2023: Entrenching `hereditary’ constituencies

The recent party primaries have been aptly described as an “unprincipled slush fund melee” to secure elected office in 2023, in which delegates shamefully sold their souls and conscience to the highest bidder while “hereditary politicians” quietly consolidated their hold on power.

Hereditary politicians aren’t the same as political dynasties that are created by families that have established their political or economic dominance over an electoral province, and multiple members are involved in politics at the same time. Perhaps the best known were the Kennedy and Bush family dynasties in America who earned their electoral victories through merit and conscientious preparation and individualism rather than family ties.

Hereditary politicians are the children of previous office holders with no political antecedents, brought on board simply to benefit from their name. Their electoral victories can be seen as being conferred by, or based upon “inheritance”, from their parents, grandparents or in-laws, who were past political office holders. It’s pertinent to note that the great African political leaders of the past such as Kwame Nkrumah, Julius Nyerere and Nelson Mandela were not children of former political office holders. Hereditary politics is not only increasing throughout Africa, it’s actually a worldwide phenomenon in which North Korea stands out as a prime example. Even a developed country like Japan in 2017 had over 25 per cent of elected lawmakers with family members who previously or currently held political office.

Under normal circumstances if previous family members failed in office, an aspirant’s political career would be a non-starter, but in Nigeria this isn’t how it works. A new crop of scandal-prone politicians has emerged who have entered the arena of hereditary politics armed with the financial resources to ensure their children’s electoral victory.

In the ongoing states’ party primaries of various political parties for various political offices, Abacha’s and Ganduje’s sons won in Kano State, Lamido’s son in Jigawa, El-Rufai’s son in Kaduna, Ajimobi’s and Akala’s sons in Oyo, Igbinedion’s daughter in Edo, Ibori’s and Okowa’s daughters in Delta, Fayose’s son in Ekiti and Ogunleye’s son in Lagos. Perhaps they shouldn’t be referred to as hereditary politicians because their success requires that they be installed while their parents are still alive. This is perhaps the reason why the political aspirations for the sons of former President Shehu Shagari and “Mr Fix It’ Anthony Anenih were frustrated which would most likely not have been the case had their parents still been alive.

Simply being a child of one of those who were disappointed while in political office doesn’t mean the aspirant would not perform better than their parents or fellow aspirants, it merely indicates a growing trend which if it continues means that a child of a political nobody will no longer be able to become a political somebody. On the surface it would appear contradictory that political leaders responsible for the nation’s dire circumstances and failure to fulfil its potential are still able to bequeath political office to their children, yet aspirants having a political parent and “godfather” are virtually guaranteed electoral success.  They inherit the value of name recognition, and benefit from an already established social network, financial resources and political ties cultivated by their parents all of which confer immense advantage during campaigning or fundraising.

When an aspirant’s name is well known, the electorate tends to see his parent’s previous accomplishment as something that the child can, or will also do, and voters will be inclined to choose the known name over a relatively unknown name. Under normal circumstances if the parent’s tenure wasn’t a resounding success, their child would not be elected. But in Nigeria this doesn’t apply. The overriding influence of money in Nigerian politics means the political fortunes of the children of hereditary politicians are not hampered by their parent’s poor performance and responsibility for the nation’s failures in governance. As a result most hereditary politicians lack compassion and charismatic personality, and have questionable self-awareness. They aren’t elected because of any previous achievement, but simply because they are relations of former or present office holders.

This doesn’t mean that hereditary politics should be condemned outright. It can be advantageous especially when the previous family member excelled in office and the aspirant has a well-earned reputation to live up to. Lamentably there are few such examples in Nigeria where a successful political career involves high finance and corrupt practices. After securing unjustifiable wealth and political power, former elected politicians pass down their ideology through generations. As a result hereditary politicians become trapped by their family antecedents and financial interests, making it difficult if not impossible for them to carry out the necessary reforms for the betterment of society which challenge the wellbeing of their families or support groups.

Another major pitfall in hereditary politics is referred to as the “Carnegie Effect” which manifests itself when a hereditary politicians who obtained their political positions with little effort, and inherited their fame and political network is devoid of any incentive to work hard. There is little doubt that Nigeria’s burgeoning “hereditary constituencies” represent a serious barrier to bringing fresh faces with modern thought processes into the political arena. As elections loom the nation needs to end the continuous cycle of failed governance. Now more than ever, is the time for the electorate to disdain money politics, be extremely careful in electing good new leaders, and be wary of entrenching hereditary constituencies.