Assistant Politics Editor, DANIEL KANU, looks at Nigeria after the Presidential election, throwing up issues to be addressed as the country transits.
Nigeria’s national election, which had been characterised by heavily divisive campaigns, eventually took place yesterday.
Although the exercise involved presidential and the National Assembly contests, the presidential election and the furore it generated made it appear as if it was the only one that took place.
Political commentators are in agreement that on account of allegations, counter-allegations, and toxic campaigns that trailed the exercise, Nigerians were denied the opportunity of healthy debate on issues, policies and strategies.
It is, in fact, argued that never in the history of the country had electioneering propaganda been this vile, especially with the entry of the social media.
It was also one election in which the electorate were sharply divided over whether they should give the All Progressives Congress (APC) and its presidential candidate, Muhammadu Buhari, a shot at the presidency or re-elect President Goodluck Jonathan of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) for another term of four years.
Despite the obvious flaws, there is, however, the agreement that the election remains the most keenly contested in the country since the restoration of democracy in 1999.
The race, as predicted, was tight and really too close to call – a situation that left the candidates and their political parties with no choice than to continue to canvass for votes from the electorate through open rallies, town hall meetings with relevant groups and paid advertisements in the broadcast and print media until 24 hours to election time as stipulated in the electoral law.
Of Jonathan’s victory
If Jonathan finally wins the election, it will be that of government of continuity. He won the 2011 presidential elections on the groundswell of popular support, and the promise of a transformation agenda.
The agenda was based on a summary of how the federal government hopes to deliver projects, programmes and key priority policies, from 2011 to 2015, coordinated by the National Planning Commission (NPC).
Transformation has remained a strong word that portends a radical, structural and fundamental reappraisal of the basic assumptions that underlie the nation’s reforms and developmental efforts.
The challenge before Jonathan’s government, which he identified, was how to move the nation away from an oil-dominated economy, institute the basics for a private sector-driven economy, build the local economy on international best practices, transform a passive oil industry to a more pro-active one, and restructure the country along the lines of a more decentralised federalism. Actualising these objectives will continue to remain the major challenges of the administration, if the president wins.
There are, however, management and leadership challenges to contend with – building an efficient and effective polity, inspiring a shared vision, remodelling a corrupt polity, building character and integrity in the leaders, and creating the Nigerian dream that will inspire patriotism and commitment in the citizenry.
Jonathan promised to use the plethora of projects and programmes conceived under its transformation agenda to significantly grow the economy and improve the living standard of the citizens. Whether the agenda has rubbed off positively on Nigerians has remained a great debate.
But it is believed in most quarters that Jonathan’s economic team undertook far-reaching reforms and policies conceived in the economic blueprint which seek, among other things, to revive the country’s infrastructure, diversify the economy from oil and create a vibrant economy.
The president had on several occasions reiterated the commitment of his administration to make Nigeria a better place and a global economic power, using the 2012-2015 Medium Term Fiscal Framework (MTFF) and Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) as the launchpad. Apart from setting up clear-cut guidelines for the four-year fiscal regime, the economic blueprint also recommended prudent management of the nation’s wealth to free up more funds for infrastructure projects and other developmental purposes.
Jonathan’s Fiscal Strategy and Economic Objectives over the 2012 to 2015 period dwelt on spending on key sectors which included security, infrastructure (including power), agriculture, manufacturing, housing and construction, entertainment, education, health and ICT.
While delivering the 2012 budget, anchored on the new fiscal framework, Jonathan declared: “My government is determined to pursue policies that will ensure a stable macroeconomic environment through a strong and prudent fiscal policy, manageable deficits, sustainable debt-GDP ratio of no more than 30 per cent, and single digit inflation, thereby promoting real growth. We believe that these measures would engender a stable and competitive exchange rate and help to reverse the declining trend of our international reserves.”
Petroleum Minister, Diezani Alison-Madueke, said government took steps to increase its non-oil revenues by plugging loopholes in the system, including partial removal of subsidy on imported petroleum products. Consequently, the committee on Subsidy Reinvestment and Empowerment Programme (SURE-P), launched by the government to manage the savings accruing from the petroleum import funds, had to set up an international metrics for monitoring, measuring and evaluating each project executed based on the Poverty and Social Impact Analyses model.
There was also transport sector revival. Some of the projects of national priority included: the dual-carriage Abuja-Abaji-Lokoja Road; construction of Oju-Loko-Oweto Bridge linking Nasarawa and Benue states; dual-carriage Kano-Maiduguri Road; second Niger Bridge under construction in Delta/Anambra states; rehabilitation of the Shagamu-Ore-Benin dual carriageway; and the rehabilitation of the Onitsha-Enugu-Port Harcourt dual carriageway.
Apart from rehabilitation of roads, airports and railways across the country were also improved upon.
Nevertheless, it is argued that the administration has not done much in lifting Nigerians from the valley of poverty. It is thus suggested that if the president wins, he should channel more efforts into realising some of the professed policies of the administration.
The Buhari expectation
Buhari had, in his campaigns, advertised what he termed ‘My Commitment to Nigeria’, anchoring it on “change” as the punch line.
His vision for Nigeria is to secure the nation, prosper the people, change politics and governance, resolve conflicts, improve the economy and infrastructure base, as well as human capital development and the environment.
In his words, “every country has its ‘lost generation’. Some were stolen away by war, some by economic downturns, and some by governments. Nigeria is perhaps the only country stolen by a cabal of political mafia, merely for power, money, leisure and privilege. For over 50 years of Independence and despite our vast wealth – abundant natural and human resources, at home and abroad – we as a nation continue to struggle with the most basic needs (food, shelter, water, security, sanitation and electricity, etc.”
