By Salihu Moh. Lukman
What
is the Nigerian political opposition all about? Is it simply about not being in
current government? Or is it about not being in good terms with functionaries
of government and to that extent in opposition to leaders of the ruling party?
Do Nigerian political opposition have any defining or distinguishing value that
differentiate them from today’s functionaries of government and leaders of the
Nigerian ruling party? Are there any programmatic attributes or claims
associated with Nigerian opposition politics? Is there any intellectual content
to Nigerian opposition politics, latent or manifest? What is the difference
between PDP, on the one hand and ACN, ANPP, CPC and Okorocha-led APGA - APC, on
the other? With APC still in the political production mill, should Nigerians
expect it – APC – to come with any defining or distinguishing attribute?
It
is almost certain that attempts to answer these questions would highlight the
strong likelihood that Nigerian political opposition is an expedient
categorization mainly associated with Nigerian politicians that are outside
government. It is mainly a reflection of where politicians stand in relations
to especially the federal government. As a result, even so-called members of
the ruling PDP, presiding over some of the states, have come to acquire the
status of being opposition politicians. Even functionaries of other arms of the
federal government, such as the legislative arm, on account of poor relations
with the federal government can be rightly regarded as opposition politicians
irrespective of partisan affiliation.
The
reality is that Nigerian opposition politics is not about any claim to value or
programme commitment. Thus, the temperament and feature of Nigerian opposition
politics is predominantly informed by lack of patronage, accommodation and
tolerance on both sides – government functionaries and opposition politicians.
There are many politicians in today’s PDP federal government that were at some
point leaders of the Nigerian opposition, just as there are many Nigerian
opposition politicians that were in PDP federal government and handled their
responsibilities in implementing PDP government’s programmes with missionary
zeal. With hardly any substantial change in orientation, yesterday’s zealots
have become today’s opposition leaders, opposition leaders have become very
loyal government functionaries.
Against
the background that today’s federal government has directed the nation more
towards increasing poverty, inequality, unemployment, poor or absence of
services, etc. disdain and anger are citizens’ attitude to the ruling party.
With such attitude, popularity of Nigerian opposition politics is on the
increase and there is almost every certainty that given an atmosphere of free
and fair elections, the ruling PDP will be thrown out of government. Political
opposition in Nigeria is therefore very popular and with current APC merger
negotiation, there is a growing feeling among Nigerians that the days of PDP as
ruling party are numbered.
The
key question that Nigerian opposition politicians need to answer is what
difference will they make in the living conditions of Nigerians when eventually
they emerged as the ruling party in 2015? In other words, what is the human
welfare content of our new APC government? Given the unfortunate absence of
ideological commitment in Nigerian politics and the fact that there is hardly
any discernible distinction in terms of policy orientations of our political
parties represented by each of the state governments they control, discussions
of the welfare contents of governments have been very prejudiced and weak. It
is largely reduced to political claims by political leaders with little
empirical content. Are there specific economic and programmatic content in the
current APC merger negotiations to signal new governance and economic reality?
If there are, how committed are the Nigerian opposition politicians to the
envisioned new governance and economic reality?
Considering
that the APC merger negotiations are still ongoing and its manifesto is yet to
be finalized, or at least so it appears, to what extent are our Nigerian
opposition politicians’ ready to commit themselves to key governance and
economic framework for the country? Would such commitment depart from current
PDP orientation? What are even the PDP commitments anyway?
No
doubt, PDP commitment is fluid. The best articulation is contained in the
National Economic Empowerment Development Strategy (NEEDS) and the
corresponding State Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy (SEEDS)
during the Obasanjo administration. Subsequent attempt to articulate it into
Vision 20-2020 development programme was truncated by a lifeless 7-point agenda
of the Umaru Musa Yar’Adua administration. Current transformation agenda of GEJ
administration has not substantially provided a clear governance and economic commitment.
The result is that governance is reduced to propaganda and in practical terms
emerging as a criminal theatre for corrupt enrichment of functionaries and
loyalists.
To
be very nice would be to portray PDP approach to handling governance and economic
framework as a conservative agenda that promote individual accumulation,
private ownership (mainly money and not enterprise), rent-seeking, etc. on a
criminal scale. The fact of its criminality has meant executive (and of course
legislative) lawlessness resulting in the current near state of anarchy in the
country. Everything is driven by exercise of crude force, which reduced human
life to virtually nothing.
