John Campbell, former US
ambassador to Nigeria, says the 2019 presidential election in the country has
been bad news for democracy.
Campbell, who also served as US
Department of State foreign service officer from 1975 to 2007, said the
election was “marred by historically low turnout and credible allegations of
rigging”.
In his election post-mortem for
the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington, DC, Campbell, who has
co-authored a book on “Nigeria: What everyone needs to know,” also said Atiku
Abubakar of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) is unlikely to win his electoral
dispute in court.
“Buhari’s margin of victory—some
four million votes—is so large that it is unlikely courts will overturn the
result,” Campbell said.
He also suggested that the
elections were a step back from the 2015 presidential election, quoting
Situation Room’s report on the election.
THE FULL ARTICLE REPRODUCED BELOW
Nigeria’s latest presidential
election cycle has been bad news for democracy in Africa’s most populous
country and across the continent. Though President Muhammadu Buhari won the
election, it was marred by historically low turnout and credible allegations of
rigging.
THE OLD GUARD
Buhari and his main challenger,
former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, both Muslims from the Fulani ethnic group
in the country’s north, are part of the political class that has dominated
Nigeria since independence in 1960. Their contest meant there would be no
generational leadership change in a country where the average age is eighteen
and half of registered voters are under thirty-five. Buhari, who spent much of
his last term abroad for medical treatment, hardly campaigned at all.
Buhari and Abubakar are the
standard-bearers for two political parties descended from the military regime
of General Ibrahim Babangida: the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the
People’s Democratic Party (PDP), respectively. Both parties are undemocratic in
spirit and function primarily to contest elections rather than to promote
legislation or policy. During their campaigns, the candidates and their parties
offered little that was new to address security breakdowns caused by Boko Haram
in the country’s northeast; conflict over land use, ethnicity, and religion in
the Middle Belt; and the division of oil revenue in the Delta. Moreover, they
were mute on climate change, urbanization, and a population boom that is
expected to push Nigeria past 450 million people by the middle of the century.
A STEP IN THE WRONG DIRECTION
The Situation Room, an umbrella
organization of Nigerian civil society groups, wrote that [PDF] the vote marked
“a step back from the 2015 general election and actions should be taken to
identify what has gone wrong and what can be corrected.” Just hours before
polls were set to open on February 16, the election commission delayed the vote
by a week. This was particularly disruptive for the many Nigerians who had
travelled from one part of the country to another to vote. When voting finally
took place, there were numerous irregularities, and many polling stations
opened several hours late. There is also evidence that the security services at
some stations prevented voters from casting ballots, particularly in opposition
strongholds, and intimidated election commission staff.
Of the more than eighty million
Nigerians registered to vote this year, just thirty-five million actually
voted. In the north, where Buhari is popular among the poor, turnout was around
50 percent. But in the predominantly Christian south and east, where Abubakar
was favored, turnout stood around 20 percent, a continuation of a long decline
in voter participation.
THE NIGERIAN EXAMPLE
Nigeria’s influence across
sub-Saharan Africa is outsized. Its population and economy are Africa’s
largest; its cultural influence, symbolized by the Nollywood film industry, is
far-reaching; and its traditional diplomatic activism, through participation in
peacekeeping missions and the regional economic bloc ECOWAS, is consequential.
When Nigeria transitioned from military to civilian rule in 1999, the effects
on West Africa were palpable: coups lost their legitimacy, and the region has
pursued a positive democratic trajectory ever since. But the latest
presidential election is far from an example for those African countries
consolidating their democracies or emerging from quasi-authoritarian regimes to
emulate.
A BROKEN SYSTEM
Younger and aspiring politicians
also ran for the Nigerian presidency: Oby Ezekwesili, leader of the
#BringBackOurGirls campaign and cofounder of Transparency International; Donald
Duke, a former governor of Cross River State known for his innovative business
development initiatives; and Kingsley Moghalu, an economist and former UN
official. But they were frozen out by a geriatric and unresponsive system whose
patronage politics requires candidates to have vast sums of money and the
ability to distribute them. These candidates failed to connect with voters,
winning only a tiny percentage of the vote.
Abubakar says he will contest the
election, but Buhari’s margin of victory—some four million votes—is so large
that it is unlikely courts will overturn the result. Aside from some small
pro-Abubakar demonstrations, Nigerians appear resigned to the outcome. The poor
quality of this election cycle and the low and declining number of voters do
not inspire confidence, and some Nigerians have begun to question whether
democracy is right for their country.
This article was published by the
Council on Foreign Relations, here.
No comments
Post a Comment
Kindly drop a comment below.
(Comments are moderated. Clean comments will be approved immediately)
Advert Enquires - Reach out to us at NigerianEye@gmail.com