By Olusegun Adeniyi
The eight men in the conference room of the Government House glanced at one another as they waited for the Governor to join the meeting. Seeking the same ticket to the House of Representatives for Wahala federal constituency, they had been invited for a final meeting before the party primaries scheduled for the next day. Seated on the extreme left is Hon Jeunsoke Gbajue, easily the most prominent in the room and also the most popular in the constituency. He had served only one term at the beginning of the current dispensation before he fell out of favour with the then governor and was edged out. While in the House, Gbajue sponsored no bill and made no remarkable contribution to debates. But he was loved by his people because he built churches and mosques and bought wheelbarrows for a number of young men under his empowerment programme.
Seated next to Gbajue is Dr Onimoya Amosu. Woe betides anybody who addresses him as Mr and not Dr Amosu. Even when nobody knows how the former Lagos panel beater acquired the title. Meanwhile, there are several stories about how he came into sudden wealth, including an insinuation that he was a godfather to kidnappers. But nobody has been able to pin anything on him. He is a heavy spender who enjoys the support of local political godfathers in the federal constituency he now seeks to represent at the National Assembly. Seated next to Amosu is a man popularly called ‘Engineer MIT’ but whose real name is Simon Efulefu. A charming politician who speaks with an American accent, ‘Engineer MIT’ likes to project himself as an intellectual and prefaces every statement with “When I was studying engineering at MIT”. That was how he earned the sobriquet with which his supporters hail him. However, the real story is that in the early nineties, Efulefu gained admission to the Maebashi Institute of Technology (MIT), a public university located in Maebashi, Gunma, Japan. After spending a decade without completing his study, Efulefu left for the United States where, according to ‘detractors’, he began doing odd jobs before he committed a crime and fled home to join politics.
Meanwhile, three hours after the meeting was supposed to have started, the aspirants were still waiting for the governor. Then, the SA to the governor on domestic affairs, Chief Garmoda Gabotari, a very pompous man who didn’t complete secondary school but was said to be related to the First Lady, walked in. “Oga said I should inform you that he will soon join you. He is having a zoom meeting with the White House. That is America. Can I get you people something to drink while you wait?” Only the two young men in the room requested for ‘soft drinks’ while others said they didn’t need anything. In their early thirties, these two young men eyeing the same ticket sat together chatting away.
One, Omorapala Mugu, is the son of the ruling party’s National Women Leader, a respected voice in the country in the campaign against the marginalisation of women, especially in the political space. Based on her gender activism, the governor had asked her to nominate a candidate for the federal constituency and was surprised when she submitted the name of her only son who spent five years to complete his Ordinary National Diploma (OND) in Marketing in the state polytechnics. Despite the fact that she has six daughters, two of whom are doctorate degree holders working in the private sector. Regarding the second young man in the room, there have been whispers about whether he comes from the constituency, which is interesting considering that his late father once represented the district in the Senate. The problem had to do with his date of birth. His father died in January 1991. But reports from his opponents claim he was born in November of that year with the insinuation that his late father’s Personal Assistant who is not from the state may be his real father.
