“We don’t believe in cheating or rigging elections but also we don’t want other parties to cheat us, and that was why we encouraged the Kaduna State Independent Electoral Commission to come up with a fool-proof voting process.”

– Nasir el-Rufai

The prefatory statement above belongs to Nasir el-Rufai, the Governor of Kaduna, one of the few Governors who have consistently demonstrated faith in the deployment of technology to protect the integrity and credibility of the electoral process in Nigeria. He is the only one who has given effect to his conviction. In 2018, Kaduna state under his watch, conducted elections with an electronic voting system. This was the first time anyone in Nigeria would adopt electronic voting, and the second case of electronic voting in Africa, after Namibia. That year, the then extant law namely the Kaduna State Independent Electoral Commission Act No. 10 of 2012 was amended, to establish electronic voting in Section 16 (3) thereof.  There were allegations of multiple voting and other challenges. But this did not deter Mallam Nasir el-Rufai.  

On September 4, 2021, his administration repeated the same “offence”, if the adoption of modern technology by African electoral umpires can be so described, by ensuring that the Kaduna State Independent Electoral Commission (KADSIECOM), again conducted elections in the state’s local government areas in line with Section 16(3) of the KADIESCOM Act. At the end of the exercise, it was reported that the challenges observed in 2018 had been addressed. Multiple voting was no longer possible. The software had been upgraded to deny any voter an attempt to vote a second time. About 18, 000 ad hoc staff were deployed whose main assignment was the verification of the voter’s register. The Electronic Voting Machine (EVM) was a computerized box with simple Cancel and OK buttons that could be used even by the illiterate and the elderly. You select the logo of the party you want to vote for, and simply tap either OK or Cancel - a simple Yes or No choice. The Cancel button in fact allows you to change your mind. Each EVM was powered by a battery that could last up to 16 hours. KADIESCOM worked in collaboration with the telecommunication companies to provide the network for the immediate transmission of results. Voting took less than a minute.

The LGA election in Kaduna State on Saturday, September 4 was by no means perfect however. About 11 electronic voting machines were vandalised by suspected hoodlums. This should not be surprising. Violence is part of the sociology of Nigeria’s electoral process. Those who do not trust the system would always find a way to violate it. No matter how fool-proof a measure may be, Nigerians would always find a way to disrupt it. Oftentimes, out of raw scepticism. In the course of the elections in 19 LGAs, 41 EVMs were snatched across Kaduna State. Should anybody be surprised? The EVMs looked like boxes. In regular, manual, elections, the ballot box is the main victim in the hands of those who want to manipulate results. The only difference with an EVM is that it is electronic and has a digital footprint. Stealing or snatching it is pointless. The Kaduna State LGA elections have now ended. The APC won in 15 area councils. But the more interesting outcome was the disclosure that the Governor, Nasir el-Rufai lost to the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in his Ungwar Sarki Polling unit in Kaduna North Local Government Area. It is a major dent for a politician to lose in his own polling unit! It makes no difference if his party wins across the entire state. He will be constantly reminded that he could not even get the endorsement of his own immediate neighbours.

With electronic voting, it may be difficult to manipulate results, stuff ballot boxes or thump-print multiple ballot papers. It should be noted however, that voter turn-out in the Kaduna Local Government elections of September 4, 2021 was very low. This is a nationwide pattern, and it is one of the ills that must change to properly deepen participatory democracy not just in Nigeria, but across Africa. The big gap between inputs and outcomes in the electoral process in Africa has alienated the people from the system and from democracy itself. Why go out to vote when there are no guarantees that your vote will count or translate into improvements in your circumstances? Why vote for people who will get into positions of privilege on the wings of your efforts and end up forgetting you? The biggest threat to democracy in Africa is this trust deficit and the disconnect between the people and the actual value of elections.       

This however should not discount the value of credibility, integrity, transparency and accountability in the electoral process. This is the objective of those who support the idea of electronic voting and the electronic transmission of results. Twice now, in 2018 and 2021, the El-Rufai administration has shown that it is doable. There may be hitches and challenges but these can be identified and fixed in subsequent elections. It may be argued that Kaduna state is relatively small (population – 6- 1 million) compared to Nigeria with a population of over 200 million and 774 local councils). But we have it on record that should Nigeria decide to adopt electronic voting, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) can deliver on that score. The GSM operators in the country have also openly said that they can provide the necessary services. There are certainly lessons that can be learnt from the Kaduna experience, and from other countries including Namibia and the West. The only problem we have in Nigeria is the refusal of Nigerian lawmakers at the Federal level to see the value of electronic voting. The adoption of electronic voting by Kaduna State sends a strong message to those members of the National Assembly who conveniently rushed to the toilet, or were absent, or lied shamelessly that there was no mobile telephony in their village when the National Assembly voted on the proposed Electoral Act (Amendment) Bill 2021.   

