ABSTRACT
This
study examines, investigates, and surveys opinion of Nigerians on some of the
factors that influence party and party system development in Nigeria, using
data elicited from the three Senatorial Districts of Edo State, Nigeria. The exercise was embarked upon against the
background of widespread desire of Nigerians for the country to attain the
highest height of party politics. To be
sure, Nigerians have been clamouring for the country to evolve, organize and
develop viable political parties that will aid the democratization
process. The question raised has been
whether the political attitudes and predispositions of the Nigerian public are
supportive or antagonistic to the identified factors influencing and shaping
party and party system development in Nigeria.
The
stratified random sampling was used to select the respondents or sample of
1,200 Nigerians, from Edo-North, Edo-Central, and Edo-South Senatorial
Districts of Edo State. The measurement
instruments were the structured questionnaire and in-depth interview, designed
to enable the researcher get at the trend of party development in Nigeria. The data collected were analyzed with the aid
of simple percentage, and the chi-square and Yule’s Q to test and determine the
degree of association inherent in the stated hypotheses. Evidence from the study’s results indicate
that: the male respondents were more likely than their female counterparts to
have the opinion that strong and vibrant opposition parties in Nigeria is
predicated on the country’s choice of presidential system of government; the
married respondents were more likely than their counterparts who are single to
have the opinion that there is a low institutionalization of parties and party
system in Nigeria. The respondents who fall within the age bracket of 40years
and above were more likely than their counterparts who fall within the age
bracket of below 40years to have the opinion that ethnic sentiments is still
associated with the country’s political parties; the respondents with tertiary
education were less likely than their counterparts with secondary
education/less to have the opinion that the simple plurality (FPTP) electoral
system is the best option for the Nigerian state; and respondents who are
public servants/political office holders are more likely than their
counterparts who fall within the business and others category to have the
opinion that the multi-party system is
the best option for the Nigerian state.
Policy
advice or recommendations were made at the end of the study, some of which
include:
1.
The urgent
need for government to ensure political parties are premised on ideological
bases rather than on the forces of primordialism – ethnicity and religion.
2.
The need for
government to promote internal democracy within Nigerian political parties.
3.
The need for
government to address the character of the Nigerian state by decongesting the
center at national and state levels and as such taming the tide of elite
factionalization of political parties.
4.
The need for
government to promote the vibrancy of opposition parties in Nigeria via
strengthening the instrumentality of the presidential system.
5.
The need for
the electoral system in Nigeria to be re-visited by the government.
6.
The need to
de-register some of the existing political parties in Nigeria notwithstanding
the fact that it is a negation of the practice of multi-partyism.
Thus,
for the evolution and development of viable political parties in Nigeria,
socio-political education and re-engineering are imperative. The values of hard work, tolerance,
discipline and unity should be emphasized by the people and government of
Nigeria.
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND
OF STUDY
The history of political party in Nigeria can be
situated within the context of the two-party and multi-party political system
(Adejumobi, 2007), which can be traced to the development of nationalist
consciousness, awareness and political movements (Agarah, 2004), that began in
Nigeria in the 1930s. This activity specifically, is what Coleman (1986:22)
described as the “second wave of nationalist movement which was ‘less militant
and resistant’ but mainly concerned with sentiments, activities and organizational
developments aimed at the self-government and independence of Nigeria”.
A key distinguishing feature of the second wave of
Nigerian nationalism was the development of permanent political associations to
pursue national objectives (Coleman, 1986), with the various associations
formed, by nationalists such as Ernest Ikoli, Herbert Macaulay, Samuel
Akinsanya, Nnamdi Azikiwe, Obafemil Awolowo and others constituting the
precursors of political parties in Nigeria.
Political parties in Nigeria display certain key
features, which include:
·
Their
emergence and evolution has been closely tied to Nigerian constitutional
development or evolution of Nigerian constitution. For example, it was the
Clifford constitution of 1922 provision of four elective seats for Nigerians in
the legislative council that stimulated the formation of the Nigerian National
Democratic Party of Herbert Marcaulay. Similarly, political party formation
enjoyed a boost from the Richard’s constitution of 1944 provision of regional
assemblies while retaining the four elective seats to legislative council.
Similarly, the Macpherson constitution’s regional assemblies and regional
executive councils and system of indirect elections to Nigerian legislative
Houses in 1951 strengthened political parties activities in pre-independent Nigeria.
·
Most parties
have ethnic and regional bases or display identity orientations. For example,
the Action Group (AG), the Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN) the Alliance for
Democracy (AD) and the Action Congress (AC) had/have their basis in the Yoruba
dominated South-West of Nigeria. Similarly, the National Council of Nigeria
Citizens (NCNC), the Nigerian Peoples Party (NPP) and the All Progressive Grand
Alliance (APGA) had/have their political strong-hold in Igbo land while the
Northern People’s Congress (NPC), the National Party of Nigeria (NPN) and All
Nigerian Peoples Party (ANPP) had/have theirs in the Hausa-Fulani heartland of
northern Nigeria.
