Religion Governance And the Politics of Communal Clashes in Some States

Democracy without Democrats: what future for the military?

As we can see, many of those who are holding office today have held similar offices under even the most despotic of regimes. What all this means is that we have a semblance of democracy but we have no democrats. The disruptions created by the military have made it difficult for a democratic culture to emerge. Nigerians have made a lot of song and dance over the fact that they have seen the end of the military. But clearly, as I have pointed out above, we have not really seen the end of the military.

Nigeria did not have a transition to civil rule in the real sense of the word. For example, we attempted to transit to democracy with no constitution. What is more, unlike the Philippines, we did not have a transition in which the incumbent bowed to pressure and fled the political space. Unlike South Africa, we did not have four years to debate our bitterest fears and further slug it out with our worst foes. What we had here in Nigeria was a transition in which we were caught unprepared with the sudden death of General Abacha. Most members of the political class had either served under General Abacha or had been blackmailed into silence. Thus, his death caught us unawares and a hurried transition was one way of ensuring that the old order did not concede too much while the new order did not have a chance of resources to mobilize and take up position. The monitisation of the process also meant that only those with enough money could contest for power. Those who did not have had to seek godfathers. This is why we have ended up with no opposition because no one wants to be left out in the cold.

The military is only partially out of office, but it is in power. Their nearly three-decade-hold on the polity has come to mean that they now possess what the rest of us can only hope for: money and time. They used the apparatus of state and as we heard from the public hearings, money did change hands even beyond those who were within the corridors of power. Now that the rest of us are poor, the military now wishes to use our poverty to their own advantage. Where they cannot participate directly, they are prepared to use stooges. This is going to be one of the most dangerous threats to our democracy. If the military men insist that they will use their ill-gotten and stupendous wealth to fight for political power, then we are taking the shortest cut to anarchy. I have argued elsewhere that left to me, the military should be banned from active politics and electoral office for the first ten years of our democracy. If you consider this injustice, then I do not know what you will call the thirty years that they shut us out of circulation. This is an issue that we must confront without emotions. I believe that if we do not deal with this issue, we shall have people trying to use the handle of democracy to pull us back to the backwaters so that they can continue out of uniform what they did in uniform. I am not implying that soldiers are men of no credibility. I only believe that they can use the wealth that they have gathered to create industries, build hotels, engage in transportation services, employ the jobless and so on.

The Nigerian state: One people, One Nation, One Constitution:

It is an irony but true that over two years into our political dispensation, we are not so sure if we have a Constitution. We are operating a Constitution that is at the same time under review. The issues of Revenue Allocation, the status of the Nigerian state, the rights of citizens under the Constitution and the supremacy of that document are things that we must treat with the seriousness that they deserves. We must now begin to see beyond the hypocrisy of those who are determined to use the provisions of this Constitution to achieve their selfish ends. The issue of what Nigeria means to all of us can only be hammered out under a Constitution. The Constitution is for now the only instrument of legitimacy that a plural and heterogeneous society like ours can look up to. For example, we do not have a Queen like the British, we do not have a national religion like the Saudis, we do not have a communist human demigod like the Cubans, we do not have a King like the people of Lesotho and so on. Democracy, nations and institutions function on mythologies. We do not have a national myth that serves as a rallying point. Even at a local level, we can see that despite their anomaly in a democracy, we have continued to hold on to traditional rulers (even though they do not have a place in democracy) largely because they are a rallying point in a period of crises. And since the nation is in permanent crises, the leaders will continue to pay to keep them. I believe that a Constitution is an imperative or a basis for instituting our democracy. This point needs to be underscored because we have opted for democracy. We must note that we did not have to choose democracy. We could have chosen to live under a Monarchy, we could have opted for Autocracy, Plutocracy, or even Feudalism. Each of these systems has its basis for existence. But since we have opted for democracy, the Constitution must become the rallying point in our struggle for justice, democracy and nationhood.

Power without Office or Office without Power?

The politics of the moment is so violent because every- one wants to enter the very narrow door of public office. Yet, how many Nigerians can hold public office at a time? All put together, from the local government to the state and federal level, there are less than one million offices to be filled. And that is a gross exaggeration which takes in even the minutest details of what is called office. Even if this were the case, what are the remaining Nigerians supposed to do? I think we need to underscore the fact that politics is not about holding office, it is about the organisation of power, its distribution and the best strategies for ensuring equity. If we go back to Ghandi's Seven Social Sins, we shall understand why we are treading a very dangerous path. If we insist that politics is about holding office and that only those who worked for the party or who are registered for the party can hold public offices, then we are in for a long haul of violence. Politics will then become an agency for distributing booty and it also means that the thugs who have worked for the party with brawn will rule the day. It means that those who have no wish to join the party but love the nation with all their hearts and are making their contributions as teachers, labourers, or doing their own work have no hope for any form of participation. This is why politics deteriorates to an investment and this is why no one wants to lose. Since no one wants to lose, politics becomes violent and the capture of raw power becomes the driving force, no more, no less. This is dangerous, but it has resonance in a very poor society like Nigeria. This is why injustice persists because, politics then is narrow and there is no room for fresh ideas, no room for opposition. There is only one hymn book and no one must sing outside that hymn book. This democracy is dangerous because, it automatically creates an US vs. THEM scenario. It also introduces Majoritarian democracy which has a direct correlation with exclusion. These are some of the unknown tendencies that produce violence, sectarianism and hate in African politics. Opposition becomes a dangerous preoccupation and the circle commences all over again.

