood for the seat of governor, all other political seats were contested in court. INEC boss described the attitude of power tussle, brutality among political party groups as inimical to democracy (Bamidele, 2011:5).The assumption that the challenges to realize free, fair and transparent elections are opportunities to improve on the quality of April 2011 elections to mitigate violence and challenges of electoral malpractices (Okoye, 2011).

2.5 FACTORS AFFECTING ELECTORAL PROCESS AND GOOD GOVERNANCE IN NIGERIA

The electoral process has been marred with conflicts generated by ethnic chauvinism, sectional interest and religious divide, malpractices, violence from the political class to outwit one another in pursuit of their parochial interest and this makes the process undemocratic.

2.5.1Ethnicity and Communal Tensions

Since the colonial era, ethnic, regional, religious divisions constitute the form of expression of social cleavage in Nigeria. In Nigeria, political parties and candidates are representatives of a particular ethnic or religious group and voters support parties and candidates. The voting pattern in Nigerian elections followed the configuration of ethnic and religious cleavages. At local and national levels, tensions arising from communal identity conflicts have a major influence on electoral contest and political process. In Nigeria’s political landscape, it is difficult to draw a line indicating where communal tensions end and where political conflicts begin. It is difficult to separate communal tension and political conflict is because of the nature of Nigerian politics which is known as ‘prebendal politics’ (Joseph, 1991). The concentration of resources in the state makes the possession of state powers a means to end control of state resources. The system of prebendal politics spurs individuals, groups, communities and constituencies to capture state power in order to control state resources. The control of state power, the incumbents try to retain it by all means, including use of violence, at the same time, those aspiring to take over power sometimes pursue their goal by employing extreme measures such as violence. In the context for power, individuals employ ethnic, communal and religious symbols and sentiments in order to outwit their rivals. This drags an entire ethnic, regional or religious community into political competition which is squarely between political parties. Each time candidates and political parties are identified in a particular ethnic, regional or religious group, victory or defeat in the electoral contest is defined in communal terms. Thus, electoral violence is triggered by individuals and political groups to use all available means, like the use of violence to defend their communal honour.

2.5.2 Ethnic and Religious Divides: In Nigeria, since the colonial era, ethnic, regional and religious communities engaged one another in violent confrontations. In their studies on ethnic relations in Nigeria scholars like Plotnicov (1971) and Nnoli (1978) presented that inter-group clashes, years of violent confrontations by some communal groups in Nigeria have eroded trust and social capital existing in the communities, making the communities vulnerable to political manipulation. The communal tensions not related to elections can degenerate into bloodshed during elections. In Nigeria, people who live outside their state of origin are most times excluded from participating in governance and political life of their place of residence because they are perceived as ‘non-indigenes’ (Bach 1997, Ostein 2009). In the past, attempts by ‘non indigenes’ to resist their exclusion from politics and governance have resulted in highly contested elections and violence (Best 2007, Orji 2011). The violence in Jos illustrates the tendency by politicians to exploit mistrust among communities to bolster their support bases. The governor of Plateau State favours members of his own ethnic community but manipulates their perceived grievances against the other group (Ostein 2009, Onwudiwe and Berwind-Dart 2010). These intense inter-group struggles between ‘indigene’ and ‘non-indigene’ communities, the politicians appeal to communal animosities and negative stereotypes, making it difficult for local conflicts to be resolved free, fair and transparent electoral competition to take place

2.5.3 Injustice and Culture of impunity: The Nigerian legal system and law enforcement agencies are not able to arrest, prosecute, and convict offenders; as such, victims of violence normally receive little or no redress. Members of the security forces implicated in violations of civil and political rights, including electoral violence, are also not usually held accountable. The awareness of the possibilities of getting away with acts of violence has fostered unabated continuation of those acts. Reports indicate that more than 11,000 people were killed in hundreds of separate outbreaks of politically motivated communal violence in Nigeria between 1999 and 2007 (Aniekwe and Kushie 2011: 18). During the same period, the country recorded several high profile cases of politically motivated assassinations (Ladan and Kiru 2005). In all these, no one was convicted (ICG 2011: 1). The tendency of political actors to use violence in the electoral process is defined by the state’s capacity to enforce law and order. Sadly, the capacity of Nigerian State to enforce law and order is undermined by the erosion of the states’ monopoly of the use of violence. The state’s monopoly of use of violence in Nigeria is gravely challenged by the activities of ‘cult gangs’, ‘area boys’, ethnic militias, unlicensed vigilante groups, and armed bandits that operate in rural and urban areas (Adewale 2005, Pratten 2006, and Fourchard 2008). The armed operations of these groups are aided by the illicit and unrestrained flow of small arms (Hazen and Horner 2007). As Nigeria’s experience demonstrates, political actors can sometimes take control of these armed groups and use them to perpetrate electoral violence (HRW 2005). The political elite and state officials armed groups to achieve political ends, are the greatest beneficiaries of the erosion of the support state’s monopoly on use of violence, and the culture of impunity promotes electoral violence.