·
Only a few of
the political parties in Nigeria can boast of having a national spread.
·
Political
parties in Nigeria have been prone to serious inter-party conflicts, divisions,
splitting and decamping (Agarah, 2004; Adejumobi, 2007).
These features arise from what has been described
by Rosiji (1992) as “caucus or elitist nature” of political parties in Nigeria,
the direct outcome of thinking that the educated minority in each ethnic group
are the people who are qualified by natural right to lead their fellow
nationals into higher political development (Olarinmoye, 2008).
In other words, political elites first create
political structures then invite the mass to join. Political parties are
created and directed by the elites in society who believe that control of
government and of political power should be their preserve. They are, thus, not
mass or branch parties with membership drawn from across board and with
interests that are parochial, centred on elite objectives and actualization.
Elite parties are therefore non-ideological
organizations having less interest in political principles than in securing and
retaining political office for its leadership and distributing income to those
who run it and work for it (Banfield and Wilson, 1965:66; Scott, 1973:121). The
structural and ideological features of elite parties translate into a weak base
amongst the masses. Most political parties in Nigeria are poorly entrenched in
Nigerian civil society with a gap existing between them and the mass
electorate.
The aforementioned
disposition of political parties in Nigeria, no doubt, has eroded the central
role which, ordinarily, parties whether in consolidated and non-consolidated
democracies are supposed to play. This,
in no small means or measure, has negated the widely accepted role by policy
makers and democracy – promotion organizations, who often display a strong
normative bias in favour of cohesive, organizationally developed political
parties. According to the US National Democratic institute (2011:22), for
instance:
Political parties form
the cornerstone of a democratic society and serve a function unlike any other
institution in a democracy. Parties aggregate and represent social interests
and provide a structure for political participation. They train political
leaders who will assume a role in governing society. In addition, parties
contest and win elections to seek a measure of control of government
institutions.
Similarly, the United
Nations Development Programme (2008:5) maintains that “political parties are a
keystone of democratic governance. They provide a structure for political
participation; serve as a training ground for political leadership; and
transform social interests into public policy”.
Scholars are similarly
effusive. Some of the world’s foremost political scientists have placed parties
at the centre of the modern democratic experience, arguing that strong parties
are a sine qua non of successful democratization. Strong parties are said to be
the prerequisite for political stability in modernizing countries. Without
effective parties that command at least somewhat stable bases of support,
democracies cannot have effective governance (Diamond and Gunther, 2001). More
recently, in one of his final publications, Lipset (2000) extolled the
indispensability of political parties for the survival of both transitional and
established democracies. The more vigorous
and healthy they are the better assured is the health of the democratic process
(Agbaje, 1998). It is therefore difficult to imagine any modern democracy
without political parties as they are the connecting links between diverse
groups of peoples and governments.
The most common classification of political
parties is that which emphasizes the degree of competitiveness in a political
system. Hence, there can be one party, two party or multi-party political
systems. A more basic classification of political parties, in the words of
Agbaje (1998), is that which highlights the nature of the membership of
political parties. Thus, there can be:
·
Branch/mass
parties whose membership is composed of different sections of political
society.
·
Caucus/elitist
parties whose membership is drawn mainly from the upper class of society.
·
Religious
parties whose membership is determined by nature of religions affiliation.
·
Broker parties
with membership drawn from both the rich and poor classes of society.
·
Charismatic
parties formed around individuals with unique talents and whose membership cuts
across identity and class lines (Olarinmoye, 2008).
Juxtaposition – wise, while a great deal of the
problems confronting political party development in Nigeria’s history can be
linked to behavioural and attitudinal dispositions of the political elite, on
the door-step of the institutions that have been saddled with the responsibility
for the regulations of these parties, experiences have shown that there is an
elitist manipulation of political parties. This is coupled with the fact that
the roles of political parties are punctured, and truncated by various negative
activities such as polarizing and widening gap between and /or among ethnic
groups. Also, the syndromes of unhealthy rivalry, marginalizing tool,
exploitative mechanism, expropriating role, as well as, the low
institutionalization of these political parties have snowballed into inter and
intra party rivalry/crisis.
1.2 STATEMENT
OF RESEARCH PROBLEM
Political parties have long been recognized as
essential components of representative democracy. Indeed, it is difficult to
imagine how the governance of modern states could be accomplished without
meaningful political parties. By organizing voters, aggregating and
articulating interests, crafting policy alternatives and providing the basis
for coordinated electoral and legislative activity, well-functioning political
parties are central not just to representative government but also to the
process of democratic development in transitional democracies like Nigeria.
Parties perform a number of essential functions
that make democracy in modern states possible. Ideally, they represent
political constituencies and interests, recruit and socialize new candidates
for office, set policy-making agendas, integrate disparate groups and
individuals into the democratic process, and form the basis of stable political
coalitions and hence governments. Collectively, this means that political
parties are among the primary channels for building accountable and responsive
government.
Beyond these functional activities, parties also
provide a number of deeper, systemic supports that help make democracy work
effectively, for instance:
·
They mediate
between the demands of the citizenry on the one hand and the actions of the
government on the other, aggregating the diverse demands of the electorate into
coherent public policy.
