I Love Francis Arthur Nzeribe

By 

Edwin Madunagu

Senator Francis Arthur Nzeribe embodies the contradictions in the Nigerian political system. His very life exposes the hypocrisies in the declarations, pretensions and assumptions of the ruling political class, of which he is a prominent member. Put differently, Nzeribe apprehends the contradictions and hypocrisies in the system and exposes them by acting on them - sometimes honestly, believing in them and at other times, cynically, challenging critics and his fellow political players, to engage him, not generally or abstractly, but concretely. Insisting that his actions are legal, constitutional and democratic he invites his opponents to enter refutations. Nzeribe abhors generalisations: he may not hate political philosophers, but he abhors philosophical intrusion into practical politics and power games. He avoids, and insists others must avoid, evasions and deviations in political arguments. Nzeribe is a faithful mirror of the political class of which he is a proud member. If you look at him, you see yourself. If you don't like what you see, you achieve nothing by criticising the mirror: you have to change yourself.

I recall the 1992 presidential primaries under Babangida's political transition programme. The military government had decreed that each of the two political parties which it created - the Social Democratic Party (SDP) and National Republican Convention (NRC) - must go through primaries to choose the presidential flag bearer in an election scheduled for the second half of that year. The primaries, not surprisingly were massively and shamelessly rigged in both parties, but more viciously in SDP - which is my focus here. Arthur Nzeribe was one of the candidates who contested the primaries in the party. In rejecting the result Nzeribe admitted, and most of the other candidates agreed, that the votes were rigged - an expression used in Nigerian electoral politics to describe one or more of the following crimes: inflation of the voters' register with the addition of "ghost" voters who then go on to "vote" like real human beings; total abandonment of voters' registers; inflation or deflation of votes cast; fraudulent collation and addition of votes; disenfranchisement of qualified voters; purchase, or illegal printing of ballot papers; etc.

Nzeribe admitted that all these atrocities took place. He was one with his protesting compatriots on this point. And everyone was happy. But then he went two steps further, confusing and embarrassing the other protesters. Now, standing alone, Nzeribe admitted that everyone, including the officially declared winners and losers and (by implication) himself took part in the rigging. That was the first blow, and it was devastating. Then the second blow: He said that if rigging was a crime, then the practice of a candidate crossing to an opponent's "territory" to rig was not only more criminal but also subversive of common class interests. Let me explain: If candidates rigged only in their geopolitical territories, there would have been as equalisation of rigging opportunity and there would have been a greater possibility of the result being generally acceptable if the candidates were, otherwise, honest people. Those who would protest would be the "unserious" candidates and they would be ignored by the party leaders, the electoral authorities and the government. What seemed to anger Nzeribe most was the fact that some SDP candidates crossed Rivers Niger and Benue to rig. This greedy action, in his view, subverted the cohesion of the political class.

Senator Nzeribe and his colleagues in the National Assembly swore to uphold and defend the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. What this means is that the National Assemblymen and women swore that their activities would be guided by the letters and spirit of that constitution. That constitution contains the provision for the impeachment of the president and state governors. Nzeribe studied these constitutional provisions, and mastered them. He then started to watch the actions of the president and his ministers and assistants. When he was satisfied that he had got sufficient information on executive "misconduct" and "abuse of office" he prepared an impeachment notice against the president and tabled this before the senate. Then heaven broke loose. His colleagues - from the three parties - descended on him. It was, for them, immaterial whether Nzeribe followed the constitutional procedure or not, it was immaterial whether the notice had or lacked merit. His crime was that by tabling an impeachment notice against president, he was embarking on a mission to destroy the "nascent democracy". The senate president who permitted the notice to be tabled was never forgiven. What Nzeribe's experience demonstrated was that the impeachment provision, like many other provisions in the 1999 Constitution, was not meant to be taken seriously, the swearing of the Senators to uphold and defend the constitution notwithstanding. Nzeribe practically demonstrated this hypocrisy.

Arthur Nzeribe says that the most critical national assignment for his newest organisation, the Movement for National Accommodation and Consensus (MONAC), is to persuade the registered political parties to adopt President Olusegun Obasanjo as consensus presidential candidate in the 2003 elections. His argument on the practicability of the scheme goes somewhat like this: "The leadership of Obasanjo's party, the People's Democratic Party (PDP), has emphasised several times that Obasanjo would be the party's candidate for the 2003 presidential election; the governors of the Alliance for Democracy (AD) are more pro-Obasanjo than the PDP; if my party, the All Peoples Party (APP), was unable to produce a presidential candidate in the 1999 presidential election - when the political situation was more favourable - what are the prospects of its being able to produce a candidate in 2003? So, you see that, objectively, the three political parties are on the way to adopting President Obasanjo for the 2003 presidential election. All that MONAC is doing is to make the adoption process a smooth one by making it more self-conscious and convincing the pockets of opposition that still exists."

Nzeribe recalls what happened under General Sani Abacha to show not only that the idea of consensus candidate is not a strange one, but also that it has a concrete historical precedent. He reminds his interviewers and, through them, the Nigerian public, that each of the five political parties in Abacha's transition programme adopted the General as presidential candidate for the election fixed for the second half of 1998. If consensus could be achieved with five political parties, why should it not be achievable with three parties that are already, if instinctively, moving in that direction? Both Nzeribe and his interviewers know that those who played the leading roles in the adoption of Abacha as consensus candidate are in leading positions in Obasanjo's Republic, its institutions and parties. So the issue of political morality is not seriously raised. And if it is not raised, Nzeribe will not answer it. Asked why Obasanjo should be adopted as a consensus candidate when everyone knows that the man has not "performed", Nzeribe replies that the question of "performance" does not arise. The issue is to make peace between the factions of the political class and preserve their class power.

Like all the other members of the political class, Nzeribe is openly and formally opposed to corruption. But unlike many of his compatriots, he knows and would admit that corruption takes place in the institutions of state, including the senate. His position: when you are charged by the competent authority, honestly or hypocritically, you must submit yourself to investigation and, if found guilty, you must accept the sanctions officially prescribed.

In electoral politics, Nzeribe is not, in principle, opposed to giving "mobilisation", "logistics" and "materials". But he would expect that in strategic or caucus discussions these things should be called their real name, money, so as to avoid costly misunderstanding. In other words, there is a limit to the use of metaphors. Furthermore in offering and distributing election "materials," party leaders and workers should be sensitive to the public positions and pretensions of the recipients. Illustration: while some supporters can be given "materials" openly and in the day, others can only be given secretly and at night; and while some supporters come to collect theirs, others have theirs brought to them. Nzeribe is not opposed to populism, but he expects a serious politician to know its limit. Illustration: However popular a senator may be in the country, the question of his or her suspension from the senate will be decided not by the millions of his or her supporters and admirers, but by the senators of the Federal Republic of Nigeria  and they are just about a hundred. 

I love Nzeribe.