Project Description

CHAPTER ONE

Introduction

1.1 Background of the Study

Electoral stability has remained a desirable feature and a measure of performance of every democratic state. Meanwhile, modern conception of democracy has come a long way from its classical notion, as well as its practice, whose history can be traced to ancient Greece where democracy is generally believed to have emanated from as a result of the attempts in the Greek city-state of Athens to reform, organize and manage its political community about two thousand five hundred years ago (Dunn, 1993 cited in Jega 2007).

Moreover, modern notions of democracy evolved from attempts to address the question of absolutism and the assumptions of sovereign power of monarchs over their people societies. For instance, the 17^th century popular rebellion against the English monarchy led by Oliver Cromwell (1642) led to a political movement which questioned absolutist monarchical rule and created the atmosphere within which the notion of popular sovereignty and representative government flourished. To this end, scholars have variously argued that democracy is a system of government that provides for a meaningful and periodic competition for positions of government power, the importance of sustaining electoral stability via a free and fair electoral process has also been appreciated as a critical component of any effort to enthrone a democratically responsive and development-focused government. Hence, election remains a defining feature of modern democracy while the electoral process that delivers periodic and genuine election is sine qua non for the existence and consolidation of democracy and responsible government.

It is apposite to state that leadership is an essential feature of all government and the character of political leadership determines to a great extent the stability of the polity especially the electoral system. Thus, credible and transparent leadership is indispensable if the government is to succeed and maintain a stable electoral system. Conversely, weak leadership routinizes governance, engenders instability and contributes to government failures. More so, leadership is a symbolic activity mediated by culture, for leaders as ‘identity entrepreneurs’ are engaged in providing myths/visions to create, reshape or enhance national and other political cultures. In the process, leaders and followers themselves are affected by what they help create.

Africa has been undergoing intense period of democratization in the past two decades. Central to this process is the need to ensure smooth democratic transition and electoral stability so as to ensure that the continent does not reverse to its authoritarian past. For instance, between 1990 and 1994, thirty-one out of forty-one countries that have not had multi-party elections in the continent did so (Diouf 1998 as cited in Ibrahim 2003). However, it has been noted that deficiencies in capacity of political leadership debilitate all sectors of government, impede progress in electoral system directly constrain the stability of the electoral system in Africa.

Nigerian experience remains traumatic as far as electoral stability is concerned. Have strenuously struggled for democracy under authoritarian military rule, considerable excitement and anticipation accompanied the transfer of power from the military to civilians with the inauguration of the elected civilian administration in 1999. Regrettably, the political leadership in Nigeria has been unable to deliver the ‘promised cargo’ as stable electoral system has remained a mirage owing to the fact that  Nigeria is plagued by home grown enemy that is, the political ineptitude, mediocrity, indiscipline and corruption of the ruling class (see Achebe, 2012).

While Nigerians are generally committed to exercising their civic responsibilities, including voting for those they want to exercise political power, the political class has developed systematic techniques for frustrating citizens in their civic engagement through rigging and electoral fraud (Ibrahim 2007 in Ibrahim J. & Dauda D. 2010:18).

Conversely, Ghana has remained a paragon of electoral stability compared to most other countries in Africa. Ghana has shown practical ability of the political leadership to transform an authoritarian militarized state into a legitimate one. The Ghanaian model is about the reinstatement of institutions, the rule of law, pluralist elections, press freedom, effective local government and public probity in a state that has suffered considerable decay (Ibrahim 2003). It exemplifies a country with gradual improvement of state efficacy, democratic governance and electoral stability. For instance, between 1999 and 2011, Ghana has been able to organize over three elections internationally acclaimed to be peaceful and successful. These successful elections, democratic transitions and alternation in political power have been attributed to the character of its political leadership and the way and manner in which they conduct the affairs of the state.

Apparently, Nigeria and Ghana share similar history in that they returned to constitutional democratic dispensation in the same decade – 1992 for Ghana and 1999 for Nigeria. However, while Ghana has decisively maintained stable electoral system within the period 1999 to 2011, Nigeria’s electoral process remains one of the most unstable in the region. The electoral instability in Nigeria and the relative stability of its close neighbor have generated serious debate among scholars. Scholars like Alumona (2007); Oladipupo (2011); Igbafe & Offiong (2007) have tried to analyze the state of instability in Nigeria without actually establishing the nexus between political leadership and electoral stability. Other scholars have attributed the instability in the electoral system of Nigeria to long years of military rule (e.g. Jega 2007: Ibrahim 2003), yet many other scholars affirmed that Ghana remains a paragon of stability in the region without actually linking the character of political leadership to the stability of the electoral system (see Joseph 2010; Through 2011; Meissner 2010; Ibrahim 2003). This study therefore sets out to interrogate the link between the political leadership and electoral stability in Nigeria and Ghana between 1999 and 2011.