The
growing expectations of Nigerians are that opposition politicians organized
under APC will develop governance and economic responses to this calamitous
national situation. The hope is that it would substantially depart from
simplistic financial management to the realm of wealth creation. Partly
promoted by international donor agencies, it needs to be acknowledged that
strategies for improved financial management have helped strengthened financial
discipline in the management of public resources at all levels. However, they
have been weak in promoting policy choices. Clear policy commitments offered by
APC focusing on halting the current criminal scale of individual accumulation,
private ownership (mainly money and not enterprise), rent-seeking, etc. are the
national expectation. It is not just about voting GEJ and PDP out of government
but that it should result in a radical shift to, at the minimum, a situation
where the departure of GEJ and PDP out of the federal government would
translate into a new leaf in governance and economic life of the entity called
Nigeria and its citizens.
Given
current merger negotiations leading to the emergence of APC therefore, the
challenge of promoting choices in the polity and based on that expand the
frontiers of economic development should take a central stage. So far, it is
too early to make any judgment because the negotiations are ongoing. There is
however the risk that governance and economic programmes may be taken for
granted given that negotiations so far are dominated by the need to contract
agreement more in terms of mechanical unity and in the process overlook
specific governance and economic programme content needed to make any potential
APC government different from PDP.
Also
given the fact of political opposition in Nigeria being more a factor of poor
relationship with the federal government, APC leaders must take steps to
contract clear governance and economic commitment. Such a commitment must at
the minimum address issues of criminal individual accumulation, private
ownership (mainly money and not enterprise), rent-seeking, etc. In some ways, a
shift from criminal individual accumulation, private ownership (mainly money
and not enterprise), rent-seeking, etc. to primitive individual accumulation,
private ownership (enterprise), etc. founded on legality could represent a
progressive governance and economic shift.
For
Nigerians, the challenge is not so much about how such governance and economic
programme is articulated but more in terms of the competence of APC as
represented by today’s Nigerian opposition politicians to deliver. This worry
is more justified by a combination of two factors. The first is that Nigerian
opposition politicians are only predominantly driven by poor relations with the
federal government and not because of any defining, distinguishing and
historical attribute. The absence of defining, distinguishing or historical
attributes could simply translate into the same governance and economic
disposition that may come with criminality.
The
second issue is that there is nothing so far in the colouration of Nigerian
opposition that represents some common characteristics, harmony or semblance of
unity. Even in terms of state governments controlled by the opposition parties
negotiating the merger – ACN, ANPP, CPC and Okorocha-led APGA, there is hardly
any common governance and economic feature. The closest is ACN’s free education
programmes based on its leaning to Awoist philosophy. In so many respects, it
is more a reflection of individual state government’s initiative. There is no
guiding party programme. Partly because of the absence of guiding party
programme, the approach of Lagos State is different from that of Ekiti, Osun,
Oyo, Ogun and Edo. To what extent are the merger negotiations therefore
conceptualizing free education as APC programme commitment? In what ways could
Nigerians expect that APC governments at all levels will be bonded by specific
unambiguous programmes commitment such as free education given that ACN is one
of the parties in the negotiation?
In
relation to ANPP, with three state governments (Borno, Yobe and Zamfara), it is
doubtful if they can be associated with any unifying governance or economic
philosophy. Perhaps since they originated the introduction of shari’a legal
system in states controlled by the ANPP between 1999 and 2007, shari’a could be
the governance and economic philosophy of their governments. With the current
insurgencies being experienced in most states in Northern parts of the country
and its religious character as one that is coming with professed commitment to
shari’a, even among Muslims, the issue of shari’a would elicit some scrutiny.
Besides,
the facts of shari’a imposition in our Northern states led by ANPP governments
being largely informed by political exigencies based on survival strategies for
elected officials without that translating into improved living conditions for
citizens, negotiations bordering on the adoption of shari’a as a party
programme will be highly unpopular, if not politically suicidal. Besides, the
inability of the federal and state governments to bring the problem of
religiously-originated insurgencies under control will undermine its
marketability as a party programme.
As
for CPC, largely because it has only a state government (Nasarawa) that only
came to power two years ago, very little can be said other than the fact that
it makes no specific claim to governance or economic philosophy. The same could
be said about Okorocha-led APGA with its control of Imo state. In which case,
Nigerians will be more justified to argue that the difference between PDP and
these parties are more in terms of the personalities.