2.5.4 Economic Vulnerabilities: The high rate of illiteracy, unemployment and poverty is a sign of underdevelopment. In Nigeria, a large section of the people lack access to opportunities and resources to actualize their potentials. This situation breeds a class of economic marginalized people (mostly youths) who are used to perpetrate electoral violence. This group of people is enticed by the wealthy violent entrepreneurs who sponsor most of the violent political encounters. The electoral violence in Nigeria is mostly carried out by gangs whose members are recruited, financed, and sometimes, armed by state and party officials or their agents. These gangs are mostly illiterate, unemployed and poor young men, who are mobilized to attack their sponsors’ rivals, intimidate members of the public, rig elections, and protect their patrons from similar attacks (Aniekwe and Kushie 2011: 20)

2.5.5 Confidence in Electoral Tribunal: The electoral justice system involves the prosecution of offences and the resolution of petitions against election results. The belief by political actors that they cannot secure justice in election tribunal reduces their inclination to seek legal redress to allegations of election fraud. The situation in Nigeria relates to Kenya’s experience during 2007 election, where Raila Odinga out-rightly rejected the advice by the US that those alleging vote tampering may pursue legal remedies’, maintaining that the election dispute was not a legal matter but a political conflict that required a political solution (East African Standard Nairobi, 30 December 2007). During Nigeria’s 2011 elections, the leading opposition candidate, Muhammadu Buhari, was reported by the national television as saying that he will not lodge petition regarding the outcome of the election since his previous attempts at legally challenging election outcomes did not yield any meaningful result. In Nigeria, the judiciary, which is central to electoral dispute resolution, enjoys a considerable degree of credibility at the federal level due to some landmark judgments it has given in the past. However, the credibility of Nigeria’s judiciary was badly dented by revelations emerging from a dispute between the two most senior judicial officers in the country- the Chief Justice of the Federation and the President of the Court of Appeal4 (Ajaero 2011, Abimboye 2011). The disclosure by the President of the Court of Appeal that the Chief Justice of the Federation tried to influence the Sokoto State governorship election appeal indicates that the judiciary is prone to corruption and vulnerable to 4 In response to attempts by the Chief Justice of the Federation to remove him as the President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Ayo Isa Salami accused the Chief Justice of trying to influence the decision on Sokoto State governorship election appeal. The allegation made many people to suspect that some other judgments given by the judiciary may have been influenced interference. This is, perhaps, why many politicians find it more rewarding to seek redress through violence rather than the judicial process.

2.5.6 Electoral Malpractice: The transparency and fairness of the electoral process, credibility of election authority, neutrality or partisanship of election management authority, lack of faith in the electoral body, non-independent of the electoral commission, and rigging play a major role in instigating electoral violence. The integrity of elections can create frustration among stakeholders in the electoral process, this can transform into violence (Barnes 2006). The issue of election integrity is even more problematic in countries where ethnicity is salient in politics. In such societies, the victory or defeat of a particular candidate or party is perceived as defeat of an entire community. Any form of irregularities that would prevent a candidate community from clinching electoral victory is opposed violently by the entire community (Orji 2010)

2.5.7 Power Sharing Problem:

The institutional changes result to opposition and violence; this has been illustrated in Nigeria’s experience where the relegation of the power-sharing arrangement which guide the previous election resulted in vigorous opposition and violence. The 2011 post-election violence in Nigeria reflects regional, religious divisions and simmering tensions over power sharing modalities in the aftermath demise of President Umaru Yar’Adua. Many Northerner believe that President Jonathan a Christian and Southerner should have conceded his presidential bid to a Northerner Muslim in honor of the unwritten rotation of power between North and South. Umaru Yar’Adua, a Northerner Muslim, succeeded President Olusegun Obasanjo, a Southerner Christian ruled Nigeria for eight years from 1999. Unfortunately, Yar’Adua died untimely in 2010, midway through his term, paving way for Vice President Goodluck Jonathan emerge as president. The proponents of power sharing insist that Jonathan should not have contested the presidency because the North had not completed its slot. The 2011 post-election violence can therefore be seen as an expression of the frustration caused by the failure of Muhammadu Buhari, a Northerner and Muslim, to reclaim the North’s control of the presidency from President Jonathan