Getting the right electoral framework for elections in Nigeria has been a major concern since the return to democratic rule in 1999: the 2001 Electoral Act, 2002 Electoral Act, 2006 Electoral Act and the 2010 Electoral Act. It has been majorly a trial and error process. In 2018, ahead of the 2019 general elections, the 8^th Assembly passed a Bill which was forwarded to the President for his assent. The President rejected the Bill, four times, on the grounds that the proposed amendments to the law could not come into effect due to time constraints. We held the 2019 elections, which again expectedly threw up issues about the integrity of the electoral process and the need to modernise elections in line with global best practices. When the 9^th National Assembly assumed office in June 2019, its Chairman, Dr. Ahmed Lawan promised Nigerians that the Electoral Amendment Bill would be treated as a priority assignment. Indeed, Lawan kept his word, as he did also with the Petroleum Industry Bill. But it is one thing to make a law. It is another thing to do so in public interest.

What was meant to be an opportunity to provide Nigerians with a progressive, forward-looking electoral framework ended up as a farce. In the second week of July, a bewildered electorate watched as Nigerian lawmakers created an ugly scene over Section 52 (2) and (3) of the Electoral Act Amendment Bill which stated that INEC “may transmit results of elections by electronic means where and when practicable.” The Senate passed the bill on July 15. The House of Representatives did so on July 16. Both chambers of the National Assembly later resolved that the electronic transmission of results would be allowed only with the express clearance of the National Communications Commission (NCC) and the National Assembly.

Thus, Nigeria’s lawmakers took away the independence of the country’s electoral body, a blatant violation of Section 78 of the 1999 Constitution, and a brazen attempt to sabotage the law. It was most disgraceful that even opposition politicians in the National Assembly could not vote in the people’s interest. There were other concerns: the decision to increase campaign expenses: to become President, you would need a minimum of N15 billion, Governor – N5 billion; Senator N1.5 billion, House of Representatives member N500 million and State House of Assembly member N50 million.  In other words, you have to be wealthy to aspire to any important elective position in Nigeria. If this bill becomes law as proposed, only armed robbers and internet scammers would probably end up in high places in this country. President Buhari should not sign the Electoral Act Amendment Bill 2021. It takes the country backwards, not forwards. It is the handiwork of cowards and a backward National Assembly. In Kaduna State, Governor El-Rufai has shown that it is possible to try new options and possibilities, and deploy modern technology to leap-frog the process. The navel-gazing lawmakers in the National Assembly should be called out. One of the errant ones has since apologised to her constituents for going AWOL when she was most needed, but there are others, so pompous and confidently ignorant, they just don’t get it.

On Sunday, September 5, 2021, President Alpha Conde, 83, of Guinea Conakry was deposed by a team of former elite military forces led by Lt. Col. Mamady Doumbouya. Conde does not deserve anyone’s sympathy and that does not necessarily amount to an endorsement of the military coup in that unfortunate country. Indeed, Conde is the architect of his own misfortune, a greedy African leader who thought he was invincible, untouchable and supreme. The photos that were released on Sunday showing him in a humiliating position, surrounded by the same soldiers who used to protect him was a loud reminder of the ephemerality of power and the unpredictability of human circumstances. The once great Alpha Conde looked very sober. The leader of the coup used to be his bodyguard.  He used to hold an umbrella over his head. Today, Conde is at the mercy of Lt. Col. Dambouya. One wrong move, he, Conde could lose his life. He wanted to remain in office for life. He denied the people of Guinea Conakry the opportunity to make their own choice. What the people of Guinea could not do, the military have done it for them. Except that the unconstitutional take-over of power in Guinea is completely unjustifiable. The people of Guinea may have trooped out unto the streets of Conakry and other parts of the country to celebrate the downfall of a man who held them down, but that is no justification for a return to military rule. Many of them removed their shirts and screamed: “Doumbouya! Freedom.” But what next for Guinea?

