|
02 March 2011 By Aminu F. Hamajoda Far from being a panacea for African unity and
development, majoritarian democracy encourages ethnic,
religious and regional conflicts as recent politics
and conflicts in Nigeria and elections in other
African countries had shown. Vote numbers is the
cardinal basis of neoliberal democracy a form of
government touted as the most humane form of rule in
the world, an alternative to autocracy. While it
surely works in the Western world, in Africa
democratization appears to encourage divisiveness and
post election violence. It is an irony that the "third
wave" of democratization sweeping across the world
also brings with it a wave of internal conflicts that
were hitherto non-existent. Unless our politicians and
lawmakers take drastic consociational measures to
mitigate identity politics, citizenship, regionalism,
and religious differences, the path of democracy will
mean the path of division, conflicts, and anarchy.
Examples abound in Africa. Ivory Coast incumbent Laurent Gbagbo for instance,
refused to step down for the world-acknowledged winner
of the October 2010 national elections, Allassane
Ouatara, despite prior consensus on dialogue and
elections by the Ivorian political leaders. Gbagbo
immovability stems from the pain of losing narrowly in
an election that has no role for the loser despite the
number of votes he scores. Gbagbo scored 46% of the
total votes while his opponent Watara scored 54%. This
finger-biting difference in scores could be the actual
cause of the impasse rather than the allegations of
rigging that Gbagbo has been taunting. In any case,
the conflict does not really stop at the party or
personal levels as it would have ideally been in a
Western country, but has transcended to revive the
north-south dichotomy and the politics of citizenship.
Between 1963 – 1993 Houphouet Boigny had encouraged
massive migration of people from other countries to
support his economic development. During that period
citizenship was not an immediate issue until Konan
Bedie introduced divisive citizenship laws that
distinguished "pure Ivorians" from "circumstantial
Ivoriens" the later made up mainly of immigrants. It
is important to note that Alassane Quattara, a former
Minister and the acknowledged winner of the 2010
elections was a victim of this denial of citizenship
and Gbagbo is therefore afraid of his victory. Even in Guinea where the results of a second round
election were accepted in November last year, it was
preceded by a renewal of the rivalry between the
Malinkes and the Fulani who form the majority of the
population in Guinea. Both ethnic groups were trying
to renegotiate their control of the government of
Guinea under an atmosphere of increasing distrust.
Both Cello Dialo and Alpha Conde made vigorous
negotiation for the support of the other key
presidential candidates, Lansana Kouyate and Sidya
Toure, but in the end the voting was ethnic and had
set a pattern of election alliances heralding a
possibility of increased rivalry between two dominant
ethnic groups in Guinea despite their emergence from a
long military rule. Earlier in Angola, majoritarian election had only
helped to re-ignite war in the 1990s. Although
enshrined in the 1991 Bicesse Peace Accord was an
electoral process that envisaged MPLA and Savimbi's
UNITA competing in the polls, what happened in the end
was a war that became more violent as it took ethnic
dimensions. During the cold war era, MPLA was
considered a Marxist movement supported by the former
USSR and UNITA was considered a capitalist pro-west
movement supported by apartheid South Africa and the
USA. With the end of the Cold War and the ideological
principles it created, conflicts in Angola took on
ethnic dimensions. The MPLA was seen to represent the
interests of the Mbundu whilst UNITA was seen as the
protector of the Ovimbundu ethnic group. When Savimbi
lost elections in 1992, he accused the Dos Santos
government of electoral fraud and thereafter embarked
on a new deadly and violent war that led to the
immediate death of 120,000 Angolans. In all the cases cited above, elections were
conducted where losers are left with nothing despite
representing sizeable percentages of votes and in most
cases representing cultural or regional groups.
Refraining election losers from governance is a bad
idea for African democracy because it creates a sense
of insecurity for both the leaders and the people they
represent. In Ivory Coast, Alassane Watara, a former
victim of a controversial citizenship law, could
reverse Konan Bedie's constitutional engineering that
divided Ivorians as "pure" and "circumstantial". In
Guinea, although the Fula control the economy, they
have been subjugated for a long time beginning with
the rule of Sekou Toure and may like to redress their
political marginalization. In Angola when Savimbi
perceived the elections as ethnic, he quickly rearmed
and received far more support from the Ovimbundu ethic
group then he ever did during the cold war period. The lesson from the above examples to us in Nigeria
is the need to acknowledge that we are susceptible to
the vagaries of majoritarian democracies. Majority of
the recent conflicts we had since 1999 stem from the
politics of numbers that drew the sentiments of
identity. The genesis of the recent Jos crisis was the
Jos North Local Government elections, where voting
patterns have been religious for several years.
