|
|
 |
 |
|
|
 |
In
most modern democracies, groups and individuals vie for power
through affiliations with competent political parties. Nigeria’s
Fourth Republic has the largest number of political parties
ever, with a total of thirty so far. Only a handful of these
parties are, however, viable and competent enough to successfully
vie for political power even at the local government level.
The political elite instinctively flock into a few major parties
leaving the rest to hang barely by the thread. Politics, to
many, is all about acquiring power and only party formations
that have potential to deliver on such a promise to its followers
can attract and retain membership, particularly in a country
like Nigeria. Once leading parties have secured their areas
of dominance and influence, competition for control of their
machinery intensifies at the local, state and federal levels.
Sufficient cash is always a limiting factor in organizing
and running political parties, especially in a democracy.
With ample amount of money, one can buy influence through
funding and controlling logistics of the party machine as
well as maintaining high public visibility which helps to
enhance the party’s aura.
|
|
 |
The
average citizen has been made to understand that
political parties are veritable conduits for acquiring
power and wealth. Regular party members join Nigerian
political parties with great anticipation of getting
something substantive out of it. There is hardly
anything done for the party voluntarily, thus requiring
that routine errands and sundry logistics are usually
all paid for in cash by whoever is perceived to
be the local boss in charge. Political parties,
as presently organized and run in Nigeria, cannot
function at grassroots level without the largesse
of partisan godfathers. |
|
 |
|
|
 |
In
a democracy, parties are supposed to operate mostly independent
of the government. In industrialized societies, corporate
entities, groups and individuals raise the funds with
which to organize and run political parties, including
electioneering campaigns. For countries like Nigeria where
there is widespread material poverty, disposable income
with which to fund party activities is hard to come by
amongst the citizenry. The ruling People’s Democratic
Party (PDP), for example, was founded by funds raised
by only a few financiers who had access to big government
contracts in preceding administrations. Notable figures
within the military establishment thus have a disproportionately
high representation in this cadre because they had complete
control of the nation’s purse strings for the past
two decades. Non-military nouveau riches party stalwarts
are mostly individuals who are known to have benefited
immensely from military rulers in regimes that preceded
current civilian democratic dispensation. The saying that
whoever pays the piper dictates the tune is particularly
true for Nigeria because money-bags, comprising mostly
of close associates of ex-military rulers, dictate the
direction and pace of our democracy by personally controlling
how political parties are funded at various levels.
General Olusegun Obasanjo emerged from Abacha’s
incarceration impoverished and extremely dispirited in
the late 90s. Within a few short months, he was re-invigorated
and primed to contest for the ruling party’s presidential
ticket in 1999 general elections. Before he was anointed
as PDP presidential candidate, the former military strongman
was reported to have donated hundreds of millions of naira
to the party. How was it possible for him to raise such
a huge amount of money soon after emerging from years
of imprisonment, some would ask? The answer is simple;
the generous helping hands of Nigerian political financiers
put up the venture capital that turned presidential candidate
Obasanjo into a multimillionaire almost overnight. Did
Obasanjo get all this political support and funding out
of mere love or were there unseen and unwritten guarantees
made by him to the financiers before the deal was consummated?
Some financiers, for example the much-publicized godfather
of Anambra state PDP, would only make such expensive and
risky venture after written guarantees or solemn oath
taking by the beneficiary.
Those who surreptitiously fostered Obasanjo’s candidacy
were reported to have fallen out with him shortly after
assuming the presidency of Nigeria possibly because their
expectations were not met as agreed. The wily president
could have gotten away with this because he did not have
a lone financier as was the case in some gubernatorial
elections. Chief Christian Uba was said to be the sole
sponsor of a list of PDP candidates in Anambra state,
including aspirants for governor, state house of assembly
and the National Assembly. With such power in his grip,
the financier expected not only partisan loyalty but also
he demanded personal adulation from whoever attained political
ascendancy from his largesse. The political elite in Anambra
state, the majority of who belong to the ruling party,
flock regularly to Enugu and Uga residences of PDP godfather
on a sort of pilgrimage to consult with and fawn on their
single most important benefactor. It was reported that,
when Chief Uba had cause to suspect the undivided loyalty
of gubernatorial candidate Chris Ngige at the eve of 2003
general elections, the latter volunteered to make a special
predawn trip to the now notorious Ogwugwu Okija shrine
to swear an oath of allegiance to the former.