In the 70s, African political scientists pushed the idea of the strong man as leader and messiah, and hence accommodated militarism as a vehicle of development. But by the 80s, the wave of democratisation led by the ideological politics of the United States created a new momentum. By the 90s, democracy was the new sing-song in most African states. The challenge however has been how to consolidate the gains of democracy and its value chain. It is most unfortunate that in recent times, rather than have a consolidation, Africa is beginning to experience a backward trajectory. The coup in Guinea fits into this pattern.

Before now, since 2010, there have been coup attempts in Niger (2010, 2011), Guinea Bissau (2010, 2011) Madagascar (2010), DR Congo (2011, 2013), Sudan (2012, 2019), Benin (2013), Libya (2013), Egypt (2013), Gambia (2014), Gabon (2019), Ethiopia (2019) Central African Republic (2021) and successful coup attempts in Niger (2010), Mali (2012, 2020, 2021), Sudan (2019), Burkina Faso (2015), Egypt (2013) and now Guinea-Conakry (2021). Military interventions in African politics constitute a major setback for democracy. The coup in Guinea Conakry can only add to the instability in the Sahel region of West Africa and provide further stimulus for the agents of destabilization – the Jihadists and the terrorists operating in the Sahel. ECOWAS Presidents Nana Akufo Addo of Ghana and Muhammadu Buhari of Nigeria, and the UN Secretary General, Antonio Gueterres have condemned the coup but the international community must go a step further and ask Doumbouya and his gangsters to hand over power immediately to civilian authorities. They have suspended the Constitution and all institutions as part of an attempt to launch a transitional government.  

It should be made clear to them that their rebellion violates the ECOWAS protocols on Democracy and Good Governance and the Constitutive Acts of the African Union. ECOWAS and AU need not worry too much about what France thinks. The relationship between France and its former colonies in Africa is at best opportunistic. The direct victims are the long-suffering people of Guinea.

Guinea is one of the most blessed countries in the world in terms of natural resources: the biggest iron ore deposit in the world, gold, diamond, bauxite but in typical African fashion, this has not translated into prosperity for the people. Guinea is effectively one of the poorest countries in the world.  And the problems are not far to seek: corruption, nepotism and bad leadership.  Alpha Conde spent his early career as a radical, progressive, opposition politician. He challenged the government of Lansana Conte in 1993 and again in 1998. In 2010, Conde led the RPG to victory and was thus elected President of Guinea for a first term of five years. He was re-elected for a second, final term of another 5 years in 2015. In 2020, when he was supposed to step down from office, Conde chose to amend the Constitution to enable him extend his stay in office.

Despite spirited opposition to this gamble, Conde imposed himself on the people. He was 82 at the time. He even increased the Presidential term from five years to six. In October and November 2020, there were protests on the streets of Conakry. Still, he held the election, which he won of course, and began a six-year term in office, illegally and unconstitutionally. That gamble came to an end on Sunday with the coup in Guinea-Conakry. It would have been better if he was removed by the people themselves in a democratic process. He promised to be Guinea’s Mandela. He was Guinea’s Caligula. Nonetheless, the cowboys looking like they don’t know their left from their right must not be encouraged to remain in power and office. The creeping collapse of the democratic ethos as seen in Chad, Mali and Guinea-Conakry is an ugly burden for the whole of Africa. Other African leaders who are tempted to sit-tight in office should learn from the disgrace of Alpha Conde.     

The People’s Democratic Party (PDP), Nigeria’s main opposition party, is currently in the throes of a commotion that threatens to destroy the party’s capability to put up any strong showing in the 2023 general elections. Party stakeholders argue that there are enough strong internal mechanisms that would rescue the party and restore it to good health, but those mechanisms do not seem to be working. It may not be too long before the party finds itself on oxygen support, as it struggles with a self-inflicted ailment that is threatening to become a pandemic.

At the height of its power, the PDP was in charge of Nigeria as the dominant political party for 16 years: the party that produced Presidents Olusegun Obasanjo (1999 -2007), Umaru Musa Yar’Ádua (2007 -2010) and Goodluck Jonathan (2010 -2015).  In 1999, with the return to democratic rule, the PDP held 214 seats in the House of Representatives. This increased to 263 in 2007, but dropped to 208 and later 137 in 2011. As of 2007, the party controlled 28 states, and 87 seats in the Senate, this dropped to 71 seats in 2011. That same year, PDP was left with 23 Governors. Up till 2011, it controlled 23 states of the Federation out of 36, plus the FCT. Today, the PDP is a minority party although it bears the comforting title of Nigeria’s major opposition party. The changing fortunes of the PDP in terms of its scope of control over the legislative and executive arms of government indicated a greater crisis.

