The PDP, APC and the other parties finally enter the ring for general elections that will commence six days away, writes Senior Correspondent, VICTOR EBIMOMI.
After months of intense politicking, energy-sapping and money-gulping electioneering, the nation’s politicians now have a date with history. On March 28, the presidential candidates of the registered political parties, as well as those vying for the Senate and House of Representatives, would have their fate decided by the electorate. Emerging signals, in fact, suggest that the contest may go into history as a watershed in the country’s elections since Independence from Great Britain in 1960.
In the beginning
Nigeria’s first attempt at democratic governance started in 1960, but did not survive beyond 1966. On January 15, 1966, the military struck and took over the reins of power. But, after 13 years of military rule, the country returned to civilian rule on October 1, 1979. The Second Republic, as it is known, was short-lived; it was also cut short on December 31, 1983 by the military. What is today referred to as the Third Republic was still-born because what could have made it complete – the presidential election – was not allowed to stand.
As a result of a series of incidents that occurred between June 8, 1988 and February 27, 1998, the Fourth Republic, which is the current one, was eventually enthroned on May 29, 1999.
Because of the long period of the military on the political scene –16 years in all – before the Fourth Republic was inaugurated, Nigerians embraced it with high hope, spirit and enthusiasm. Never again shall we be ruled by decrees, but by the constitution, they seemed to say.
A peep into Fourth Republic
The Fourth Republic started with three registered parties – the Alliance for Democracy (AD), All Peoples Party (APP) and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). Among the three, the PDP has been at the centre stage since May 29, 1999. Olusegun Obasanjo, a retired General and former military head of state, kick-started its dominance as he became the president of the Federal Republic of Nigeria on the party’s platform. The race was between him and Olu Falae, former finance minister, who contested on a merger platform between AD and APP. APP later metamorphosed to All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP). Though the election was marred by claims of fraud and irregularities, Nigerians later took it with equanimity for the sake of the nascent democracy.
Obasanjo repeated the same winning streak in 2003 by defeating Muhammad Buhari, another former military head of state, who ran on ANPP ticket.
After Obasanjo’s second term in 2007, PDP presidential ticket was won by the late Umaru Yar’Adua, of the same party who again defeated Buhari of the ANPP. The election was also said to be full of flaws, which Yar’Adua himself acknowledged during his inauguration at Eagle Square, Abuja – a rare acknowledgement that earned him encomia from Nigerians.
The PDP continued its occupation of Aso Rock, Abuja (the seat of power) in 2011 with the incumbent President Goodluck Jonathan who still defeated Buhari. But this time, the latter contested under a new party he formed known as Congress for Progressive Change (CPC). The feat of the PDP in the election excited the party chieftains so much that one of them declared openly that the party would rule Nigeria for 60 years.
But unlike the previous elections, there were pockets of riots that left many people dead over allegations of rigging and other electoral malpractices. The bloodshed was quickly curtailed through condemnations by Nigerians, and swift reactions from the security agents. Consequently, about four days later, calm returned to the volatile areas in the North.
Enter 2015
The 2015 general elections is generating more interests as well as controversies than all the previous elections combined since the beginning of the Fourth Republic. Although there are 28 registered political parties by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to slug it out on March 28 and April 11, the contest appears to be a two-horse race between the PDP, whose flag-bearer is the incumbent President Jonathan and All Progressives Congress (APC), with Buhari as its candidate. The APC emerged like a child of necessity through merger of leading opposition parties, which are Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN), CPC, ANPP and a faction of All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA). Its main objective is to flush the PDP out of Aso Rock Villa, albeit through popular votes.
Toxic campaigns
But the unfolding events since the two parties became the major players in the political scene point to something ominous. Before the two parties had their conventions in December, there had been continuous exchange of verbal missiles as well as occasional skirmishes between their supporters in different parts of the country.
After their various conventions and emergence of the flag-bearers, the missile appeared to have gone ballistic.
The sign that the tempo of the battle had changed began to manifest fully a day before the PDP officially kicked off its campaign in Lagos on December 8. Addressing the press in Abuja, spokesman of the party’s Presidential Campaign Organisation, Femi Fani-Kayode, took a swipe on Buhari, describing him as representing darkness while Jonathan represented light.
“It is our full intention to expose General Muhammadu Buhari for what he really is, what he stands for and the great danger that his candidacy portends for the unity of the Nigerian state and the peace and well-being the Nigerian people,” he added.
But the APC would take none of this. In fact, Kano State Governor, Rabiu Kwankwaso, promptly made a riposte, hitting hard at Jonathan and describing him as an “incompetent commander-in-chief”.
In the ensuing war of words, the PDP National Secretary, Wale Oladipo, threw what could be likened to a bombshell. He described Buhari as a “semi-literate jackboot”.