We must distinguish between Power and Office. It is possible to be In Office but not In Power just as it is possible to be In Power without being In Office. For example, Nelson Mandela, even while in prison wielded more power and commanded more respect and integrity internationally than those who kept him in prison. An Sang Su Kyii in Burma, today, is not in office despite winning an election, but she is more respected and known than those who have kept her captive. Mahatma Ghandi never held any public office despite the opportunities and yet, he is the most respected and revered Indian leader. Mother Theresa did not hold any public office, but in her poverty, she was revered as a living Saint. The examples are many. We must note that in a plural society such as ours, our politicians need to understand the very complex web of leader and leadership structures that can be harmonized and channelled for the greater good. It is not only politicians that have power. As the politicians themselves know very well, they will come and go, but there are certain categories of people whose power and influence transcend politics and its ephemeral time frame. These include churchmen, traditional rulers, officers of civil society organizations etc. We must find a common ground so as to make politics more people and community friendly. It is the duty of intellectuals to show this path and as part of the middle class, they must offer democracy the intellectual framework for excellence. This class spreads across all levels of life. Even George W. Bush, in secular America, has woken up to the fact that there is need to concretely woo the churches in the area of rendering services that they have excelled in over the centuries. We can learn from there.

The Search for a Moral Balance

The way God has crept into our national life today is a matter of great concern. Unfortunately, this is a theme that we have not really explored intellectually. All we tend to hear is that religion has been commercialized and so on. What has become very clear though is that Nigerians now know and they also see that there is no connection between these visible expressions of religiosity and faith. Thus, there are too many Cains and far too few Abels. Every thing now in this country, from fighting for an elective office, seeking promotion, playing football or seeking a contract, are all in the hands of God. Everything will happen in Jesus Name. Right now, from armed robbers to the greatest tricksters, everyone is seeking the grace of God to succeed. Indeed, this skewed religion has had profound implications for our economic and political failures. Think about those many pastors who doubled as chairmen of many a failed banks some ten years ago. Think about those many pastors who still talk about prosperity when the economy is daily shrinking. Think about those pastors who went round praying and spiritually arming one dictator, governor and office holders, after the other. Now, thanks to the war of the young and famous pastors in Lagos, we now hear what some of us had always suspected or known long ago: that demonology had replaced theology!

This nation needs to attain a certain moral balance, but that will not happen if the country does not return to the path of economic revival. The government of course is currently, if arrogantly, riding a high horse called privatisation. Somehow, I have problems with the agenda on two counts.

First of all, I find it strange that the government will pursue privatisation with so much speed at a time when nothing has been done to put money in the hands of ordinary citizens (I hear though that the government is offering ten thousand naira to poor people to buy shares!). I feel that the kind of open discussion that needed to precede the privatisation has not taken place.

Secondly, this country is at present in the hands of a few individuals. As we saw when the government made a feeble if laughable attempt to confiscate the properties of some senior military men. They turned around and repurchased their own properties even at a higher price! It would seem that one benefit to arise from this privatisation is that at least the core North in its own admission is far more confident now than it has ever been. I tend to be on the side of those who argue that the system is not transparent.

Transparency is not just about cameras and paper chasing. Transparency is about participation and according people a certain amount of right to say "No, "Wait a little," or "Please I need some more information." It would seem to me that this project has defied popular views. Nigeria has been in private pockets any way, so there is very little to say again. As the Hausa say, Da ruwan kifi a ke dafa kifi ( You catch a fish from the water, and you use the same water to cook it). If Nigerians remain poor, the pursuit of this moral balance will be a mirage because, they will remain instruments of deceit in the hands of the many crooks who masquerade as harbingers of good news. Had the Americans stopped David Koresh much earlier, perhaps there would have been no Oklahoma bombing. As we saw, flushing out Otokoto at the time the government did was the right thing. When religion becomes a cover for the wrong thing, the nation pays the price.

A final note on the issue of the Sharia. Again, like a lot of other things, this government has been pussy footing and hoping that the issue will go away. Although we are not in a military regime and the President cannot directly interfere in the affairs of a state, the lives of ALL citizens are in his hands. What has been going on so far in some states in the North is not about religion. If Nigeria does not sieve the chaff from the grain early enough, we could end up in far greater trouble than we can imagine. Unlike the economic Structural Adjustment Programme which made a few crooks very rich, I believe that for the structural adjustment of this nation to succeed, it must be anchored on a sound moral balance supported by the rule of law.

Summary and Conclusion

My conclusion in this paper is that government and its agencies have been the basis for the conflict that has triggered off what we call communal violence. Good governance by itself exists only on paper and those who govern us tend to believe that they know what is good for us and that we should only be patient with them. Government is the culprit, but government itself is the one that sets up the commissions to investigate issues that they themselves have caused. There is need for us to establish why this union has not worked for the common good. I have tried to show that beyond apportioning blames to institutions, regions, ethnic groups or even the elites, we need to re-examine ourselves. I believe that if we are able to lay down the right strategies, develop the right mental discipline to take on the challenges of democracy, we can build a great nation.

I have also tried to argue that our transition is still largely inconclusive because, it is still largely a continuation of the game of yesterday by other means. There are too many of the old order in the new order and this is bound to delay the birth of the new order. I conclude that this new order must be anchored on a sound moral framework that can guarantee the greatest happiness to the greatest number of people as opposed to the present arrangement that has extended the greatest privileges to the smallest number of elites. There has been the thinking that Nigeria is difficult to administer because there are too many ethnic groups. No, these differences can be a blessing indeed if properly managed. After all, as we see in the Holy Bible, David's coat was so beautiful because it was a coat of many colours. We can use our differences to weave a beautiful tapestry of national unity. God bless our dear fatherland. May He show us the way and give us the wisdom to follow Him so we can all contribute to building a united, just and democratic nation. I thank you for your very kind attention and God bless our fatherland.

April 2002