The
excitement of Nigerians about APC and the potential it represent is more in
terms of the expectation for it to come with a governance and economic
programme commitment that are capable of solving all the intricate problems
facing the nation, especially issues of improved citizens’ welfare leading to
reduced inequality, poverty and unemployment. Such a commitment should come
from the party – APC – and just expressed based on individual preferences of
leading functionaries of government. Party commitment to specific governance
and economic programmes have potentials to influence the choice of party
candidates and on account of the pressure it will exert, force party leaders to
be interested in matters of delivery.
One
of the strong demobilisers in Nigerian politics in terms of economic
development is the fact that programmes are largely absent. The major
consideration is basically access to money by all means. The details are very
glaring. Corrupt individuals, mediocres and even criminals have been vested
with political leadership in this country. Is APC going to change that?
It
is paramount that Nigerian opposition politicians positively respond to this
challenge. In doing so, it is not about taking undue advantage of the disdain
and anger of Nigerians against PDP and based on that just railroad itself into
power without any governance and economic programme commitment. It is also not about
declarations. Therefore, it is more about documented commitment articulated in
APC constitution and manifesto. In addition, it has to come with personal
belief in which the leadership of APC will become both the torchbearers and
symbols.
These
are matters for formal recognition and not informal, driven more by contractual
obligation and not just trust. It is important that these conditions are met
from the beginning especially given that the high expectations on APC is more
as a result of the charisma of the leaders of the parties negotiating the
merger – ACN, ANPP, CPC and Okorocha-led APGA. Like the parties, these leaders
have no unifying governance or economic philosophy or attributes.
Given
the dynamic reality that principal leaders may hardly go beyond advisory and
moral responsibilities, and even if they do, may not include being drivers of
government, our principal leaders need to demonstrate superior levels of
commitment to the future of the entity called Nigeria by ensuring that APC
emerged with strong governance and economic programme commitment. There may be
the temptation to project trust based on assumption of loyalty. Without however
going into details, experiences of Gen. Buhari between 2003 and today with
opposition politicians saddled to manage state governments should be a wakeup
call. Our political experience since 1999 demonstrate that this must never be
taken for granted again.
Therefore,
given high and rising levels of inequality, poverty and unemployment in the
country, APC’s governance and economic programme commitment must offer a new
reality that seek to improve the welfare and guarantee the well being of
Nigerians by drastically reducing levels of inequality, poverty and
unemployment. Beyond contracting political relations with citizens, APC need to
come with a programme design that seek to engender new forms of economic
relations between Nigerians and their governments at all levels. The programme
design must clearly outline issues of how production will be stimulated and the
strategy that will drive value change and progression from primary to higher
production levels. Mechanisation, industrialization, etc. programmes should be
strategically located as integral component of the APC governance and economic
agenda and not abstract and largely donor-driven governance programmes.
With
such governance and economic programme commitment, Nigerians can then expect
that all local and state governments controlled by APC would undertake some
specific programmes ranging from education, healthcare delivery, agriculture,
housing, industrial development, etc. The fact of such commitment and its
expression in the political belief system should translate into some
accelerated shifts in the practice from a situation whereby Nigerian political
leaders go abroad for medical treatment (mainly Asia, Middle East, Europe,
North America and recently some African countries) and send their children to
school in these countries to a new reality to be stimulated by APC government
whereby our citizens’ and
leaders’ educational and healthcare needs can be met here in Nigeria.
These cannot be delivered based on trust; they
are not matters for declaration; they require clear governance and economic
programme commitments. With such commitments, history will forever be kind to
our today’s Nigerian opposition leaders and Nigerians of all generation will
remain grateful to them for rising up to the challenge of today’s governance.
On account of the strength of commitment and clarity of obligation, our history
shall make special acknowledgement of today’s Nigerian opposition politicians
and all actors shall have a special individual recognition in terms of their
contributions as individuals who helped pulled the nation from a situation
where government is reduced to virtually a criminal theatre for the
corrupt enrichment of functionaries and loyalists to one in which governments
and functionaries are equated with services that translate to improved
citizens’ welfare and guaranteed well being. And APC shall be a party for all
times capable of responding to citizens’ welfare needs and aspirations. That is
the defining, distinguishing and lifelong attributes Nigerians look forward to
in APC!
(Lukman can be
reached on: smlukman@gmail.com)
