A Nation Still in Search of Freedom
When Nigeria got Independence on October 1, 1960, the celebration and jubilation were unlimited because it was thought that it would bring freedom to the people but 59 years after, it has remained an illusion, write Rebecca Ejifoma and Sunday Ehigiator
Independence Day means freedom but in the clutches of this present government are its citizens who are not free despite court judgements. Welcome to Nigeria, where flagrant disregard for rule of law and democracy reigns supreme. When Nigeria gained its independence on October 1, 1960, it was supposed to be a gateway for peace, freedom and everything good for the citizenry. Over the years, the hopes and aspirations of our freedom fighters continue to filter down. Some might say the situation is even worse today.
Post Independence
In the simplest term, independence is regarded as freedom from the control or influence of others. It is also the freedom to make laws or decisions without being governed or controlled by another country or organisation.
In the Nigerian context, the nation was granted full independence on October 1, 1960, under a constitution that provided for a parliamentary government and a substantial measure of self-government for the country's three regions.
From 1959 to 1960, Jaja Wachuku was the first black Speaker of the Nigerian Parliament, also called the House of Representatives. Wachuku replaced Sir Frederick Metcalfe of Great Britain. Notably, as first Speaker of the House, he received Nigeria's Instrument of Independence, also known as ‘Freedom Charter’ on October 1, 1960, from Princess Alexandra of Kent, the Queen's representative at the Nigerian independence ceremony.
The federal government was given exclusive powers in defence, foreign relations, commercial and fiscal policy. The monarch of Nigeria was still head of state but legislative power was vested in a bicameral parliament, executive power in a prime minister and cabinet and judicial authority in a federal supreme court.
The nation would however grapple with military regime for 16 years before the emergence of a democratic Nigeria in May 1999 saw Olusegun Obasanjo as the president. However, the emergence of President Muhammadu Buhari makes him the third successive democratically elected president of Nigeria since the leadership of Obasanjo.
Juxtaposing Democracy and Rule of Law
Efebeh Vincent (PhD), of Political Science Department, Delta state University, Abraka, in an online material published in 2015, posited that, “Democracy and the rule of law are inseparable concepts that make it possible for modern societies to function effectively and thus guarantee peace, harmony and egalitarianism in the society.
“The democratisation project is therefore, regarded as the age of civilisation that every society should strive to attain rather than a political option among many others. Democracy has thus become known to be the only moral and legitimate way by which a society can be ruled”.
Thus, democracy adequately understood, is a theory that sets some basic principles and standards according to which a good government, whatever its form, should be operated. Such principles include those of justice, equity, freedom, liberty, accountability, openness and transparency in government.
In most countries today, it is these principles that are used as criteria for distinguishing between good and bad governments. Thus, democracy not only prescribes how political power should be acquired but also what to do with it or how it should be exercised.
On the other hand, Vincent said “the rule of law is the legal principle that should govern a nation, and not arbitrary decisions by individual government officials.
“It primarily refers to the influence and authority of law within society, particularly as a constraint upon behaviour, including behaviour of government officials.
“The rule of law implies that every citizen is subject to the law of the land, including lawmakers themselves. In this sense, it stands in contrast to autocracy, dictatorship, or oligarchy where the rulers are held high and above the law.
“Lack of the rule of law can be found in democracies and dictatorships, this can be as a result of neglect or ignorance of the law, corruption, lack of strong institutions or lack of corrective mechanisms for administrative abuse, such as an independent judiciary with a culture of the rule of law, a practical right to petition for redress of grievances, or elections.
“A government’s decision to obey preexisting legal rules can provide the key to gaining widespread supports and general acceptance. Such respect for laws of the land as recorded in a constitution and in laws adopted through a credible democratic process is the hallmark of the rule of law.
“The rule of law therefore, makes democracy to thrive because law is the collective will of society, making possible equal rights, social order and justice.
“Certain elements make up the rule of law; these are order and security, legitimacy, checks and balances, compliance to court orders, fairness, effective application, integrity and the supremacy of the rules.”
It is therefore apt to state from the forgoing that the rule of law is the bedrock of modern constitutional democracy. This was underscored by its role in bringing about transitions from authoritarian or totalitarian regimes to constitutional democracy in Nigeria, and elsewhere in the world.
Disregard for Rule of Law and Democracy
Adherence to the rule of law has been a Herculean task for various Nigerian governments since independence in October of 1960. In fact, according to the late Chinua Achebe of blessed memory, part of the reason the January 15, 1966 coup planners gave for staging the coup was that “corrupt and undisciplined ruling class” has become the order of the day in governmental circle (Achebe, 2012).
This identified nature of the Nigerian ruling class was in display all through subsequent regimes, military and civilian alike that have governed the country before 1999. Thus, one would have thought that the experience politicians have gathered over time, particularly during the long spell the country had under military regimes, would have transformed them to become apostles of the rule of law.
However, the reverse seems to be the case, as this current administration is still marred with several instance of outright disregard to the rule of law and democracy. From disobeying court orders, arrest of persons considered to have opposing views about the government and its decisions, media suppression and oppression, shooting and killing of harmless protesters, illegal arrest and detention of human rights fighters, the score keeps dragging.
Speaking with THISDAY on these concerns, Executive Director, Rule of Law and Accountability Advocacy Centre (RULAAC), Okechukwu Nwanguma said, “In Nigeria's political history, except perhaps, under the Buhari to Abacha military dictatorships, no regime has been characterised more with the level of perchance for executive lawlessness than the current President Muhammadu Buhari government.
“The level of brazenness with which this government disobeys court orders is most appalling and despicable. It recklessly flaunts its contempt for the rule of law. The executive has not hidden its contempt for the judiciary and the rule of law. This became clear when the federal Attorney General arrogantly and explicitly stated before the Senate that the executive has the powers to decide which court orders to obey or not.
“As the chief law officer of the government, the AG ought to advice the government legally and not to give illegal counsel and advice. His conduct and utterances constitute the worst disaster that would ever happen to the legal profession. He is not only misrepresenting that noble profession but also denting its image. This ought to attract sanctions from the NBA.
“The disgraceful statement at the Senate, during the ministerial screening that the executive disobeys court orders because of national security was clear evidence that the Buhari government is totalitarian and believes it can choose which court orders to obey and which ones to ignore.
“And the entire Senate saw nothing wrong with that gaffe and went ahead to confirm him. That's one clear indication of further executive capture of the legislature which ought to exercise its oversight powers over the executive. Unfortunately, both the legislature and judiciary, to other co-equal arms of the