By Hassan Saliu
Introduction
As Nigeria prepares for the next round of elections with campaigns in top gear, politicians have been crisscrossing the nation, selling their programmes to voters and hoping to carry the day in the series of elections lined up. The nation is expecting different outcomes from the elections. While that is legitimate, this author believes it is time we paid attention to the conduct of politicians that has kept things the same after rounds of elections. This intervention aims to address that gap.
1 Conceptual Illusions about Democracy
Conceptual illusions often encumber the discourse on democracy. From its Athenian origins to contemporary liberal practice, no polity has achieved a “pure” form of democracy. If democracy is conceptualised as government of the people, by the people, and for the people, the representative architecture of modern states excludes most people from direct decision-making. If it is defined as popular sovereignty, empirical reality suggests that elite structures mediate, contest, and often dilute sovereignty.
If democracy is further reduced to the rule of law and due process, the Nigerian experience reveals a system that disproportionately caters to political gladiators, with legalism applied selectively. Comparative evidence also indicates gaps between democratic theory and practice in established democracies, including the United States, where departures from institutional norms have become more visible in recent years. It is therefore not surprising that indices of democratic practice often rank smaller states higher than the traditional promoters of democracy. This underscores a critical point: that material and economic interests frequently supersede the normative rhetoric of democracy promotion by Western powers.
2. Democracy as Slogan for Primitive Accumulation
In the Nigerian context, liberal democracy has largely functioned as a slogan for primitive accumulation. The disjuncture is evident: while the national minimum wage remains at ₦70,000, the remuneration and perquisites of political office holders bear no relation to this benchmark of public morality.
The implication for citizenship is profound. The electorate mobilises during elections, after which it effectively surrenders sovereignty. Accountability mechanisms remain weak, and the post-election relationship between the governed and the governors is characterised by indifference. Within this milieu, scholars have variously described Nigeria’s practice as limited democracy, virtual democracy, and civilian authoritarianism. These descriptors, though differently emphasised, converge on the gap between democratic form and substance.
3. The Possibility of Multiple Brands of Democracy
However, it is important to acknowledge the pluralist argument that democracy is not a monolith. As Julius Nyerere observed, democracy should not be treated as Coca-Cola, a uniform brand exported across all contexts. Different societies may evolve context-specific brands of democracy that reflect their historical, cultural, and material conditions. Nigeria’s challenge is whether its brand can reconcile elite interests with popular welfare.
4. Moving to Praxis: The Nigerian Case
The conceptual review provides the backdrop for assessing democratic praxis in Nigeria. Several structural and behavioural pathologies account for the persistent democratic deficit. Some of these include:
I. Entitlement Mentality
The “emi lokan” declaration in Abeokuta in 2022 by Candidate Bola Tinubu exemplifies an entitlement orientation that has become normalised in Nigerian politics. This is reflected in claims of regional birthright to power and in casting candidacies as personal prerogatives rather than public trusts. Another candidate in the 2023 presidential election also resorted to entitlement when he spoke to his audience in Kaduna shortly before the election. Entitlement has thus been institutionalised as a basis for political recruitment.
II. Joint Venture-ship Politics
The relationship between elected officials and a privileged few is transactional and instrumental. It operates on a “use and dump” logic. Patrons are courted at critical moments and discarded once political objectives are achieved, reinforcing a culture of opportunism.
III. Hatred of Truth and Merit
A systemic aversion to critical feedback persists. Leaders often prefer sycophancy to candour. Public declarations against dissenting voices reinforce a political culture that punishes truth-telling and rewards mediocrity.
IV. Democracy as Elite Economic Empowerment:
Following Claude Ake, democracy in Africa has largely appealed to the political class because it serves as a vehicle for economic empowerment. Distributive outcomes favour elites at the expense of the general citizenry. Campaign rhetoric therefore masks a deeper reality of elite capture. The weaponisation of poverty has also become an enduring instrument of political control.