The best illustration of this was how the party lost the 2015 general elections to an emergent Special Purpose Vehicle called the All Progressives Congress (APC) – an association of strange political bedfellows whose only ambition was to put an end to the Jonathan administration and the PDP’s continued stay in power. By the time the 2015 elections ended, PDP lost the Presidency.  It was down to 13 PDP Governors.  It also lost its majority status in the National Assembly. Many of its leaders abandoned the party. They include Alhaji Adamu Muazu, then Chairman of the PDP, former Chairman of the party, Alhaji Bamanga Tukur and former Chairman of the Board of Trustees, Mr-Fix-It, Chief Anthony Anenih. In 2015, the PDP could not fix anything. Much damage had been done earlier to the party when former President Olusegun Obasanjo who served for eight years as President under the platform of the PDP publicly directed that his party membership should be torn into pieces.   

There have been many theories as to why the PDP lost steam and eventually the 2015 General elections. The commonest submission is that after 16 years in office, the party could not manage its success, or that the party had been taken over by those who wanted a Northern President and no-second-term for Jonathan or nothing. But whereas one side of the story does not usually capture the full scope of a manifold experience, it was true that the PDP was sabotaged by the crisis of internal democracy, and the many tendencies within the party pursuing their own narrow interests without a thought for the future. The eventual pain that the party suffered was self-inflicted. The party played into the hands of both fifth columnists and the opposition.  It will be recalled that in August 2013, the Convention of the party at the Eagle Square in Abuja witnessed an unusual spectacle.

Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, and the governors of Adamawa, Kwara, Sokoto, Jigawa, Kano, Rivers, and Niger and all their delegates walked out of the Convention in anger. They later reconvened at the Yar’Ádua Centre to address a press conference. The issue at stake was the election of persons into the 17-member National Working Committee of the party. The Convention continued, but the party was already split down the ranks. This was the incident that led to the emergence of a new PDP, which became a partner in the APC Coalition, and it was widely believed that other aggrieved persons that did not walk away on that occasion, chose to remain within the party to wreak havoc. Alhaji Bamanga Tukur who was Chairman of the party at the time, lost his position to the crisis and was replaced by former Governor, Adamu Muazu who was hailed as “the game changer.” Indeed, the game changed for the PDP.  But could the party have survived the 2015 election if there was greater cohesion among its ranks?  

It was perhaps in sober realization of this and the fact that many PDP candidates who initially won during the 2015 general election eventually lost their positions at the election petition tribunals and the courts, that the party now decided to do an audit of the 2015 general elections. In November 2015, the party held a National Conference in Abuja on “The Sustenance of Democratic Ideals in Nigeria.” As the party grappled with its post-election crisis, Prince Uche Secondus from Rivers State, emerged as the party’s Acting National Chairman. Still, the party was not yet out of the woods. Secondus was challenged in Court by Hon Ahmed Gulak who asked the court to remove Secondus because the position he occupied had been zoned to the North East. Justice Hussain Baba-Yusuf who presided over the case ruled in Gulak’s favour and sacked Secondus - who along with the PDP appealed the judgment. The party was under heavy pressure on all fronts. It lost the Kogi Gubernatorial election to the APC.  It had issues with the Gubernatorial election in Bayelsa state. Key officials of the party and those who served in the Jonathan administration were subjected to heavy harassment, policing and interrogation by the new APC government. The APC accused the PDP and the Jonathan administration of being the cause of Nigeria’s woes. Oil prices had dipped. The country faced both revenue and debt crises. It would soon slip into recession.

Later, in 2016, the PDP held a National Convention at the Sharks Stadium in Port Harcourt. It was an exercise in chaos as the party was before then divided between supporters of the incumbent Chair of the National Working Committee Ali Modu Sheriff and other members of the party. Sheriff left Port Harcourt in a huff, brandishing a court injunction that was ignored. It was the same Port Harcourt Convention that produced former Governor Ahmed Makarfi as Chair of a National Caretaker Committee. The party never recovered from the tussle for legitimacy between the Sheriff and Makarfi factions. In December 2017, the PDP held yet another National Convention which led to the emergence of Prince Uche Secondus as Chairman of the National Working Committee. But the seeds of discord and division that had been sown within the party had germinated, and grown leafy branches. Each time there had been a conflict within the party, the leaders tend to focus more on the party at the national level. They overlook the damage that had been done down the line, all the way to the wards, states and local councils. Before 2015, PDP was the party of choice for many Nigerians. The crisis at the Eagle Square in 2013, the loss of the 2015 general election, and the inability to pull the party back from the brink merely created greater tension from top to bottom. In 2019, the PDP practically donated the election to the APC. The APC won in many states, not because it could boast of a better record of performance but because the PDP was yet to wean itself from the politics of ego and personality conflicts.

