HOW NIGERIAN ELECTORS RAPED DEMOCRACY
Democracy is simply a rule or leadership that
involves the majority. In a wider description, it is a system of government in
which the citizens exercise power directly or elect representatives among
themselves to form a governing body such as a parliament. Another school of
thought, particularly Political Science, describes it as ‘a government of the
people, by the people and for the people’.
The above definitions indicate that democracy
is characterized by the people. It’s equally worth noting that election is
peculiar to democracy. In other words, any democratic system is required to
embrace an electoral process. It is through an electoral procedure, or
elections, that the needed leaders emerge.
Elections are means of making political choice
by voting. They are used in the selection of a leader and in the determination
of issue. This conception implies that voters or electors are presented with
alternatives that they can choose among a number of proposals designed to
settle an issue of public concern. It is thus not needful to assert that, in
elections, electors are expected to act as kingmakers.
Elections
are central to the existence stability and development of democracy. The
encyclopaedia of social science defines election as ‘the process of selecting
the officers or representatives of an organization by the vote of its qualified
members’. It could be defined in a technical sense as the process by which an
office is assigned to a person by an act of voting needing the simultaneous
expression of opinion by many people. On the other hand, in a social sense,
election is the process by which a person is liked to an office with due
provision for the participation of the people meant to be under the awaited
victor.
On December 28, 1978, the leaders of the then
Nigeria’s five political parties issued a unanimous pledge to the nation, to
keep election free and fair. The leaders in question promised that their
leadership to the country would curb excesses in speech and behaviour by their
party members.
They further stated that they would
restrain their members from engaging in political thuggery and ensure that
nothing was done to disrupt the peace of any community where election is to be
conducted or upset the unity of the nationhood. Above all, they disclosed that
they would accept the verdict of the electorate in the elections which they
would help to make peaceful, free and fair.
Recalling the recent Nigerian
electioneering eras, even the blind could attest that several things are no
longer at ease as against what it used to be. The assertion that things have
fallen apart is not unconnected with the fact that practices to include
thuggery and election rigging are now the key attributes of most elections. It becomes
pathetic when realized that the supposed kingmakers (electors) are the primary
cause of the ongoing unfortunate situation.
If the above perception is anything to go by,
then a sane person would wonder the reason a ‘kingmaker’ would partake in any
act targeted at rigging a scheduled election let alone indulging in such dirty
act as thuggery. It’s more baffling to acknowledge that those electors –
particularly the youth – who sell their birthright would stand to gain nothing,
not even reasonable cash.
Even
those who would not want to associate themselves with activities that could
lead to election rigging would prefer to act like mere onlookers as long as the
election lasts. Funnily enough, most of them would be present at the polling
unit just to engage in frivolous interactions like issues bordering on sports,
relationship or what have you, and not to cast their votes; when scrutinized
further, you would observed that majority could not even boast of voters’ card.
Owing to the acknowledgement that
electors are ostensibly the kingmakers, the constitution of most countries
across the globe, which Nigeria’s isn’t exceptional, captioned a clause that
relates to ‘Vote of no-confidence’. The aforementioned term is a constitutional
matter that empowers the electorate, or the governed, to recall any elected
officer if found wanting.
In such case, the concerned electors are
required to act as a body by collectively endorsing a written document, stating
that they no longer have confidence in a particular elected officer thus
ordering him/her to return home. This tool shows that the electors are meant to
be in charge, both in the pre and post– election eras.
It is as well worthy of note that the
teeming Nigerian electors have equally abused such a lofty democratic tool.
They are often marred by apathy when expected to act as one indivisible body,
thereby allowing themselves to be cajoled into a state of mockery by the
elected officers who they have chosen to worship. Of course there is no
tangible reason a legislator, for instance, who does not have a befitting
constituency office would not be recalled by his/her constituents.
It is not anymore news that most of the
present lawmakers cannot boast of a constituency office in their various
constituencies let alone observing ‘Constituency briefing’ as a priority. Some
don’t even know the ward chairmen of their respective political parties; they
are invariably interested in acquiring such information when elections are by
the corner. Worse still, the affected electors would claim ignorance of the
injury they have incurred in the process.
This trending unwarranted and
mind-boggling attitude of most Nigerian electors has succeeded in raping the
God-sent democracy. The gravity of the rape is arguably colossal. It is
therefore needless to state categorically that there’s a compelling need to
carry out an all-inclusive sensitization among these individuals before the
worst is witnessed. Think about it!
Comrade FDN Nwaozor
Executive Director, Docfred Resource Hub (DRH) - Owerri
________________________________
Twitter: @mediambassador
http://facebook.com/TheMediaAmbassador