V. Authoritarian Language and Disdain for Public Accountability
Political communication is frequently authoritarian and dismissive, not mobilising. A case in point was a ministerial defence of Chinese loans for railway construction, including clauses permitting asset seizure on default. Rather than engage public concerns, the response trivialised them, reflecting a broader disdain for public accountability, while asserting that there was no alternative to Chinese loans on the occasion.
VI. Disregard for Rule of Law, Due Process and Transparency
The pursuit of accumulation has eroded commitment to due process. Transparency in public finance is minimal. In some instances, sensitive government transactions are conducted through informal channels such as WhatsApp, further weakening institutional oversight.
VII. Politics of Division and Waste
Identity politics is routinely instrumentalised to divide the populace. Furthermore, projects are initiated or abandoned based on political expediency rather than public need, with little regard for sunk costs and opportunity costs.
VIII. Elections as Ego Wars
Elections have largely degenerated into contests of personal and factional ego among competing segments of the political and economic elite. The issue of good governance and public welfare is often peripheral to the contest.
IX. Promotion of Mediocrity over Meritocracy
The recruitment and appointment process prioritises loyalty over competence. The process excludes individuals with critical capacity and assertiveness, particularly at the subnational level. This directly affects policy quality and developmental outcomes.
X. Craving Empire Building
Outgoing governors frequently seek to install successors to retain access to state resources and influence. Competence is not the primary criterion. Indeed, perceived incompetence is sometimes preferred as it ensures continued control.
XI. Treating Common Patrimony as Personal Property
Public funds are often treated as private resources. Attempts at public scrutiny are resisted, and whistleblowers may face harassment or detention. The expectation of continued access to public funds even after leaving office further entrenches this patrimonial logic.
XII. Governance as Friends and Family Enterprise
State resources are increasingly channelled to friend and family networks. Sector and contract allocations follow friendship and kinship lines, so proceeds accrue to specific friends and families rather than the public.
XIII. Project Execution for Accumulation, Not Need
Project selection is driven by the potential for accumulation rather than by felt needs. Feasibility studies are routinely ignored. The determining factor is the political principal’s preference, not the community’s developmental priority.
XIV. Politics Perceived as Reward, Not Service
Politics is conceived as reward rather than public service. The reward dimension dominates the service dimension. This orientation explains the limited developmental impact observed across many states.
XV. Disregard for Party Manifestos
Party manifestos, which should serve as programmatic constraints, are largely ignored. Many state chief executives are unfamiliar with their party’s manifesto. Consequently, governance outcomes show little variation across party lines. The result is uniform symbolic infrastructure, such as flyovers, amid pervasive poverty.
XVI Lazy Approach to Development
Policymaking today requires searching for information and considering competing perspectives to arrive at the most efficient and effective option for adoption and implementation. What one sees in Nigeria is a rush to pick a policy line without deep reflection. As a result, a litany of abandoned projects abounds with huge sums already committed.
XVII. Reliance on Neoliberal Approach
The refrain that government has no business in business is often heard from people who campaigned on a better life for the people. After taking over government, they suddenly remember that they are not expected to transform society. They push that responsibility onto a virtually non-existent private sector that has not promised transformation to voters, while they take fat allocations and do what pleases them with increased allocations. This is the crux of the matter!
Conclusion
The evidence suggests that what obtains in Nigeria is democracy in form rather than in substance. The conversion of governance into a private enterprise has profound developmental consequences. The development cost is high. Infrastructure is sited without recourse to need or feasibility. Resources meant for health, education, and basic services are appropriated as personal and family property. Neglecting manifestos and enthroning mediocrity produce policy outcomes detached from citizens’ welfare. The paradox of monumental projects coexisting with mass poverty is the logical outcome. In this context, accumulation takes precedence over development.
For 2027 and beyond, a democratic renewal will require more than electoral rituals. It demands a return to politics as public service, the subordination of private accumulation to public good, and the alignment of public resources with the felt needs of the people. Until then, Nigeria’s democracy will continue to fail the test of development. The future of both our democracy and our development hangs in the balance.
Hassan A. Saliu, HM-NPSA
Department of Political Science,
University of Ilorin