 

1.2 Statement of the Problem

Democratisation processes and discourses on democracy in contemporary Africa influenced by the demise of the Soviet Union and communist regimes in Eastern Europe  have dramatically opened up the African space for acceleration of the third or fourth wave of  democratization and has led to the emergence of market-driven democratic transitions which unfortunately are mostly illiberal, not desirably participatory, barely representative and constrained by lack of accountability and bad governance (Jega, 2007:19).

Furthermore, Ake (cited in Jega 2007:20) noted that many African cases of transition to democracy have spawned up what may be referred to as democracy without democrats or democratic dividends. He argued that democratization may have opened up an hitherto closed political space, but that space is still highly exclusive and restrictive, and populated by enormous threats to political stability. To this end, extant literature on the character of political leadership in Africa and its impacts on various economic and political variables in the continent seems to be in agreement on the poor quality of political leadership in Africa and the inability of these leaders evolve and sustain stable democratic polity within the content.  It has been argued that political leadership in Africa are alienated from themselves and lacks sense of direction hence, there is overpoliticisation of social life, political struggle has become so intense and so absorbing that politics becomes the means for appropriation and accumulation Ake (cited in Ihonvbere 1989:60). As a corollary, electoral stability remains scarce democratic virtue in African states as the premium on political power has risen and the political elites employ every means to cling to power and reproduce themselves.

Despite the above argument that Africa as a whole is characterized by poor leadership and political instability, contemporary discourse reveals that while some countries continue to languish in instability, others have made decisive effort to emancipate themselves from the scourge of poor leadership and political instability. Scholars agree that corruption is an inherent character of political leadership in Nigeria. They argue that corruption which has passed an alarming stage and entered the fatal stage has always been there since independence and there is a unanimity of views across regimes and at different levels of government (see Ibeanu & Egwu 2007; Achebe 2012).

The quest to use the state as a means of accumulation has led to political conflict in the country. Hence political conflict has become an endemic feature of the political system which is characterized by electoral fraud and all forms of electoral malpractices (Nwosu, 2007; Alumona, 2007; Igbafe & Offiong 2007 etc). Conversely, Ghana which is among the geographical closest neighbor of Nigeria has been averred to be a paragon of stability and a veritable example for its peers in stabilizing the political system (Throup 2011; Meissner 2010; Joseph 2010). Altogether, these explanations hardly illuminate the understanding of the nexus between political leadership and electoral instability particularly in Nigeria and Ghana, between 1999 and 2011. In the light of the above, this study attempts to redress the observed shortcomings by posing the following research questions:

1. Does the corrupt character of the political leadership in Nigeria undermine the viability of electoral institutions more in Nigeria than in Ghana?
2. Has the failure of Nigeria’s political leadership to evolve strong electoral institution engendered electoral instability in Nigeria relative to Ghana?
3. Did the credible management of election outcome by the political leadership in Ghana account for the relative electoral stability compared to Nigeria?

 

1.3 Objectives of the Study

The broad objective of this study is to examine the nexus between the character of political leadership and electoral stability in Nigeria and Ghana from 1999 to 2011. Its specific objectives are however to:

1. Investigate whether the corrupt character of the political leadership in Nigeria undermine the viability of electoral institutions more in Nigeria than in Ghana.
2. Examine how the failure of Nigeria’s political leadership to evolve strong electoral institution engenders electoral instability in Nigeria relative to Ghana.
3. Analyze how the management of electoral outcome by the political leadership in Ghana and Nigeria account for the varying level of electoral stability in both countries.

 

 

 

1.4 Significance of the Study

The study is of both theoretical and practical significance. At the theoretical level, it aims to explore how the character of political leadership in Africa affects the stability of the electoral system using Nigeria and Ghana as case studies for basis of comparative analysis. It shows how the corrupt character of the political leadership in Nigeria undermines the viability of the electoral institutions in Nigeria relative to Ghana, and how this failure to evolve viable electoral institution engender electoral instability more in Nigeria than in Ghana. The study seeks in addition to bridge the existing gap in knowledge on the nexus between political leadership and electoral stability by demonstrating how the character of leadership in the countries under study and the concomitant impacts on electoral institution and processes affect the electoral stability in these countries. Thus, the study shall contribute to knowledge on the subject matter and serve as a resource material for other scholars and students alike.