According to him, Nigeria has been paralysed by widespread poverty, endemic corruption, high levels of unemployment, a near total collapse of the educational system and facilities, collapse and decaying health and ineffective social services systems, as well as chaotic transportation.
He had, thus, given hints on how he would fix Nigeria with the help of the people.
On politics and governance, he had argued that Nigeria’s politics is broken; hence the nation urgently needs fundamental political reform and improvement in governance, as well as redoubled efforts in transparency and accountability.
He promised to amend the constitution to remove immunity from prosecution for elected officers in criminal cases, vowing to reform and strengthen the justice system for efficient administration and dispensation of justice.
Buhari said he would urgently secure the territorial integrity of the nation, usher in permanent peace and solution to the insurgency issues in the North East, the Niger Delta and other conflict-prone areas such as Plateau, Benue, Bauchi, Borno, Abia, Taraba, Yobe, and Kaduna states, to engender national unity and social harmony.
His foreign policy objective, he said, would be to make regional integration a priority within the West African sub-region, including free trade, with a view to ensuring that common tariff currency is in use by the end of his term in office.
He promised to maintain a strong, close and frank relationship within the Gulf of Guinea, the Commonwealth, South Africa and the rest of the world, just as he said he would establish a special relationship with the leading emerging markets like Brazil, Russia, India and China (BRIC) and other strategic partners around the world.
Beyond campaign promises
What Nigerians will expect after the election is either continuity of Jonathan’s transformation agenda, which many believe needs more bite, or Buhari’s change mantra, which the citizens are yet to experience, but, some believe, needs to be experimented. Security tops the list on this expectation.
One of the greatest problems facing the nation in recent times is the issue of security, especially the threat by the Boko Haram terrorist group. Most observers believe that it is cheering that the military’s recent successes have overwhelmingly turned the tide against Boko Haram, an indication that, given proper motivation, the Nigerian military has the capability of defending the territorial integrity of the country.
Professor of History, University of Ibadan, Chris Ogbogbo, agrees that the issue of security has improved and gave kudos to the army for the feat.
He said, “The Nigerian Army is the one that matters. The soldiers are already motivated and you can see the successes they have made.”
For him, the economy is not as bad as painted, given that some of the factors are influenced by international indices.
“Most of the things happening are not because of internal factors alone; there are global factors to them. I do not see what is happening on the economy as the ineptitude of those managing it,” Ogbogbo submitted.
Spokesperson of Afenifere, the Yoruba socio-cultural group, Yinka Odumakin, argued also that the security situation is already under control, given the giant strides of the military.
There is, however, the general expectation that more efforts should be deployed to ensure security of life and property of Nigerians. In fact, aside the Boko Haram challenge, the precarious state of the country’s internal security arrangement came to the fore some weeks before the election when some Nigerians resident in other parts of the country, especially in the North, relocated to their hometowns over fears of possible post-election violence.
Their action was informed by the ugly incidents of 2011 in Bauchi and other parts of the region when non-natives were attacked by suspected supporters of a particular candidate after his loss in the presidential election. In apparent effort to guard against reoccurrence, the federal government is said to have deployed soldiers to different parts of the country. Chief of Army Staff (COAS), General Kenneth Minimah, has further asserted the preparedness of his officers and men to deal effectively with those intending to cause trouble, before, during and after the polls.
Requiem for hate campaigns?
The issue of hate campaign speeches deployed by the major political parties was also something that had given observers cause to worry.
Under the pretext of making political statements, the parties and their candidates had on occasions virtually incited their supporters against their opponents. Some of these antics manifested in the form of virulent attacks on the religion, ethnicity, integrity or regions of their opponents.
It is believed that the toxic campaign will naturally die down after the election, as it has been the trademark of political campaigns in the country. It was essentially on account of the apprehension infused into the system by the regime of toxic campaigns that the attention of the international community was focused on the elections. Twice, for example, two accords were signed by Jonathan, Buhari and other presidential candidates to rein in their supporters and maintain peace, despite the outcome of the polls. The first undertaking, which was entered into in the early days of the campaigns, was supervised by former United Nations’ Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, and former Commonwealth Scribe, Emeka Anyaoku. Last week, another accord was signed by the duo under the supervision of former military head of state, Gen. Abdulsalami Abubakar’s peace and conflict resolution committee.
Between the two interventions, American Secretary of State, John Kerry, had visited and admonished the two candidates on the need to ensure violence-free elections. United States President, Barack Obama, also spoke to the country on the import of playing according to rules in the contest.
Curiously, the interventions did not register much impact on the henchmen of the leading political parties, as they went on with inciting speeches and actions. With the contest over, it is expected that sanity would prevail.
As Odumakin observed, “the campaign of hate will go down after the election. Given the nature of the Nigerian state, it is expected. The stakes are high, but it will die naturally.”
Last Line
Beyond the contest, however, investigations have shown that what Nigerians need at the moment is for a transformational leader who is genuinely interested in serving rather than being served.
It is argued that the president Nigeria needs now must have the ability to create the vision, inspire and motivate followers, and through consistent, persistent and focused guidance, empower individuals to achieve results greater than they ever imagined.
Professor of Political Science, University of Ibadan, Benjamin Osisioma, argues in this respect.
He said: “The leaders Nigerians want may not necessarily have the loudest voice, but the most attentive ear; instead of bureaucratic hierarchies, they have a structure built of energy and ideas; they lead people who find their joy in the task at hand while embracing one another; and they do worry about leaving monuments behind. Great leaders are produced by great groups and by organisations that create the social architecture of respect and dignity. Without each other, the leader and the led are culturally impoverished.”