Less than two years to the 2023 general elections, the party’s leaders have started again. They seem not to have learnt any lessons from the past. At a time the party should be organizing and strategizing to take power from the APC, and provide Nigerians with an alternative that they badly need now more than ever, they are busy promoting the perception that there isn’t much difference between the PDP and the APC. The way the PDP is managing its politics, it will end up donating the 2023 Presidency to the APC. Governors are major stakeholders in every Nigerian political party. They control the constituencies. They are overlords in charge of the wards and organs of the party in their states. They do and undo. And that is why in the PDP today, the main conflict is between a governor (Governor Nyesom Wike of Rivers) and the party Chairman, (Prince Uche Secondus). Once upon a time, they were bosom friends but not anymore. Party members are taking sides. Some are defecting to other parties for both personal and pragmatic reasons. The future of the party as a dominant vote-winning machine hangs in the balance. The party is back to where it was in 2013 before the 2015 elections, and where it was in 2016 before the 2019 election.

I make these comments as someone who experienced and witnessed first-hand in 2014/15 and again in 2018/2019 how the stubbornness of political gladiators can sabotage a political party’s chances. I was the Deputy Gubernatorial candidate of the PDP in Ogun State in the 2019 elections. A year to that election, it was widely believed that the State Gubernatorial election would be won by the PDP. The APC in Ogun State was practically in disarray. It had split into factions. The incumbent Governor did not support the candidate of his own party. The PDP, was also similarly divided, a victim of the Modu Sheriff/Makarfi factionalisation of the party at the centre.  Both factions were in and out of court till three days to the election. When eventually the court ruled in favour of the Buruji Kashamu faction, it was expected that other stakeholders would respect the agreement that was reached earlier that whoever won in court would be supported and outstanding matters would be resolved after the party had achieved the objective of beating the APC at the polls. Meetings were held. Leaders of the various factions waved the olive branch. But as it happened, within 24 hours after the court judgment that favoured the Kashamu faction, those who swore that the party was more important to them than their own interests had dissolved into either the APC or its break-away faction, the Allied People’s Movement (APM). Their conspiracy cost the party dearly.

The point cannot be overstated that politicians in Nigeria do not believe in anything other than their own ambitions. In our political parties, the Machiavellian ethos reigns supreme. Nigeria’s political party system is underdeveloped, driven as it is by all the ugly narratives of the Nigerian experience. Today, in the PDP, after the cliché that the party’s internal mechanisms would be used to resolve the crisis, the other thing you hear is that the APC is trying to sabotage the party, and yet no one can say exactly how the APC is responsible for the collapse of amity between the Chairman of the party and the Governor of Rivers State and others. Secondus is a tested fighter. Wike is a man of courage who likes to win wars. Both gladiators know each other too well. All the persons taking sides in their matter are actually the ones who want to destroy the party. Secondus and Wike are allowing themselves to be used by forces that they met in the course of their political journey from the creeks of the Delta to the blinding heights of Abuja. They both owe themselves a duty to resolve whatever differences they may have. They have both helped each at various times in the past. They can both help the PDP now by burying the hatchet! What does Wike want? Does he want to be a President or Vice-Presidential candidate in 2023 or a Godfather? What does Uche Secondus want? Does he want to have a say in who becomes the standard bearer of the PDP in 2023? Or does he want to succeed Wike as Governor of Rivers State? They should not allow their personal ambitions to ruin many years of friendship and brotherhood and should not drag down the party. Enough damage has been done already. Although APC leaders have more serious problems of their own, they must be in one corner laughing with all corners of their mouth. The worst legacy Secondus can leave behind is to hand over the 2023 general elections to the APC on a platter of gold.