Practically, the study attempts to explicate the real reason for electoral instability in Nigeria and the relative stability in Ghana currently averred as the paragon of stability in Africa. To this end, the study shall arm leaders with the necessary knowledge and information needed to pursue electoral stability in Nigeria.

 

1.5 Literature Review

1.5.1 Political Leadership & Electoral Stability

The concept of political leadership is difficult to define essentially, because the character of political leadership differs across the globe and therefore tends to affect how various scholars caption the concept. However, most literature have tried to grapple with the concept in order to tease out meaning at least for analytical purposes, for instance, pockets of scholars have noted that the character of the political leadership is dependent on institutional, cultural and historical contexts and situations – both particular and general (Blondel 1987; Wildavsky 2006; Wildavsky 1989; Klenke 1996).

Ogbeidi (2012) noted that political leadership refers not only to the government or to the leadership of an organised state, but embrace the totality of the political class that has the capacity to exert influence on the machineries of government even from behind the scene. According to him Political Leadership refers to the ruling class that bears the responsibility of managing the affairs and resources of a political entity by setting and influencing policy priorities affecting the territory through different decision-making structures and institutions created for the orderly development of the territory. It could also be described as the human element that operates the machineries of government on behalf of an organised territory. This includes people who hold decision making positions in government, and people who seek those positions, whether by means of election, coup d’état, appointment, electoral fraud, conquest, right of inheritance or other means. In his view, political leadership broadly defined goes beyond the ruling elites that directly manage the affairs of a territory. He noted that leadership failure is the major problem with Nigeria and that no country can develop strong institutions without the benefits of good leadership, leaders who will create the conditions necessary for building and sustaining strong institutions. Weber (2010) opined that when the concept of leadership is understood as a process (prescriptive) rather than as a position (descriptive), it commonly refers to the practice of constructing or reconstructing situations that require public attention. He noted that democratic political leadership is a social process in which individuals engage public situations or problems to construct or reconstruct ways of thinking about them to debate and address them together in collective action aimed at the good of a majority of citizens while respecting norms of open and fair decision making. Weber examined various theories of democratic political leadership and concluded that irrespective of the approach employed to explain the term, democratic political leadership is a kind of process which serves the public interest, derives its authority from the public; and is accountable to those whom it is intended to serve.  Other scholars like Gormley-Heenan (2001) agree that the political outcomes depends to a great extent on the nature of political leadership, he argued that:

1) many political processes and peace processes are essentially elite driven, with a relatively small number of people responsible for making final decisions and implementing policy,

2) many violent societies are prone to political leaders who are willing to manipulate a delicate situation, who do not necessarily behave in an altruistic fashion and who actively canvass against

a peaceful settlement of conflict if such a settlement collides with their own interests,

3) many other variables are dependent on political leadership in the transformation of a conflict. For example, structural and

issue transformations in a conflict can really only occur when promoted by the leadership of conflictual positions.

 

The foregoing definitions of leadership shows that political leadership plays  very important roles in the management of state affairs, its success and/or failure. Hence the nature of political leadership in any country can significantly influence the electoral stability of the country.

Meanwhile, Nwankwo (2006) examined elections and democratic governability in Nigeria and argued that despite changes introduced under the electoral Act of 2001/2002, it reproduced the basic framework of the traditional electoral system of the country, namely single member plurality system, which she uses at all national, state and local council elections. According to him the electoral system is an

 ensemble of rules and practices adopted in determining access of actors to the principal political offices of a community, the rules, modes or mechanisms according to which the political preferences of voters among alternative persons/parties may be expressed and according to which votes are translated into mandates in parliament or in the executive. (Nohlen 1996:21 cited in Nwankwo 2006:182)

 

In his view, Alumona (2007) opined that elections remain the main processes via which the people exercise their constituent power and sovereignty and also decide at periodic intervals who gets what, how and why. He noted that elections in Nigeria have a chequered history as the organization of free and fair election has remained problematic mainly because of the long years of military rule and its concomitant effects on the political culture. The overall implication of this according to him has been the frequent break down of the democratic process as recent elections show that political office seekers have refused to use elections as an avenue to test their legitimacy.