At this point, the incumbent member of the House of Representatives, Hon Suegbe Banza, whom they all seek to displace, entered, greeted them warmly and said, “Let me go and see the governor.” It was bad enough that he came late. More than five hours after they had all been seated. And that he was going to see the governor made them uncomfortable. Five minutes after Hon Banza went inside, the Chief of Protocol entered and said, “Distinguished ladies and gentlemen, please rise for His Excellency.” The governor entered with Hon Banza, greeted the people warmly and took his seat. “Gentlemen, we all agreed that the best way to settle this matter without rancour is by consensus. We all know it is God that gives power to whomever He wishes…”
As the governor was still talking, Gabotari (the SA who had came in earlier to ask for what they would drink) remerged, this time wearing a complete babariga. “The party’s caucus has decided that the candidate for Wahala Federal Constituency is Gabotari”, the governor declared. All the nine men in the room, including the incumbent Hon Banza were dazed by the announcement but the governor was already done. “Now, if you will excuse me, I am in a hurry to catch my flight to Dubai where I have a meeting tonight with some foreign investors…”
The foregoing, of course, is based on my imagination. But if the morning, as they say, shows the day, it would appear that Nigerians have already been shortchanged regarding the 2027 general election. In most states, the gubernatorial candidates and those for legislative seats (House of Assembly, House of Representatives and Senate) were practically imposed in the name of ‘consensus’ or ‘direct election’ in which the ‘returning officers’ adopted what Professor Jerry Gana once described as ‘monkey counting’—1, 2, 3, 9, 37, 98, 503 etc. Even in the smaller political parties, there is no candidate (for any of the offices) who one would say emerged through a competitive process. Yet, these people require the popular electorate to validate their aspiration on the basis of one man, one vote!
As we have seen in recent days, when a ‘consensus’ emerges in Nigerian political parties, it is rarely the product of genuine consultation or the collective will of party members. More often, it is the result of backroom negotiations among a cabal of power brokers who have decided that the democratic process is too cumbersome, too unpredictable, and ultimately, too threatening to their interests. Aspirants who have mobilized support across the party structure are told to ‘step down’ in the interest of ‘party unity’. The script is familiar because it has been repeated so many times. And because we have normalized this subversion at the level of party primaries, we arrive at the general election with a choice between pre-selected surrogates.
The irony is instructive. The political parties that cannot organize credible primaries to select their standard-bearers are the same institutions expected to defend the sanctity of the general election. But the consequences of this manipulation extend far beyond the internal affairs of political parties. It is a given that when primaries are compromised, the choice before the electorate is no longer between competing visions or competent leadership, but between various degrees of imposition. This is why our elections, even when adjudged “free and fair” by international observers, often feel hollow. The fraud has already occurred upstream. By the time voters arrive at polling units, the real contest, the one that determines the quality of leadership on offer, has been settled in hotel rooms and private residences, far from the scrutiny of party members, let alone the general public. What remains is a ritualistic validation of decisions made by a select few.
In a democracy where political parties are the primary vehicles for accessing power, their internal processes cannot be divorced from the public interest. Therefore, when parties subvert their own rules to impose candidates, they are undermining the foundation of representative democracy. Besides, candidates who emerge through manipulated primaries often arrive at office beholden not to the electorate, but to the godfathers who facilitated their emergence. Governance becomes an exercise in settling political debts rather than delivering public goods. Accountability suffers because the candidate’s primary allegiance is to party kingmakers, not the citizens who voted. And so, the cycle continues. Compromised primaries produce compromised leadership, which in turn produces compromised governance.
If we are serious about deepening democracy in Nigeria, we must begin with the painful acknowledgment that the rot starts with party primaries. Electoral reforms that focus solely on the conduct of general elections will remain insufficient if we do not address the cancer of internal party democracy. The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) can conduct the most transparent election, but if the candidates on the ballot are products of fraud and imposition, we will have succeeded only in perfecting the mechanics of a flawed process.
Democracy, as we have learned elsewhere, is not only about the freedom to vote. It is about the freedom to choose among candidates who emerge through transparent, competitive processes that reflect the will of the people. And until we come to terms with that reality, our elections will remain elaborate rituals that change very little. We will continue to marvel at the efficiency of our electoral process while wondering why the quality of leadership remains abysmal. The answer, uncomfortable as it may be, is that we are already complicit in the fraud, validating at the polls what was imposed in the primaries.
What is needed is a fundamental rethinking of how we regulate political parties. There must be enforceable standards for the conduct of primaries. And citizens, particularly party members, must be empowered to challenge impositions without fear of victimization. Until our political parties internalize this truth, we will remain trapped in a cycle where the promise of democracy is perpetually deferred.
