Security Agencies and Our Democracy
At times, I could be mischievous. When security agents barricaded Government House, Ado Ekiti, ahead of the July 14 governorship election — and Governor Ayo Fayose released his hit single, “I’m in Pains” — a friend, with whom I had been engaged in a fierce debate over the nature of restructuring Nigeria needs, quickly sent me a message. He said: “Simon, I hope you now agree with me that we need state police. If there was state police, that nonsense would not have happened!” It did not cross his mind that governors could also use state police to crush their opponents — the same way they use state electoral commissions to win 100% of council elections.
And so when pictures of the reported police blockade of Senate President Bukola Saraki’s house on Tuesday went viral, I seized the opportunity to retaliate. “Baba, don’t you think we need senate police? If the senate had its own police, this would not have happened,” I said. He got my point. We argued for about an hour and concluded that enemies. Space would constrain me to write on the it is not state or federal police that is the issue: experiences of Chief DSP Alamieyeseigha, Chief public institutions will continue to be vulnerable to Joshua Dariye, Alhaji Rashidi Ladoja, Alhaji Atiku political manipulation for as long as their managers Abubakar, Fayose and several others who were think they owe their loyalty to their principals persecuted by state institutions for not towing rather than to the constitution and the country. Obasanjo’s line. I do not suggest they were We keep saying we need strong institutions as blameless or that they had no case to answer, if institutions run themselves. but I was intelligent enough to understand the
We need to come to a consensus that institutions political undertone. are as strong as those managing them. If the President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua did not want human beings running state institutions don’t to be left out — he chased Ribadu out of EFCC have balls, how will they run efficiently and in the most audacious circumstances, reportedly professionally? And if the institutions are not at the behest of his politician friends, notably run professionally, how can our democracy Chief James Ibori, former governor of Delta state, make any progress? It is a global standard that whom Ribadu was determined to see in jail at democracy only works where state institutions all cost over allegations of corruption. Ribadu work. Since Nigeria returned to civil rule in 1999, was eventually demoted from AIG to deputy the biggest obstacles obstructing our journey to commissioner of police. For failing to wear his new attaining “constitutional” democracy has been the rank, he was dismissed from service. He ran out conduct of state institutions such as the police, of the country after an alleged attempt on his life. DSS, INEC and — to some extent — the judiciary Yar’Adua also sent the EFCC after Mallam Nasir and the armed forces. Rufai reportedly over a previous grudge — and
On Tuesday, some federal lawmakers were to the former FCT minister fled into exile. defect from the ruling All Progressives Congress President Goodluck Jonathan is generally (APC). Apparently to checkmate them, police quickly regarded as the gentle one. There were reports fired a letter to Saraki asking him to come for that he deferred significantly to his attorney-general, interrogation over Offa robbery — same day. His Mr. Mohammed Bello Adoke, on matters of law deputy, Senator Ike Ekweremadu, who would have and, therefore, avoided using state agencies to presided in his absence, was simultaneously caged harass his opponents. For instance, when five at his residence by the EFCC. I don’t believe in PDP governors defected to APC in 2013 and coincidences in this business. There was outrage he came under intense pressure to use security all over town and people were making angry agencies to remove and replace them, Jonathan comments on social media on how our democracy reportedly declined. Chief EK Clark, the Ijaw was coming under attack and how the security leader, was said to have angrily asked for the agencies were taking sides. My apologies — I sack of Adoke, who was accused of curtailing the was not among the baffled. “enormous powers” of the president. But it was
Anybody who has lived in Nigeria since not as if state institutions were totally impartial the return to democracy in 1999 and who has under Jonathan. good memory should not be baffled. In July I recall that when Hon. Aminu Tambuwal, 2003, Anambra state governor, Dr. Chris Ngige, as speaker of the house of reps, defected from was kidnapped by his political godfathers who PDP to APC in 2013, his security aides were tried to force him to resign. The mayhem was withdrawn. In fact, police barricaded the entrance co-ordinated by an assistant inspector general to the house of reps. Members had to scale the of police (AIG), Mr. Raphael Ige, now deceased. fence to report for duty. Mr. Suleiman Abba, President Olusegun Obasanjo’s boys were at then-inspector general of police, even became work. Obasanjo would later withdraw Ngige’s a judge. He declared Tambuwal’s seat vacant, security aides, saying he no longer recognised saying he did not need any court order, that him as governor. To prepare the ground for the he was a lawyer, and that the constitution had declaration of state of emergency, the hooligans already said if any MP defects, he will lose his set Awka on fire and burnt down the government seat. Does anybody still remember Mr. Joseph house, under police supervision. Mbu, the Rivers police commissioner, and his