The other problem are those lawyers running from Port Harcourt to Kebbi and to Calabar, all in one week, to secure orders ex parte to ensure the removal of Secondus from office. For many Nigerian lawyers, every election season, before, during and after, is the season for them to eat, to make money. They forget the standards and ethics of the profession and transform into ambulance chasers, looking for any desperate politician who needs an injunction from the courts to gain advantage over a rival. Lawyers are trained to be officers in the temple of justice and respect established procedures. It is one of the reasons why since 1985, every Chief Justice of Nigeria and virtually every Chief Judge of the Federal High Court has warned against the abuse of interim orders ex parte, which is a remedy in civil law procedure that is expected to be given under circumstances of a real urgency. But many judges have turned such orders into an opportunity to jump into the ugly arena of dirty, partisan, politics. They promote personal interests in the process and bring the judiciary to ridicule.

In the on-going PDP crisis, judges presiding over the same courts of co-ordinate jurisdiction have been granting injunctions with appellate import which amounts to an abuse of the justice system. It is shameful and reprehensible. I understand, however, that the CJN has now summoned about six Chief Judges whose courts have been involved in this abuse with regard to the PDP case and election matters in Anambra, Jigawa and Imo.  Judges must be restrained and lawyers must be called to order. The judiciary is the last hope of the common man. If it is turned into the playground of profiteers and desperate politicians, the heavy cost will be borne by the entire society. But while it is good to hear that CJN Ibrahim Tanko Muhammed is making efforts to remind the judges involved of established directives, is it not the case that the CJN himself emerged as a beneficiary of a controversial ex parte order on the basis of which the Federal Government removed Walter Onnoghen, CJN (as he then was) before appointing him in his place? Nigeria is never in short supply of ironies.  

From what we have seen and heard so far, it seems most likely that the race for the 2023 Presidential position would end up as the fiercest, most contested, and perhaps the most controversial since Nigeria’s return to civilian rule in 1999. We all must keep an eye on 2023. In 1999, President Olusegun Obasanjo emerged not because he was a known, seasoned, politician but because the country needed a pair of steady hands and a strong character, with the right connections and experience to save the faltering ship of state, and move the country beyond the evil annulment of the 1993 Presidential election. Obasanjo delivered. But he ran into troubled waters with his succession plans: the politics of Third Term, the bitter quarrel with his Vice President, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, and his open endorsement of Alhaji Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, whose health status and eventual death in office defined the highest office of the land. President Goodluck Jonathan who succeeded his boss, Yar’Adua was a collective product of the law, and the majority insistence on what was right. His presidency was a turning point and a major historic landmark for Nigeria, an affirmation that Nigeria could also be a land of dreams where a man of humble beginnings could rise to the top.

By 2015, the forces of elite conspiracy and ethno-religious myopism, organised an acidic campaign against the Jonathan Presidency and got him out of office. He was succeeded by President Muhammadu Buhari, a former military Head of State, who had sought the Presidency of Nigeria as a civilian three different times – 1999, 2007 and 2011. In 2015, he was propelled into office by an electorate that had embraced his managers’ promise of change and hope. He was yet another rallying point for great expectations. In 2023, the circumstances would be different. There is no coalescing, propelling force, at this time behind any aspirant, on such a national scale, and of such a momentum as we saw with Obasanjo, Jonathan, and Buhari’s cult-like popularity. And this is why the 2023 Presidency is fast becoming a desperate gamble, a ‘try-your-luck’ kind of proposition, without any core basic agreements. A kind of anybody’s game, generating tension, so early, so far from the commencement of the 2023 electoral process.     

There is no consensus on any issue. The people of the South East argue, rightly that, it is their turn to produce the President of Nigeria. No Igbo man has been President since 1999, although Igbos have helped to put others into office. They want the marginalisation of Igbos to end. They want it on record that the Igbo race is not inferior to any other group in Nigeria. Igbos are the third largest ethnic group in the country. They have been told by Northern spokesmen that nobody will offer them the Presidency on a platter of gold, and that in any case, they should go and organise themselves and reach out to other Nigerians especially now that there is an internal debate in the South East about identity politics – who is Igbo and who is not and who is more Igbo than the other? Many persons consider this suggestion, an insult! The people of the North East and Central zones also insist that it is their turn to have their kinsmen inside the Presidential Villa and that  after the Presidency has gone round the six geo-political zones, we can then begin to talk more seriously about those principles of merit, competence, knowledge – the same issues the other privileged geo-political zones never stretched when the Presidency fell into their laps.

