Another look at the 'turn by turn' philosophy
By
Before now, some Nigerians have made a case for a single term in office for elected public officers, especially with particular reference to the office of the President. I must confess that I was never persuaded by that argument. It appeared to me an argument of greed, impatience, and turn-by-turn politics.
Why would anybody not submit to the demands of the constitution, endure it, get used to it, and lay the foundation for democracy. But I must confess that the current political mood in the country seems to be vindicating the advocates of one term.
The group called the GOOD GOVERNANCE GROUP (South East Wing), in its well articulated position in some national newspapers, titled: "To Avert Bloodbath in the South East", made a most persuasive case last week for the people of the South East to examine the single term option together with the rotation principle as a way out of the looming cataclysm in Igboland, as we approach 2003. You may not agree with their submission, but it seems that in the situation we have found ourselves, and given the passion that has so far attended the quest for a second term, the GOOD GOVERNANCE GROUP s option has a lot of merit.
It is evident everywhere that second term has become an albatross weighing heavily on the neck of the nation. Hardly had the incumbents been in office than the quest for re-election assumed frenetic and febrile pitch. Ever since, the poor electorates have been dragged through harrowing experiences. Not only are the incumbents distracted by the struggle for a second term, enormous resources are being deployed towards the war for a second term at the expense of real development.
Most of the states are almost ungoverned as all energy and time are directed towards fighting off virulent opposition. In some states, billions have been voted as security votes, even when it is clear that such votes are war chests for the re-election battle. And in some of these states, civil servants are being owed many months of salaries in arrears and unpaid pensioners are dying in penury. And these are some of the people who should benefit from our politics. If the people are not benefiting, the question can rightly be asked: What then is the purpose of politics?
The quest for a second term has reduced working for the people to a patronising flim-flam. The provision of amenities, which is why a governor is in office in the first place, is reduced to mere public relations events. In most cases, projects implementation is deliberately delayed till election time. More money, than the true worth of some projects, is spent to advertise the people s good fortune for having the, often shoddy, amenity provided for them. Those who are opposed to the incumbents are spending equally stupendous amounts debunking the miraculous claims of the incumbents in the newspapers. At the end parties aggravate tension. Their supporters collide in an orgy of violence. And like the proverbial grass, the people suffer the roforofo fight of the elephants.
It is not being said that some incumbents have not relatively performed, but what the argument seems to be is that, may be, they could even have done better if they did not have to look over their shoulders because of the second term humdrum. Perhaps even more persuasive in the GGG argument is that the single term option seems to be the most viable way to negotiate our way out of the impending bloodbath, especially in Igboland, where things seem to be spinning out control.
Make no mistake about it. The constitution provides for a second term. But what does not seem to impress the incumbents is the fine point that NOTHING in the constitution says that an incumbent must run for the two terms. A second term is a reward for good performance in the first term. And the opponents also do not appreciate the fact that an incumbent cannot be removed merely on the whims of an opponent or moneybag, but on the fact that, based on his performance, he has failed to get the nomination of his party or the mandate of the people.
It can be seen that these fine arguments do not cut ice with the combatants for now. In the ongoing imbroglio about second term, the sole determinant of who gets it or not, that is, the electorate, is excluded from the debate. Rather, political warlords have arrogated to themselves the sole right of the electorate to render verdict on the performances of the incumbents. What we have is that the masses are made to suffer the collateral damage of such wars of ego. Add to it the abandonment of diligent governance, what the people are faced with assumes the character of double jeopardy.
The GOOD GOVERNANCE GROUP tabled four solid proposals in its submission, which are worthy of consideration; that the South East should, without prejudice to the constitutional provision, agree on a single term of four years for elected political office holders from the zone, starting from the 1999 election; that the three senatorial zones in each state of the South East take turns to produce a governor; that the question of which zone takes the next turn can be resolved through negotiation or a flip of the coin; and that the rotation principle should apply to other elected posts right from the wards.
Perhaps what the GROUP did not say is that this is a temporary arrangement, which, by the time it lasts 12 years, can give the South East stability, enhance development, and deepen democracy. I say this conscious of the fact that whereas democracy has a universal ingredients of regular free and fair elections, free press, constitutional rule, independent judiciary and all that, the character of governments to prop up these tenets and deliver the dividends of democracy to the people, still borrows from the peculiar circumstances and experience of the people.
Nigeria has found itself in an inextricable situation where it has to seriously borrow from its experience and history in order to nurse its democracy to fruition. That is what Switzerland did. Today it is the most stable and peaceful country in the world. That is why it is a safe haven for money stolen from Africa, Nigeria included. But Nigeria s case is such that people greedy for power for its own sake and what it can bring to them and their family, refuse for Nigeria to take the option that can guarantee peace.
There is so much corruption in governments that people are willing to kill to get there. Because people get away with their corrupt loot, no one wants to watch from the sideline for too long. Personally I detest the turn-by turn theory of governance as being vulgarly hawked by Commodore Olabode George. But given the dangers ahead, I am willing to give the GGG option a thought, and I think the South East leaders should. The environment is too charged for anything else; unless anybody has a more attractive alternative.
The South-East must make its own decision to save the zone from the predicted doom. The leaders should enter into discussion today with all parties concerned. The zone belongs to all of us, not to the politicians alone. The place must not be abandoned to the warring politicians to reduce to a war zone. This is the time for all those who profess love for the people to make the sacrifice that matches their avowals.
April 2002