The ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) has once again postponed its convention earlier scheduled for Saturday, February 26 to March 26. This is the third time such would happen.
Meanwhile, at their meeting in Ghana, governors of the opposition Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) failed to reach an agreement on the zoning of the party’s presidential ticket exclusively to the southern part of the country.
- NIGERIA DAILY: How Nigerian Politics Will Be Shaken By ‘The Third Force’
- Nigeria needs professionals in fishery technology – Provost
But more crucially, should President Muhammadu Buhari recant once again from signing into law the amended electoral bill sent to him by the National Assembly once the constitutional threshold of doing that passes, after the legislative body had done the needful on some of the areas the president had objected to in the earlier one sent to him, then that puts the February 18, 2023 elections date in serious question.
With the state of political uncertainty in the country now, and growing by the day, this is a wilful and needless invitation to chaos and danger to our democracy and ultimately to the country itself.
Despite this glaring evidence of sloppiness and unseriousness on their part, the political class will still want us to indulge their hollow assurances that things are on an even keel and that “there is no cause for alarm, we are on top of the situation’’ as they always say on such matters.
Let us call a spade by its name. As far as the 2023 elections are concerned with current developments in the country, there is real cause for alarm and our political elite, driven by a combination of power corruption, fractured by ethnic and religious factors and glaring political incompetence, are clearly not on top of the situation. The sooner Nigerians come to terms with this and prepare to address it collectively, the better to stave off the impending danger that will surely arise from our political complacency.
Per the present state of growing political uncertainty about the 2023 elections in the country, I can identify five groups from where this emanates.
The first category consists of political appointees namely, ministers/commissioners and special assistants who have issues with the provisions of the electoral bill which states that they must resign their appointments in order to contest for elective positions which many of them are interested in. The bill also calls for these sets of officers not to be considered as delegates for party conventions and congresses as is the norm.
As expected, this set of officers would kick against this aspect of the bill and use their vantage positions in the executive arm of government to either scuttle or delay its passage.
The second group are members of the National Assembly. Individually and collectively the National Assembly members are often engaged in political battles with governors from their home states and also with many members of the Federal Executive Council. It is not surprising therefore for state governors and ministers to suspect that the provisions of the electoral bill were tailored to place the National Assembly members at an advantage against them (governors and ministers).
The third group is made up of the state governors. Ever since the advent of the present democratic dispensation, governors as a collective have come to assume overbearing powers and influence that they have literarily become the real powers in the polity. They wield enormous powers over the two respective major political parties and are influential enough to determine the passage of bills at the National Assembly, court judgments by the judiciary and even in some cases executive policy by the presidency.
Presently, the governors are not only calling the shots in determining the political direction of both parties, they are also pressuring the presidency to jettison aspects of the electoral bill which they find objectionable to their interests as a group.
Party grandees are also in the mix. These are a collective of old, seasoned political war horses who are much travelled in the political road in Nigeria. They have seen it all and although not in a position to direct or influence executive and legislative policy, they are nevertheless significant players in the political, business and public spheres of life which makes them relevant in the political process and system. With their proven capacity to whip up public attention and sentiments to their cause and person, they can only be ignored to the peril of the polity.
Some of these personalities are presently in both political parties exhibiting an unmistakable gravitas, while some others, though outside the parties, are engaged in causes that have potential bearing on the political system either negatively or positively.
The last but certainly not the least of political institutions that can be identified in the subject matter of this article is the presidency. It is the nexus of executive power in the country and the grand protector of the Nigerian interest. But in our democratic experience since 1999, the presidency has often been used by its occupants and phalanx of officials as a platform for intrigues and power play to the detriment of the collective interest of Nigerians. Thus for instance President Obasanjo allegedly sought to use the presidency to push through his illegal third term project.
Presently President Buhari with his filibustering over the electoral bill and enduring pandering to partisan and sectional political interest groups, it must be said, is tendentiously endangering our constitutional and democratic growth of which he is a principal beneficiary.
This is hardly the democracy some of us fought the military to enable. And when and where the political elite is engaging in acts that seek to derail those democratic gains we braved the odds to bring about, we owe it a duty to speak and act legitimately to prevent it.
(To be continued)