Constitutional provisions on eligibility for the Nigerian Presidency are stated in the 1999 Constitution. There is no mention of ethnicity or geographical zone, although Section 14(3) and (4) mention Federal Character, diversity, unity and justice. The two major political parties have since agreed on an unwritten code of Rotational Presidency, but this is beginning to look more like a tool of political expediency. Ahead of the 2023 general elections, Nigeria’s two major political parties – the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and the All Progressives Congress (APC) are both engulfed in crises that could be counter-productive. There is no clarity on both sides about how the 2023 process could be used to address the people’s concerns. Not even the National Assembly is serious about the provision of an electoral framework that can inspire trust and confidence. In 2021, Nigeria’s 9^th National Assembly, dominated by the ruling party, voted to prevent the adoption of electronic transmission of election results. The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) says it is possible and doable, the politicians disagree. In smaller, neighbouring African countries, electronic transmission of results is not a problem. In Nigeria, it is a source of crisis.     

But what I find even more disturbing is the bad rhetoric that is beginning to build up, the high velocity intolerance and the threat of violence that hang dangerously in the air, and the refusal of some emergent “stomach democracy activists” to engage in decent conversation. This has been a bane of Nigerian politics. But it is getting worse. It could even become more frightening. The professional political class must seek counselling for its growing mass psychosis. The right of Nigerians to choose, to express their differences and choices must be respected. Nobody has a monopoly of the right to Nigerian citizenship, or the corridors of power. The way some interested parties are carrying on is deplorable. I recall writing once in this column about likely candidates for the 2023 Presidency titled “The South West Presidential Hopefuls” (April 20, 2021). I made some categorical statements about the chances of those who were in the news at the time: Senator Bola Ahmed Tinubu, Professor Yemi Osinbajo, Senator Ibikunle Amosun and Dr Kayode Fayemi of Ekiti State. It was my own review of the political situation and the possibilities. But what did I get in return? Those who felt I was critical of their masters went after me with a sledge hammer. I read one reasonable piece in which the author tried to respond to the issues raised but the others were so poorly written, I couldn’t waste my time reading till the end. Bad writing gives me migraine and there seems to be a large supply of hacks around many of our political figures. In the 80s and 90s, we used to have quality debates in Nigerian newspapers. Today, the space is dominated by hacks without brains. Well maybe I was lucky. They didn’t abuse my parents.

Since that piece, the conversation about 2023 has gained greater momentum, beyond zoning and possible Southern candidates to a full-blown obsession. This reached a peak recently with the prescriptions by former Head of State and President, General Ibrahim Babangida during an interview with Arise TV, ahead of his 80^th birthday on August 17, 2021. I wrote a review of some of his submissions in the context of what marked his 80th birthday: an attempt at revisionism on certain key historical points, but again I got thoroughly abused by one of the key organizers of the IBB white-wash. I have made my point. (See Reuben Abati, “IBB’s Birthday Interview”, ThisDay, August 10, 2021).  The IBB interview, considering his own stature added oxygen to the 2023 Presidential debate. ThisDay newspaper followed up with a front-page list of 31 likely candidates, and a review of those who can lead Nigeria in 2023. I take all of that as a healthy promotion of public conversation. But it merely ended up showing a certain trait that I think can pose a threat to the journey towards 2023: the thinking by some people that the Presidency of Nigeria is already an acquired right. How? When? Where?

One of the immediate reactions to the ThisDay list came from Dr. Doyin Okupe, veteran politician, spokesperson to a political party, the defunct NRC, and media adviser to two former Presidents. Dr. Okupe, appearing on Arise TV Morning Show, said there are only three possible candidates: Senator Bola Tinubu, his good self and incumbent Vice President Yemi Osinbajo in that order. We later hosted Mr. Sonny Iroche, Chairman of the Anambra League of Professionals, who thought that Dr Doyin Okupe must have been joking, and that he, Iroche, would make a better candidate. Before Iroche, Malam Kashim Ibrahim-Imam, President of the Kings College Old Boys Association, and Chairman of the Board of the Tertiary Education Trust Fund (TETFUND) also appeared on the Arise TV flagship show to discuss the state of the nation. He had kind things to say about Tinubu, leader of the APC but he made it clear that he, Kashim-Imam, would be the best man for the job.    

