The rise of modern
states in virtually all the third world countries is faced with numerous
difficulties, such as the enthronement of state institution of governance,
greater citizens’ participation, peace and security, sustainable development
and the association demand for the state, provision of welfare. Therefore, the
forge in which the state dealt with these issues, define its character and its
relations with the political system. Devid conceived modern state as a set of
political apparatuses , defined from both ruler and ruled, with supreme
jurisdiction over demarcated area; backed by a claim to a monopoly of coercive
power, enjoying legitimacy as result of minimum level of support or loyalty
from the citizens. This implies that, all state whether big or small, has been
characterized by certain requisite element, viz, the distinct attribute of
sovereignty, presence of public institution, formal monopoly over instruments
of coercion and an impersonal, impartial and neutral bureaucracy
In spite of these
challenges, until more than a decade ago, it would have seemed almost
inconceivable of state collapse to be on the increase. Many modern states were
once collapse to be increase. Many modern state were once collapsed and many
more other now approach the verge of collapse and some much more ominously,
than others do. This nonetheless, it was opined that state collapse is a part
and a process of state reconstruction and formation. In the same vein, state
collapse hardly occurs spontaneously, and a lib or all at once. Whosesoever, it
happens, it drift disastrously by complex and conflict-ridden process of
decline, erosion of state functions. A number of scholar’s have described state
collapse in Liberia, Somalia, Mozambique, Ethiopia and Nigeria and risk of collapse in at least dozen other
state. The common theme here involves overwhelmed governments that are almost,
if not completely, unable to discharge basic government functions; the basic of
which is security and defense. This is the primary function of any state, which
all other political goods and services.
There is a correlation
between electoral malpractices and state collapse. That electoral malpractice
has major implications for state formation is by now quite obvious. It is also
clearly evident that election malpractice has drifted many countries into
conflicts, absence of law and order, forcing the state paralyzed,
incapacitated, hence unable to discharge basic function such as in the Democratic
Republic of Congo(2011), Kenya (2007), Zimbabwe(2008), Nigeria(2007) and(
2011). Based on these considerations, it is predictably feasible to argue that
incidence of state collapse in a number of Africa countries woes largely to flaw
and fraudulent electoral process.
In effect, electoral malpractice
refers to any wrongdoing affecting election procedures and materials, especially
by government officials and political party and candidate agents. It takes
different forms ranging from irregularities, deficiencies, flaws in electoral
management at different levels during the election process.
Drawing from the above
premise, foreign policy magazine reasoned that elections are almost universally
regarded as helpful in reducing conflict. It further explains that when
elections are rigged, conducted during active fighting or attract a low turnout,
they can inefficient or harmful to stability of state. As crisis group (2007)
point out while reporting on the conduct of the 2007 general election, ‘the
failure of April elections has major implications for Nigeria’s governance,
internal security, and stability’. The report goes further to identify the
consequential effects of the flawed elections are:
1.
Legitimacy deficient, as the product of
a deeply flawed, disputed election, it takes power in Abuja but has not yet
earned a place in the heart of the people
2.
Slide toward one-party state, since
1999, the PDP has steadily captured even more state and legislative seats at
state and national levels
3.
Diminished confidence in the democratic
process. The turn out during election have continued to shrink as follows 52.2%
in 1999, 64.8% in 2003, 57.2% in 2007and 53% in 2011
4.
Undermining conflict management, the
flawed elections also have implications for the country’s demotic conflict
management. Elaigwu(2011), cited about 286 selected cases of ethno-religious
conflict in Nigeria and about 373 selected cases of election-related conflict
in Nigeria from May 1999 to November 2011.
The
above notwithstanding, Eric had this to say about the 2011 general election,
while recognized that INEC had improved from the past performance, as had the
security force, he describe how the PDP had hijack ballot boxes at the gun
point in Akwa Ibom, and how result from Akwa Ibom had nonetheless been reported
at the collation center . Parden highlighted few flaws that characterize the
election. He explain ‘the urban areas were more accessible to domestic and
international observers, but the rural areas were where the vote rigging occurred. Ballot stuffing was
widespread, as well payments of about $2 per vote to rural people. Money was
paid even to the local opposition party observers to agree to the results’.
Based on these and other allegations. The HRW reported called an INEC to
release result, including the results for individual polling units, as means of
ensuring accountability.
Despite
these shortcomings, unlike the 1999,2003, and 2007 general elections, the 2011
general elections was adjudged by many as the best organized and conducted
election in Nigerian history, for instance, a former us envoy, Amb. Howard,
remarked that ‘the level of success and credibility recorded by Nigeria in 2011
general elections could make the country the standard bearer for democracy’.
The verdict
Dauda(2011)
observer that Nigeria’s April 2011 election was view by many as a critical test
of government’s move towards credible democracy. He further asserts that the
funding of most observer group have characterized the general election as
significant improvement over the previous poll, although not without problems’.
Thus, the post-election violence across the north highlighted lingering
communal tensions, grievances and mistrust.
The
question remain, why despite the applause to the 2011 general elections, the
reactions to the outcome posed a critical test to the legitimacy of the
government. Additionally, the successive elections in the country from the 1999
to 2011 had always patently posed potential landmines to state formation in
Nigeria.
Elaigwu
(2011) declared that leaders who are not genuinely elected lack legitimacy. Hence,
the crisis group observed that groups that did not believed in the legitimacy
of the new government threated a campaign to destabilize the regime. Specific
mention was made of the Campaign of Democracy (CD) and Adewala Balogun ,
executive director of the center for constitutional governance. The later had
warned that if yar’adua allows himself to be sworn in, based on that fraud
called election he will not enjoy our cooperation, and will ensure that he does
not enjoy his reign’, while the former that is CD says ‘it will challenge the
legitimacy of the government by any means possible’ . Be that as it may,
election malpractice in Nigeria serve as impetus to election violence in the
country thereby diminishing the citizens’ confidence in the democractic process
and political institution of the state. According to the executive summary on
the report of the judicial commission of inquiry into the post presidential
election disturbances in kaduna state, the remote causes of crisis of the
crisis; is the non-adherence of PDP zoning system as enshrined in its
constitution, desperate politician and winner-take-all-syndrome
Secondly, plethora of
literature abound on the multiplier effect of social factors such as horizontal
inequality, poverty, unemployment, social exclusion, lack of social cohesion,
and illiteracy to list but few. Towards the credibility of electoral process.
For instance, paden(2012) marveled over the incumbent assess to government
resources; drawing from the excess crude account to finance party campaigns,
deployment of security forces, controlling and hiring of powerful electoral commissioners
‘etc. while Jega attributed ‘crisis of expectation’ on the post-election
violence. In addition, Charles Dickson commented on the formation of the
government thus, ‘today, whether we like it or not, the president is a Christian,
the senate president is Christian, head of judiciary a Christian, SGF is a
Christian, national security adviser is also a Christian, the chief of army,
SSS Director, in fact welcome to the federal republic is of Christians’
Hence,
it is the views of this paper that even if conduct of the general elections
will be immune from criticism, the pre-election intrigue marred the credibility
of the whole exercise, hence, impair state formation in Nigeria.
An edited paper presented at the
National Conference on Perspective on
Elections and Challenges of Democracy in Nigeria. Organized by the Department of Political science BUK
This is interesting. Keep the faith Boss
ReplyDelete