The imperial Obasanjo was an expert at political war with Mr. Rotimi Amaechi, the state using “state of emergency” and EFCC to crush governor, in 2013/2014? his political opponents. He used Mallam Nuhu Now that state institutions have obviously Ribadu and EFCC to maximum effect, intimidating continued to be political under President state legislators to impeach governors viewed as Muhammadu Buhari, I am sad but not amazed enemies of Obasanjo or friends of Obasanjo’s or overwhelmed. This is the type of “democracy”
THISDAY Newspapers Limited. we have been practising since 1999 . And there is a scholarly explanation for it. In the July 2002 edition of the Journal of Democracy, we can find intellectual elucidation in an article entitled ‘The Rise of Competitive Authoritarianism,’ written by Steven Levitsky and Lucan A. Way. They wrote under the theme ‘Elections without Democracy’. I came across this article in 2006 in the heat of the decapitation of Nigeria’s democracy by President Obasanjo.
After reading the essay, I concluded that Nigeria was not yet practising democracy. I will share their thoughts with us extensively in this article, spiced with my comments. Levitsky and Way wrote: “The post-Cold War world has been marked by the proliferation of hybrid political regimes… Particularly in Africa and the former Soviet Union, many regimes have either remained hybrid or moved in an authoritarian direction… Analyses frequently treat mixed regimes as partial or ‘diminished’ forms of democracy, or as undergoing prolonged transition to democracy. Such characterisations imply that these cases are moving in a democratic direction. Yet… this is not the case.”
Defining it as ‘Competitive Authoritarianism’, they explained: “In competitive authoritarian regimes, formal democratic institutions are widely viewed as the principal means of obtaining and exercising political authority. Incumbents violate those rules so often and to such an extent, however, that the regime fails to meet conventional minimum standards for democracy… they may be better described as a (diminished) form of authoritarianism.” In democratic societies, state institutions, such as the police, the judiciary and the electoral commission, are never at the beck and call of partisan actors. We’ve never been able to comfortably say this about Nigeria since 1999.
Levitsky and Way further wrote: “Although incumbents in competitive authoritarian regimes may routinely manipulate formal democratic rules, they are unable to eliminate or reduce them to a mere facade. Rather than openly violating democratic rules (for example, by banning or repressing the opposition and the media), incumbents are more likely to use bribery, co-optation, and more subtle forms of persecution, such as the use of tax authorities, compliant judiciaries, and other state agencies to ‘legally’ harass, persecute, or extort cooperative behaviour from critics.” You will agree with me that this has been our lot for nearly 20 years now. There is yet no end in sight.
The authors postulated that in competitive authoritarian regimes, “elections are often bitterly fought. Although the electoral process may be characterized by large-scale abuses of state power, biased [government] media coverage, (often violent) harassment of opposition candidates and activists, and an overall lack of transparency, elections are regularly held, competitive (in that major opposition parties and candidates usually participate).” They noted that even though legislatures tend to be relatively weak, “they occasionally become focal points of opposition activity.” I am not a fan of the national assembly but I admit that they serve good purposes in our convoluted system.
To our credit, though, we’ve met certain conditions — such as holding regular elections and keeping to constitutional term limits. But democracy is nothing if the institutions that should create a level-playing field serve as tools in the hands of contending political forces. How can our institutions become professional and non-aligned? This is the conversation we should be having. Since 1999, every government has used state institutions to its own advantage. It didn’t start today; it won’t end today. How can political appointees begin to exercise utmost loyalty to fatherland rather than to politicians? Is there a place for individual conscience? Let the debate begin.