El-Rufai and the Rule of Law
The only ‘defence’ you hear from officials of the current administration when you broach the issue of how critical state institutions and the courts are being weaponised to hold former Kaduna State Governor, Nasir el-Rufai perpetually in jail is whataboutery: ‘Did he not do the same to others?’ While one should not condone whatever el-Rufai may have done to others in the past—and he has a sordid record on that score with the El-Zakzaky saga a prime example—when those who superintend the temple of justice become tools for an individual to be recycled across courts by prosecutors who evidently just want to keep that person in custody, we are on a slippery slope as a nation.
At face value, El-Rufai has been granted bail in the sum of N100 million. But before he can perfect the bail, he must obtain a surety who resides in either the Maitama or Asokoro districts of Abuja who in turn must deposit the original Certificate of Occupancy of a landed property at the court registry. The surety must be a federal civil servant not below Grade Level 17 and must provide evidence of salary payments for at least three months, authenticated by a letter from the manager of a bank within the jurisdiction of the court. The court further ordered the surety to be deposed to an affidavit of means, enter into a bail bond, and submit a recent passport photograph to the court registry. The court also directed that a verification letter from the surety’s immediate department be submitted, alongside a tax clearance certificate covering the last six months. El-Rufai must also submit a letter of attestation from the Chairman of the Kaduna State Traditional Council.
Even if we ignore the absurdity of El-Rufai being ‘roundtripped’ by three federal agencies—the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), State Security Service (SSS) and the Independent Corrupt Practices Commission (ICPC)—we should not close our eyes to the sinister role being played by the judiciary in his travails. Seven years ago, I had a rare opportunity to address this same issue at a gathering of Judges and senior lawyers, where I made my position very clear. I spoke at a dinner in honour of Justice Cecilia Mojisola Olatoregun, who had then just retired from federal high court in Lagos. In attendance that night was the Chief Judge of Federal High Court, Justice John Tosho. Other Justices also in attendance included Justices Binta Iyako, Mohammed Liman, Anwuli Chikere, Nnamdi Dimgba, Maureen Onyetenu, Adefunmilola Demi-Ajayi, Mobolaji Olubukola Olajuwon, Ayo Emmanuel, Rosemary Dugbo-Ogboghorie, Ibrahim Watila, Chuka Austine Obiozor, Iniekenme Nicholas Oweibo, Hadiza Rabiu Shagari and Toyin Bolaji Adegoke. There were, of course, many other Justices as well as senior lawyers like Dr Wale Babalakin, SAN, Mr Wole Olanipekun, SAN, Mr Mike Ozhekhome, SAN, Chief Bayo Ojo, SAN and Mrs Folake Solanke, SAN.
I prefaced my presentation this way: “In Nigeria, there are several challenges that our men and women on the bench confront almost on a daily basis. So, I salute all our Judges who are seated here tonight. However, there is an issue that worries me and I want to seize this opportunity to highlight it: The attachment of stringent bail conditions that are most often designed to keep applicants in jail. That these conditions apply mostly to those being prosecuted by the government raises questions that touch on the integrity of the bench in Nigeria.” I then went further to argue that since Judges are supposed to be neutral arbiters in the settlement of disputes, I do not think it is right to be using bail applications to tip the scales of justice. “Except in exceptional cases, the courts should not be giving bail conditions that they know cannot be met. Since the essence of demanding a surety is to ensure that the defendant returns to court for the remainder of the criminal justice process, I believe that the eminent jurists seated here tonight should reflect on what bail has become in our country today…”
While interested readers can access my presentation of 8th November 2019 here, https://olusegunadeniyi.com/projects/1076-justice-in-nigeria-and-the-lucrative-business-of-bail.html?lang=en, the El-Rufai saga goes beyond the travails of one man to the core issue of rule of law and justice administration in Nigeria. I therefore urge the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun to intervene on the matter. Our courts must not be seen as an instrument of injustice against any citizen—regardless of whether or not we like such individuals.
You can follow me on my X (formerly Twitter) handle, @Olusegunverdictand