Thereafter, rather than dwell on issues, the theme of the campaigns of the two parties appeared to be verbal attacks, with frequent physical attacks by their foot soldiers.
Accord to the rescue?
As the nationwide tension lingered, some concerned groups and persons, both locally and internationally, decided to intervene to save the nation.
On Wednesday, January 14, Jonathan, Buhari and 12 other presidential contestants were made to sign an accord that would ensure a violent-free polls.
The accord required the political parties and their candidates to run issue-based campaigns at national, state and local government levels. In it, they were to refrain from campaigns that would involve religious sentiment, ethnic or tribal profiling, by themselves or those acting on their behalf.
They were also expected to refrain from making or causing to make any public statement, pronouncement, declaration or speeches that have the capacity to incite any form of violence before, during and after the elections.
The parties were further enjoined to forcefully and publicly speak out against provocative utterances and oppose all act of electoral violence, whether perpetuated by their supporters and/or opponents.
The accord also required them to commit themselves and political parties to the monitoring of the adherence of the agreement if necessary, by a national peace committee made up of respected statesmen and women, traditional and religious leaders.
It insisted that all the institutions of government, including INEC and security agencies, must act and be seen to act with impartiality.
The accord was signed at a workshop chaired by the former Secretary-General of Commonwealth, Emeka Anyaoku, while former United Nations Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, was the special guest of honour.
Few days later, United States of America Secretary of State, John Kerry, flew into the country to also caution against electoral violence. He met both Jonathan and Buhari. The trend continued last week, when U.S. Vice President, Joe Biden, also called and advocated peaceful election.
Accord defeated
But the accord seemed to have collapsed as soon as it was signed, given that few weeks later, nothing appeared to have changed. In fact, analysts believe the accord was too cosmetic, as the situation got worse.
As the frequent vituperations from both camps continued, their respective foot soldiers also replicated same on the streets and campaign grounds. By last week, in fact, there were indications that virtually every state in the federation had experienced politically-motivated violence, some of which led to loss of lives.
Prominent among the clashes was the Okirika, Rivers State, incident of February where gunmen alleged to be loyal to PDP invaded an APC rally mid-way and rained bullets on the gathering killing several people.
Also, on Wednesday, March 11, a serious clash reportedly occurred in Owerri, capital of Imo State, between APC supporters and that of PDP during a scheduled debate for governorship aspirants in the state. The debate was organised by the Catholic Archdiocese of Owerri.
As a result of the volatility of the political space, many analysts have continued to wonder whether the two main parties, indeed, have anything to offer Nigerians.
They argue that though PDP anchors its campaign theme on ‘Continuity and Transformation Agenda’ and the APC stresses ‘Change’ which entails ‘a new face of Nigeria’, these are hardly reflected on their campaigns.
Nigerians react
Nigerian elections are traditionally fiercely contested, but this time around, analysts believe that looking at the existing trends, the fear of violence is very high because this is the first nationwide contest between the ruling party and an opposition since the return to civil rule in 1999.
Charles Okafor, an unemployed graduate, expressed worry that given the way the campaigns have been going on, the two parties have nothing to offer, except a blind desire to corner the national treasury.
According to him, if the candidates truly mean to serve the public, especially the masses, they would not commit the same people to go and die through violence. “They are there to serve themselves. So I don’t expect anything from them,” he added.
Also commenting on the matter, Olagbaju Abiodun, a film maker, decried the volume of violence being perpetrated over the elections and prayed that there would be credible contest.
“Whoever is going to win; either the incumbent or Buhari, what I expect is drastic change because the situation we are now is not favourable,” he stressed.
Arguing in similar vein, Dr. Tunde Oseni of the Department of Political Science, Lead University, Ibadan, frowned at the conduct of the politicians, especially those contesting in the election, saying they have not displayed enough maturity and positive disposition. He rather accused them of approaching the exercise with a do-or-die mindset.
“The politicians have not displayed maturity and positive political attitude. In a normal society, people who throw themselves up for political offices need to behave in a way that shows that they are coming for service and not for personal aggrandizement,” he said.
He condemned the use of the youths by the politicians to achieve their selfish aim, stressing that when violence moves from verbal, psychological to physical level, it portends a great danger for the polity.
On the way forward, he advocated that, in the short term, the media should help in sensitising the society, adding that “politics is not a do-or-die affair”.
The security agents, especially the police, he said, should be well funded and professionally trained to ensure that those who promote or involve in violence are made to face the music.
And for Abiodun Aremu, the Secretary of Joint Action Front (JAF), a pro-democracy civil society organisation, no matter the level of political manoeuvring by the politicians, Nigerians should insist on free and fair elections.
According to him, since INEC has continuously promised to conduct a free and fair election, Nigerians also stand on that.
“I don’t want to comment on any expectations, but I want to advise that the people have the responsibility to make the exercise free and fair. After all, INEC has promised free and fair election,” he remarked.