During political transition program of the Third Republic,
grassroots leaders of a faction of National Republican
Convention (NRC) in old Anambra state were routinely sent
to the shrine of a deity in Oji River local government
area to swear their allegiance to the main party financier
of the time. This enabled this partisan faction of NRC
to remain fairly intact even after the old Anambra state
was split into Enugu and new Anambra states. Oath taking
to ensure partisan loyalty is not confined only to swearing
in shrines of powerful deities. At the eve of NRC party
convention in Aguata local government in the early 90s,
delegates who belonged to the Catholic denomination were
secretly convened by a group of parish priests in a church
where a special mass was held to indoctrinate them to
vote against a non-Catholic rival candidate. The delegates
were specially admonished to display their rosary and
crucifix conspicuously at the election venue to ensure
solidarity till conclusion of election of local government
party executives. As was expected, the delegates obeyed
the activist priest and ended up electing an obviously
less competent candidate who was, nonetheless, pre-approved
for the position of party chairman by the Catholic Church
establishment in the local government.
Committing one to undergo solemn oath-taking ceremony
as a means of assuring loyalty is usually given preeminence
and priority over inculcation of partisan ideology because,
in most instances, personality of candidates and not the
issues they stand for determine the choice of political
leadership in Nigeria. It goes without saying that those
who are bound by oath on the eve of a democratic election
have had their right and freedom of choice pre-empted
and abrogated by someone else. Democracies that have endured
were founded on strong principle that separates affairs
of the church from those of the state. Politics, in the
modern era, operates within the realm of the mundane where
laws are made by humans to serve the greater society in
which all must survive and thrive. Instilling fear of
the unknown into the citizenry mystifies politics to the
extent that unscrupulous elements can easily outwit and
exploit the vulnerable in our midst. Political power,
in an impoverished polity, tends to gravitate to the few
who have amassed ample amount of disposable income. Nigerian
moneybags, most of who lack visible ideological political
conviction, dabble into politics anyway as a sort of business
venture. This class of politicians demand assurances,
oath taking included, before they part with their cash
to support the party or its candidates.
Nigeria’s political and intellectual elite are firmly
fixated on political precedents of the nation’s
founding fathers and appear committed to pursuing respective
visions of the trio of Azikiwe, Awolowo and Ahmadu Bello.
Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe, in contrast to the Sardauna of Sokoto
and Pa Awo, stands out as a nationalist whose political
career and vision for Nigeria transcended direct parochial
interests of his ancestral Igbo ethnic nationality. Immediate
successors of Nigeria’s founding politicians sought
relevance based on public avowal of loyalty to political
movements that became the legacies of their respective
regional champions. Until official imposition of a two-party
system by former military president, Ibrahim B. Babangida,
during political transition to the abortive Third Republic,
partisan formations approximated the regional power bases
of the post-Independence era. Truly national political
parties have now become the norm since the final exit
of military rule even though Alliance for Democracy (AD)
and All People’s Progressive Grand Alliance (APGA)
still have their regional bases in the Southwest and Southeast
zones respectively. Present Nigerian political parties,
across the board, differ only in name and the personnel
that run their affairs. They are ideologically indistinguishable
otherwise.
With the creation of 36 state governments to replace the
defunct 4 regional structure of pre-civil war era, Nigerian
political discourse is slowly moving away from blatant
ethnic and parochial jingoes as potent instruments for
partisan mobilization. Money and personality cultism have
subsequently assumed greater significance in current battle
for survival and supremacy amongst the 30 registered political
parties in Nigeria. The People’s Democratic Party
(PDP), since its impressive victories in two successive
national elections, has emerged as the colossus of Nigerian
political landscape while the less know parties are slowly
fading away from public consciousness. Within the PDP,
the battle for control and domination of the party political
machine has become quite intense. Again, in a party that
is virtually devoid of discernible ideological leanings,
money and personality of key players are the two important
instruments for orchestrating intra-party struggles for
supremacy. PDP political conventions, for example, particularly
the ones that select presidential candidates, are bazaars
where partisan support of delegates is openly traded and
acquired by the highest bidder.