Somehow, within the South West and the APC, every man who considers himself a potential President manages to defer to just one man: Senator Bola Tinubu. Those who say anything that is off-key in that regard or fail to pay homage get knocked no matter how sensible they may sound. This then, reminds me of the case of Governor Yahaya Bello of Kogi State who has been a target of heavy pummelling for having the effrontery to have told Senator Tinubu in an interview with the Daily Trust newspaper that the senior politician should allow his “children” to take over the Presidency of Nigeria in 2023. Yahaya Bello obviously considers himself a Tinubu “son”. Whereas the leader of the APC has not yet announced formally that he wants to be President, there is already an army of Tinubu Support Groups out there pushing the 2023 Tinubu for President agenda. As far back as May 2021, Governor Bello had announced in a television interview that “Nigerian youths, women and all Nigerians, including very objective elites” were asking him to run for President in 2023. Bello was immediately dismissed by Professor Itse Sagay, SAN, who reminded him that the Presidency in the APC had been zoned to the South, and that being a youth cannot be an automatic qualification.

Indeed, much earlier, Eniola Bello in his ThisDay column – “Yahaya Bello: The Ugly Face of APC” (March 8, 2021) had made even more damning remarks about the Governor. But Yahaya Bello has been resilient in saying he wants to be President.  His latest effort must have been prompted by the renewed debate about age and 2023 Presidential politics. His reported interview in the Daily Trust newspaper of August 22, 2021 is titled “2023: Buhari, Tinubu Pact not Binding on APC Members – Kogi Governor.”  Having confirmed that he would run for President in 2023, Governor Bello said of Tinubu: “Senator Tinubu is one of our leaders and I respect him so much. He has played a very significant role in Nigeria’s democracy and has built a lot of people. He has paid his dues, and with all respect, as a son to him, my simple advice is that it is time for him to allow his children take over the mantle of leadership and do it to the glory of God and his admiration. He should see that those children he raised are now doing well. Let him see how we manage this country in his lifetime. However, he has a right to run, nobody is questioning that. I always urge everybody to respect him for the role he has played in this country’s democracy. He is a man of integrity, to be candid.” He was then asked: “Do you think the APC would survive if Tinubu is denied the party’s ticket and he pulls out with the South West?”  Bello, who says he believes it is the turn of the North Central to produce the next President responds: “You don’t build a house and destroy it. I don’t think he will do that. He has grown past that. As an elder statesman, he will not say that the country should be destroyed in his lifetime, not even after his demise, so I don’t see him doing that.”

These are the words Yahaya Bello said, except he was otherwise misquoted by the Daily Trust newspaper. But for these respectful, almost subservient expressions of admiration for the party leader, and the affirmation of his own future ambitions within the APC, Yahaya Bello has been severely rebuked by the Tinubu Support Group. In a statement signed by the Director-General of the TSG, Umar Ibrahim, Yahaya Bello has been called a “disgrace, a failure and a betrayer.” He is advised to channel his efforts into “begging and praying for forgiveness for all the sufferings you have inflicted on the good people of Kogi State, rather than eyeing the Presidency.” Ibrahim insists that Tinubu is the most qualified person for the Nigerian Presidency in 2023.

I have never met Governor Yahaya Bello personally. I don’t need to. I have in fact been very critical of him: his re-election in 2019, and his many gaffes about COVID-19. But I think he, like every Nigerian, of eligible age, can aspire to the Presidency of Nigeria, and that the rest of us have the right to express an opinion and an interest without being mauled by any group that claims a monopoly of insight about the future of Nigeria. There is nothing that Yahaya Bello has said that was not implied in the Babangida criteria for the 2023 Presidency. Where was the Tinubu Support Group? Why didn’t Umar Ibrahim go after the elder statesman? Given the level of interest that the 2023 Presidency has generated, there would be more persons expressing views. How many views and expressions of interest will the TSG shut down? It may be possible to intimidate persons in the South West and the APC, but there are enough Nigerians who will also lay claim to the Presidency of Nigeria. The Tinubu Support Group does him great disservice. This is a leader who made great sacrifice to promote democracy in Nigeria. He invested a lot in building a generation of leaders. He earned a reputation as a master political strategist. Today, he appears to be surrounded by a group of political vultures and hacks on the question of 2023. Whoever and whatever they may be, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu owes us a duty to call the TSG, as presently constituted, to order. They are damaging his brand. Their campaign should be more focussed on selling his ideas, not motor-park politics.

Going forward, two key questions are pertinent:  Is there a dark horse and a third force in the political space who may emerge as President in 2023? And is there enough time for such an alternative to make any meaningful impact, timing being a major factor in politics?