This paper is intended to give a summary of "Democratic Impasse: Remilitarisation of Nigeria" by Ajayi Ola-Rotimi and Julius O. Ihonvere published in the Third World Quarterly, Volume 15, Number 4, 1994.
by Paul Indeglia
Since independence from Britain in 1960, Nigeria has had long history of political instability. Civil uprisings in mid-1960's lead to the first military coup in 1966. This seizure of power by the military was followed immediately by another coup in the same year from a factional military group, resulting in Lt. Col. Yakuba Gowon of the Ibo tribe elevating himself to the presidency. In 1967 civil war erupted when a separatist movement in the eastern region of Biafra declared its independence from the central government. The war lasted until 1970 when the separatists were defeated and Gowon reestablished a unified Nigeria.
The Gowon regime pushed for national unity until he was deposed by another military coup in 1975. This regime eventually restored civilian rule in 1979 and Alhari Shehu Shagari was named president in the free, democratic elections. In 1985, Maj. Gen. Ibrahim Babangida overthrew the civilian government in yet another military coup. While president, Babangida was accused of human rights violations and received pressure from western nations to restore civilian rule. A thwarted coup attempt in 1990 by a northern tribal alliance cited the corruption of the Babangida regime as their impetus.
As a result of the external pressure, Babangida scheduled elections for a civilian government to be held in 1992. According to the authors, Babangida's military government hindered the democratic process from the beginning amidst an environment ripe for democracy. After nearly three decades of military rule, Nigerians were eager to follow the lead of other African nations like Ghana, Zambia and South Africa, and adhere to the principals and ideals of democracy. Contrarily, political parties were disbanded upon presidential order, political opponents of Babangida were put in jail for no reason and the 1992 primaries were canceled. The government created new political parties, promoting doctrines designed to advance the regime.
The politicians presented by the parties, allegedly under the direction of Babangida, Moshood Abiola of the Social Democratic Party (SDP) and Bashir Tofa of the National Republican Convention (NRC), had no prior political experience and seemed unsuitable and unqualified candidates. The politicians and the elite continued to patronize the government and its corruption in the hope of obtaining political and economic advancement through Babangida. The government encouraged this corruption as it assisted in gaining continued support from the elite and strengthened their control of the power structure. The already widespread corruption in Nigeria was reinforced by the wealthy through this misdirected attempt at democracy.
The Association for a Better Nigeria (ABN) was formed through funding illegally obtained from the government with the intention of disrupting the political process. The ABN was ruled by a court to be illegal but it still existed and conducted its subversive activities. In 1993, the ABN called for the cancellation of the elections due to political corruption of Abiola and Tofa and sued the National Election Committee (NEC). The court judges were allegedly bribe by the government and ruled that the elections should be canceled. However, the government, claiming to be supreme over the courts, told the NEC to continue with the elections in a political move design to falsely present the government as advocating the elections and the transition to a civilian government.
Anticipating dissension, the government closed all the universities in May, a month prior to the elections, to prevent the possibility of student protests once the elections were nullified. The elections for civilian president were held on June 12, 1993. Although it took nearly two weeks to calculate the votes, the elections were deemed to be absent of any major abuses by the NEC, foreign observer groups, members of both political parties and President Babangida himself. In the last tally, figures showed that Abiola was leading his opponent.
On June 26, Babangida unexpectedly nullified the results of the elections. The reasons given for the annulment were that the politicians had spent too much money, that one candidate had 'neo-colonial ties' (p. 674), that there persisted a conflict of interest between the military and the candidates, that there were election malpractices, that the candidates bribed and bought votes, and that the 'conduct of the election was against the interest of the National Security and Defense Council' (p. 674). The authors refute the issues of excessive funds and neo-colonial ties but do not offer rebuttals pertaining to the other issues.
The authors do speculate as to the other reasons why Babangida annulled the vote. Besides the desire of Babangida to remain in power, the most important issue presented, is the ethnic and religious divisions within the population. Northern tribes (Hausa, Fulani, Kanuri) are mostly Muslim and under the direction of the Sultan of Sokoto while the southern tribes (Yoruba, Ibo, Ijaws, Ogoni) are Christian. Traditionally, the south has had the resources and wealth so the north has felt justified in retaining political power. There are many statements in the article made by northern leaders indicating that a southern president would not be acceptable. The authors bring into focus the issue of Nigerian nationalism which seemed to flourish under the Gowon regime while the present military is accused of divide and conquer tactics.
Additionally, the political and economic elite stand to gain from the military rule due to the potential capital and influence obtained through corruption. The authors cite the corroboration between the government and the elite as the primary inhibitor in the democratic process. The authors claim that the Nigerian election scandal depicts the ease with which a government can manipulate politics while poverty increases and the elite become wealthier. This, unfortunately, can be said for many democracies.
The immediate effects of the annulment of the election results were that the military received harsh criticism from the United Nations and western countries. Limited economic sanctions, including a trade embargo, were imposed in an effort to coerce a return to civilian rule. Perhaps the most disastrous effect was that the manufacturing base, from which Nigeria obtained much of its wealth, grinded to a halt as industries could not operate without raw materials purchased outside the country. Additionally, many western airlines canceled their flights to Lagos and Abuja, effectively cutting the nation off from the United States and Europe. Foreign aid from the United States was canceled and there was a sharp decline in foreign investment.
By the middle of the summer, Babangida was suffering from widespread criticism and was viewed by most, domestically and internationally, as ineffective and declining in power. Protests and rioting throughout the country, plus pressure from the western countries, forced Babangida to resign. An interim government was established by Babangida in August 1993 and a civilian, Ernest Shonekan, was named interim president. The majority of the country rejected Shonekan, who was viewed as a puppet of Babangida. Shonekan was accused of trying to bribe opposing members of the National Assembly in an attempt to gain legitimacy and national support. In November 1993, Gen. Sani Abacha led another military coup, initially presenting the plan of restoring civilian rule. However the Abacha regime immediately tightened politics and eventually banned all political activity in the country.
The elections were important because of Nigeria's reputation as the leader of the region. Nigeria has provided peace keeping forces in Somalia, Liberia, Congo, and the former Yugoslavia and, due to the large oil deposits, it is among the wealthiest African nations. The reinstatement of civilian rule for this strategic nation would have been a positive example for other nations emerging democratically and boosted Nigeria's image internationally. Also, viewed in the light of other recent democratic breakthroughs in Ghana, Kenya, South Africa, and Zambia, Nigeria's elections could have furthered the image of Africa as a progressive continent which excludes no one from the political process.
The election did have a positive dimension, though. During the period leading to the elections, the Nigerian people experienced a major transformation in terms of political understanding. There was widespread participation and education regarding democracy. The authors report that 43 pro-democracy and human rights groups were formed to advance party ideologies and inform voters what the precepts of democracy are. The military regime is presented as the result of 'the anarchy and irresponsibility within the ranks of the civilian fractions of the bourgeoisie" (p. 685) and the process of democracy cannot be fully realized until the element of corruption between the government and the elite is diminished. The authors believe that this recent political set-back is merely a delay, not a permanent event, and will eventually fortify democracy once established.