On Sunday, Arise News and the Centre for Democracy and Development (CDD) organised the first of a series of town hall meetings for candidates contesting the 2023 elections. The first outing was set for the top four presidential candidates. They were selected based on the performance of their parties in an online survey conducted by CDD. The leading parties were LP, APC, PDP and NNPP. The APC presidential candidate, Bola Ahmed Tinubu, however, opted not to participate. This was not surprising as he had declined all other previous invitations to participate in public debates. Apparently, he only participates in forums he has organised himself with audiences that are sourced by his own supporters. I believe that is not the best approach. All candidates should be ready, willing and able to participate in public platforms where other candidates are present to challenge them. Running away and hiding in “secured audiences” only gives credibility to rumours circulating about his allegedly reduced capacity to participate in a rigorous campaign. Candidates that cannot even campaign effectively in the run up to the elections cannot have the energy to govern effectively should they win. But then, that is a matter for voters to decide on. The PRP was brought in to replace the APC in the townhall.
The other preliminary issue was that the PDP candidate, Atiku Abubakar, did not turn up for the debate. It was reported that he was abroad and had sent his running mate to represent him. A number of people in the audience complained loudly that they wanted only presidential candidates and not running mates but at the end of the day, the presentations started. The participants were a former governor of Kano State and presidential candidate of the New Nigeria People’s Party (NNPP), Rabiu Kwankwaso; a former governor of Anambra State and presidential candidate of the Labour Party, Mr. Peter Obi; the Governor of Delta State and vice-presidential candidate of the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP), Ifeanyi Okowa, who stood in for his principal, Atiku Abubakar, and the presidential candidate of the Peoples Redemption Party (PRP), Mr. Kola Abiola.
An important feature of the townhall was that all the candidates were informed that the Premium Times fact checking team was present in the hall and would fact-check statements made by candidates and report on their truthfulness or lack of it as the debate proceeded. This was an important innovation, which had an immediate impact. I noticed all the candidates became careful about the affirmations they were making as most likely, they wanted to avoid the embarrassment of being told on the spot that they were making false claims. The expectation in democratic systems is that politicians must always be truthful in what they tell citizens. The reality often is that they tend to make fantastic claims hoping they would not be caught out. On-going fact-checking should therefore remain a permanent feature of campaign debates. It teaches politicians the virtue of honesty.
All the four candidates were categorical in their statements that the current government at the national level is a complete failure and that if they win, they would establish a government that is much more competent in governing and addressing the challenges of insecurity and economic collapse Nigeria faces today. They also bitterly complained about the excessively high level of corruption of the Buhari administration claiming they were capable and willing of combating corruption as a prelude to addressing the economic crisis facing the country. The constant attacks on the failure of the APC administration might be another clue as to why the APC candidate is determined to avoid debates where he has to respond to the key question of why Nigerians should vote for another APC candidate while their current principal is a failure.
The presidential candidate of NNPP, Rabiu Kwankwaso drew from his successful governance record as governor of Kano State to make the case that he would be a successful president for the country. He argued that the current number of military officials was grossly inadequate and promised that if he wins, he would make adequate arrangements to increase the number of military officers from 250, 000 to one million military, army, air force and navy. The police would also be increased along the same lines. With adequate numbers, his government, he said, would be able to recover every square metre of the country. Also, on his security agenda, he promised he would be willing to sit down with everyone with grudges in any part of the country to dialogue and resolve differences.
The presidential candidate of the Labour Party lamented the level of poverty in the North, saying it was unacceptable, given the amount of arable land available for agricultural purposes in the region, even as he insisted on the removal of fuel subsidy if he is elected president next year.
“How do I tackle the issue of IPOB, Boko Haram and all agitations? I have said it repeatedly; I will dialogue with every agitator. There is nothing wrong with agitation. I will consult. Governance and democracy are about consensus. I will consult, I will dialogue, I will meet everybody. “Dialogue is normal, agitations is normal. So, we will deal with everybody. We will make sure we sit down and talk and resolve issues amicably,” he said. His general argument on combating insecurity is to reduce the level of poverty in the country, especially, in northern Nigeria.
Presidential candidate of the PDP, Atiku, who was represented by his running mate, Okowa, said, the PDP would ensure a private sector-driven economy and would handle insecurity, by creating state police that was fully equipped: “We need to emphasise coordinated intelligence gathering and sharing. We need more boots on the ground to address insecurity in Nigeria. We need to evolve policing in Nigeria to ensure that people, who have a better understanding of their areas, know how to secure their areas. One centralised police force is unable to meet the demands that we have.
The presidential candidate of the PRP, Kola Abiola, who was big on security, said there was a need to address the security architecture of the country in order to tackle the hydra-headed security problems confronting the country. He decried the fact that the national security committee of the country had allegedly not sat since 1999, in spite of the deteriorating security situation in the country.
My assessment is that the town hall is a good beginning. Their positions however need justification. For example, it is easy to say security agency numbers will be multiplied by four. The question is how will this be funded. What has to be sacrificed to do this and at what cost? It is also easy to say the subsidy would be removed. Given the suffering of the people, would Nigerians accept the complete removal of petrol subsidy?