Political godfather is basically a euphemism for an affluent
partisan who has the financial resources and the will
to deploy same for influencing politics in one’s
domain of control. The PDP, to a greater extent and other
opposition parties, to a lesser extent, are awash with
godfathers at all levels of governance throughout the
country. Anambra’ s Chief Chris Uba has become the
poster child of Nigerian political godfatherism because
the mechanism of control that he put in place to secure
his home state for PDP during 2003 general elections malfunctioned
and unexpectedly blew up in everyone’s face. The
crises that followed inevitably led to revelations of
complex underhand deals that took place amongst PDP stakeholders
in the state in run up to the April 2003 general elections.
It has now been revealed that the incumbent governor lacked
his own personal resources to successfully compete for
PDP nomination to contest for the State House, Awka. To
get over this impediment, he went to a great extent to
secure the favors and sponsorship of Chief Uba who ended
up financing a long list of aspirants, including Governor
Chris Ngige. As one would expect, the godfather’s
generosity was not without conditionality.
Political godfathers are not intrinsically evil men nor
are their roles in the polity. Based on the prevailing
socioeconomic environment in which Nigerian democracy
is constrained to function, one could boldly assert that
the role of political godfathers is inevitable. Partisan
politics demands the time, sweat and money of its key
players in an ongoing basis to meet its many logistical,
organizational and operational needs. Electioneering politics
multiplies the needs of a given political party several
folds. The rank and file party membership can hardly muster
what it takes to fulfill the needs of a ruling party like
the PDP in running a state in which it is determined to
stay in control. The average citizen has been made to
understand that political parties are veritable conduits
for acquiring power and wealth. Regular party members
join Nigerian political parties with great anticipation
of getting something substantive out of it. There is hardly
anything done for the party voluntarily, thus requiring
that routine errands and sundry logistics are usually
all paid for in cash by whoever is perceived to be the
local boss in charge. Political parties, as presently
organized and run in Nigeria, cannot function at grassroots
level without the largesse of partisan godfathers.
How do we go about obviating the need for political godfathers
and their penchant for using oath taking to retain loyalty
of those who rely on their patronage to be relevant partisans
or aspirants for elective posts? There are two options.
First alternative is to let a neutral entity fund the
party and allow political parties to be organized on the
principle of “equal owners and equal joiners”.
The second option is to build political parties out of
grassroots movements from where they should derive their
legitimacy and power. The first option was experimented
upon during the Babangida administration’s transition
program in the ill-fated Third Republic. The two official
political parties, National Republican Convention (NRC)
and Social Democratic Party (SDP), were funded by the
Federal Government. This experiment cost billions of naira
of taxpayers’ money annually to remotely manage
only two parties. It boggles the mind to imagine the cost
for sustaining 30 distinct political parties that are
officially registered today in Nigeria. While the idea
of floating grassroots-based political parties sounds
sensible, the notion of egalitarianism in a laissez-faire
democratic system of government is oxymoronic.
Nigerian democracy shall remain stunted if the evolution
of national political parties at grassroots level is left
in the hands of godfathers and their unorthodox ways of
using wealth and personality cultism to ensure the loyalty
of mostly uninformed and impoverished partisan followers.
Fundamental change in the status quo shall require an
ideological reorientation in Nigerian political discourse
and practice. Political parties must be revamped and restructured
to reflect visions and principles that resonate well with
needs and values of the average citizen. In absence of
these, a big philosophical void shall continue to overshadow
the political landscape of Nigeria. Nigeria has the manpower
and resource base to lead in the socioeconomic and cultural
advancement of the African continent and the Black World.
The vision to fulfill this role should inspire Nigerian
intellectual and political elite to embark on a novel
popular movement to clean up the mess that currently frustrates
all efforts to bring many benefits of 21st Century global
environment within reach of the average citizen.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Osondu
The Survival Struggle for Ndiigbo |
|
|
 |