In an extensive and persuasive essay, Ake in Ihonvbere (1989) while analyzing leadership problems in Africa noted that leaders in Africa cannot function because it has no sense of identity or integrity and no confidence, neither does it know where it is coming from or where it is going. As a result the environment is characterized by political repression and overpoliticization of social life as political leaders have chosen to disenfranchise the people politically and remain permanently in power through political repression. He argued categorically that:

1. As politics is repressed, it becomes more and more primary and marginalizes everything else including economic development.
2. As politics becomes primary, the premium on political power rises and political competition becomes increasingly intense leading to the militarization of not only politics but also society to the detriment of economic development.

 

He added that as a result of the intensity and all-absorbing nature of politics in Africa, politics becomes, for the political leadership and entire political class, the means for appropriation and accumulation. Thus, the argument put forward by Ake depicts the true character and nature of the political leaders in Africa and the attendant instability it generates.

Ibrahim (2007) in Ibrahim  & Dauda (2010: 51) agrees that the success or failure of any electoral commission is not only dependent on the degree of availability of the requisite human, material and infrastructural tools at the disposal of its staff to work, but also on the quality and style of its leadership in terms of competence, capacity, procedural mechanism for decision-making and organisational and strategic ability. Examining factors that could enhance stability in the polity Boafo-Arthur (2008) noted inter alia that one source of stability is the capability of political leadership to manage conflicting and competing societal interests. The system’s capability to successfully mediate various competing and at times contentious interests helps in sustaining national stability. Where ethnic as well as religious proclivities assume extremist forms, for instance, the conflict management capability of the system is openly challenged. The ability to forestall the degeneration of such competing demands into open intra-state conflict goes a long way in enhancing the stability of the system. He noted that there have been several examples in the sub-region where the inability of political leaders to manage conflicts has led to total breakdown of the system.

Meanwhile, in their analytical study, Ojo & Ojo (2012) examined leadership within the context of Nigeria’s governance and argues that effective leadership can be used to achieve political stability and help reverse the nation’s drift and slide to anarchy. In effect, the scholars noted that the intensity of political crisis in the country could lead to total breakdown of law and order, they advocated for transparency and efficiency within the leadership circle.

 

1.5.2 Political leadership & Electoral Stability in Nigeria

The character of political leadership in Nigeria has indeed impacted on the stability of the electoral system. This has continued to manifest in the polity even with the return to civil rule in 1999. In fact, the electoral system of the country has been characterized as one of the most unstable in the West African subregion in recent times (Boafo-Arthur, 2008; Oladipupo 2011).

In a very persuasive and emotional literature, Achebe (2012) blamed the political leadership in Nigeria for all the problems of the country especially the vicious cycle of political crises in the country. He described the leadership in Nigeria as corrupt, indiscipline and profligate and noted that the whole electoral process is characterized by election rigging, violence and intimidation of the general public by those in power. Achebe decried that Nigeria is plagued by “home grown enemy: the political ineptitude, mediocrity, indiscipline, ethnic bigotry, and corruption of the ruling class.

According to Ibrahim  & Dauda (2010) the sad history of electoral fraud or rigging has been having serious implications for our(Nigeria’s) democratic future because the phenomenon is growing rather than declining. As the elections go by, the principal forms of rigging and fraud have been increasing and perfected in successive elections since 1964, 1965, 1979, 1983, 1999, 2003 and 2007. The result is that elections have become turning points in which the outcomes have been the subversion of the democratic process rather than its consolidation. Not surprisingly, major political conflicts have emerged around rigged elections and fraud. According to them, the 1983 elections occupy a special place in the history of electoral fraud in Nigeria, as competitive rigging reached its apogee, then:

All sorts of strategies and stratagems including manipulation of the ballot or “rigging” were employed in order to win elections. Each of the opposition parties used its local power of incumbency to retain power and/or to improve its position vis-à-vis other contenders. However, federal might was used to dislodge state governors in Anambra, Oyo, Kaduna, Gongola and Borno states, thus raising NPN’s tally of governorships from seven to twelve states, reversing the power structure existing before the election when opposition parties had twelve against NPN’s seven governors (Kurfi 2005:97 in Ibrahim 2007 in Ibrahim J. & Dauda D. 2010:18 ).

 

The authors further argue that Nigeria is a society where the majority of the members of the political class (leaders) appear not to believe in free and fair elections as a mechanism for societal transformation. Rather, they see electoral institutions as a hindrance to their inordinate ambition to dominate the political system. This, by implication, affects the quality of leadership and the eventual disenchantment by the people, a major challenge in Nigeria is

DOWNLOAD (CHAPTER 1-5)