Numbers might also be the source of the violent
identity conflicts that had arose earlier that had
included; the Tiv versus Jukun, in Taraba State, the
Tiv versus other ethnic groups in Azara of Nasarawa
State in 2001, the Hausa/Fulani versus the Anaguta,
Afizere and Berom in Jos North Local Government Area
of Plateau State in 2001, the Tarok versus
Hausa/Fulani in Wase Local Government Area in 2004,
the Goemai versus the Hausa/Fulani in Shendam Local
Government Area of Plateau State in 2002. Although several centrapetalist measures are taken
to ensure democracy unite Nigerians, more drastic
consociational measures should be taken to stem the
ethnic and religious conflicts that the nation face
today. One constitutional measure already taken is the
distribution requirement. The ‘distribution
requirement' applies both at presidential elections
and party formation to encourage cross-regional
politics by requiring winning presidential candidates
to gain not just a majority of the vote, but a spread
of the vote across the country to ensure that winning
presidents receive a regional spread of electoral
support and thereby a cross-ethnic and religious base,
rather than drawing their votes from one region only.
Similarly, the presidency rotation strategy adopted by
the ruling party, although at present jettisoned, is
still a sound consociational strategy that should be
practiced at all levels of government despite of it
ideological backwardness. The advantage is to
demystify Nigerians that having a leader coming from
their ethnic group, region, or religion would better
their lot. Ridding Nigerians of this myth will go a
long way to paving the path for a conflict-free
democracy. Another strategy that needs to be adopted is
constitutional creation of duties for losing
contestants especially at the national and state
levels. The fear of adversarial sabotage should not
prevent a provision for a losing contestant to
contribute to the development of his state or nation.
Meaningful roles should be found for loosing
presidential and gubernatorial candidates especially
in the legislative arm. However, by far the most important measure that
should be taken is the issue of citizenship versus
indigeneship, a nefarious gap that remains a time bomb
for the nation. The issue is the most currently sour
aspect of African political economy. Research by some
development historians has shown how a colonial legacy
is twisted to harm Africa. Between late 1950s to late
1970s, most postcolonial discourse has concentrated on
the economy of post colonial African states,
especially during the cold war era when forces were
labeled as ‘progressive' or ‘retrogressive'.
Engrossment with ethnicity was considered truly
backward by then. Angola again provides a good example
of this change. MPLA was previously regarded as a
Marxist movement dedicated to socialist ideals, while
UNITA was considered a pro-capitalist pro-west
movement. In the 1990s, these same movements turned
into defenders of Angola's major ethnic groups, Mbundu
and Ovimbundu respectively. Many historians blame the colonial legacy of
creating native and customary authorities for the
present dilemma of ethnic identities. During the
colonial period, the British for instance created two
types of political identities, civic and ethnic. The
civic identity was mostly reserved for whites and
educated Africans while the ethnic identity was
designed for cultural groups using native authority
and customary laws to preserve their ancestry. The constitutions of modern African states no doubt
give full citizenship rights to its people but in most
cases for instance in Nigeria these rights are
curtailed at state and local government levels, where
indigeneship deny citizens rights to political power,
educational subsidies, employment and sometimes
resources as a away of protecting groups of people who
claim ancestry to the area. A striking example of the
dichotomy of constitutional citizenship and indigenous
citizenship is the Tiv versus Jukun situation in
Taraba state. Deadly clashes have been recorded
between the two ethnic groups since 1964, 2001 – 2002
being the deadliest. The same scenario is what is
occurring in Jos presently. The consequence of this
citizenship-indigeneship debacle is the curtailment of
economic dynamism and social fluidity. While the
nation's economy dynamise citizens, states and local
governments disenfranchise them. Yet the Nation sees
no anathema in this contradiction. One of the solutions proffered for this predicament
is to rethink our situation as a colonial treachery.
Our political leaders and lawmakers must redefine
political identities, rights, and justices and
probably banish indigeneity. The persistence of the
colonial concept of ‘native' and ‘settler' in our
political psyche will disintegrate Nigeria and the
whole of Africa. But any undertaking to refashion our
political destiny requires a restoration of Nigerian
history and civic education in our educational
curricula. Prior to the 1990s, no Nigerian could
graduate, no matter his discipline, without passing
the mandatory course, Nigerian History and Culture.
The Cicerion adage, ‘Not to know what happened before
one was born is always to remain a child'. The fact
that senior journalists, political leaders and even
scholars use misnomers like ‘settler' to refer to a
Nigerian indicates lack of historical knowledge.
Nigeria's history did not start when the whiteman
arrived at the cost and blew a whistle. None of
Nigeria's over 250 ethnic groups was here less 400
years ago and surely over 85% of the migratory routes
of each ethnic group in Nigeria have been established.
It is pertinent to revive, fund and madate the
Historical Society of Nigeria to continue with the
groundwork they started in 1970s by writing books on
the history of Nigeria suitable for all levels of our
education. While the authors of the treachery that is
consuming Africa are dogged on uniting Europe,
Africans are busy falling apart. Our legislature and
judiciary must use 2011 to pass drastic implementable
laws to mitigate the current trend of ethnic
chauvinism and religious bigotry that is taking us
nowhere but to calamity. |