·
They make
effective collective action possible within legislatures. Without the
predictable voting coalitions that parties provide, there would be chaos as
legislative majorities shifted from issue to issue and vote to vote.
·
By providing a
link between ordinary citizens and their representatives, parties are also the
primary channel in democratic systems for holding governments accountable for
their performance.
Yet in many transitional democracies in general,
and in the Nigerian State in particular, parties struggle to play these roles.
Instead, parties exhibit a range of pathologies that undercut their ability to
deliver the kind of systemic benefits on which representative politics depends.
For instance:
·
They are
frequently poorly institutionalized, with limited membership, weak policy
capacity and shifting bases of support;
·
They are often
based around narrow personal, regional or ethnic tiers, rather than reflecting
society as a whole;
·
They are
typically organizationally thin, coming to life only at election time;
·
They may have
little in the way of a coherent ideology;
·
They often
fail to stand for any particular policy agenda;
·
They are
frequently unable to ensure disciplined collective action in parliament, with
members shifting between parties;
·
As a result,
parties often struggle to manage social conflicts and fail to deliver public
goods and thus to promote development.
The aftermath of the aforementioned is poor
electoral process snowballing into legitimacy crisis which is one of the major
impediments of an enduring democracy (the Nigerian State inclusive). The political topsy-turvy arising from poor/
weak parties and party system
development notwithstanding, the factors that negatively impacted on the
Nigerian party and party system development are multi-faceted, which ranges
from ethnicity, poor party institutionalization, lack of independence in the
operative of the judiciary and the electoral body, poor political culture among
others (Ibada, 2007; Omodia, 2007).
However, the fundamental thrust of this research
study is to unravel the causes, nature and trends of political party and party
system development as key structure of the democratic political institutions in
undermining or strengthening the electoral process in Nigeria. This is, no
doubt, indispensable considering the conception that functional political
party, especially in a multi-party system tends to enhance the quality of the
democratic process in terms of democratic representation and political
participation through effective political education that also enhances and
provides functional support for the electoral process (Dinneya, 2006; Bello,
2008). In other words, it could be argued that a strong electoral process cum democracy
exists when there is strong parties and party system which manifest the tenets
of democracy both at the intra and inter party levels.
To lend
credence to the import of the problem which this study seeks to espouse,
it is apposite to reiterates the aphorism that political institutions can
easily be judged as good or bad on the extent and degree to which they provide
political satisfactions or utility to citizens. Political utility can therefore
be “estimated for the inclusiveness of citizens in the participation process
and the fit between policy-making decisions and citizens preferences” (Colomer,
2008:1). It can be discerned that the nature and character of institutional
designs are likely to influence political party institutionalization in
Nigeria. In a recent study, Kura (2008) establishes that institutional designs
have contributed in weakening and destabilizing political party oppositions in
Nigeria. The ruling party has unlimited access to state resources that it uses
in not only strengthening itself but also wooing opposition politicians through
clientelistic networks. The nature of the presidential system gives abundant
power to the president to appoint all strategic officers, such as principal
members of electoral institution, top ranking police and army commanders,
e.t.c. Thus, in a state characterized by clientelism and neo-patrimonalism,
these officers have become instruments of the ruling party. They are used to
destabilize opposition parties and serve as instruments of dominant party
system formation (Kura, 2008).
However, these deficiencies in party and party
system development in Nigeria, vis-à-vis their impact and effects, are so
widespread that they have become a central concern in the body polity of the
nation, to the extent that they are increasingly seen as a threat to stable
democracy within the Nigerian state. The recognition of such
impediments to democratic development has spurred growing attention, both domestically
and internationally, on how stronger, more capable political parties can be
evolved, sustained and developed in Nigeria.
1.3 OBJECTIVES
OF STUDY
Based
on the research problem discussed above, the objectives of this study are:
·
To unfold the
machinations and manipulations of political parties by the politicians/elites
in such a way that political parties are elitist in formation, development, and
operation.
·
To examine the
extent to which the multi-party system in Nigeria has facilitated and
engendered political socialization of the electorate, recruitment of political
leadership, and serve as a unifying force in a divided polity.
·
To examine and
scrutinize the extent to which the electoral system (simple plurality system or
first-past- the post) affects the development of political parties in Nigeria.
·
To identify
the main institutional designs influencing party formation,
institutionalization and development in Nigeria.
·
To proffer
solutions to the problems be-deviling political party and party system
formation and development in Nigeria.
1.4 STATEMENT
OF HYPOTHESES
Deriving from the
above, the researcher proposed the under-listed hypotheses which are in their
null and alternate forms:-
1.
Ho: There is no relationship between
respondents’ sex and their opinion about the presidential system having evolved
or engendered strong and vibrant opposition parties in Nigeria.
HR: There is a relationship between respondents’ sex and their
opinion about the presidential system having evolved or engendered strong and
vibrant opposition parties in Nigeria.
2.
Ho: There is no relationship between
respondents’ marital status and their opinion about low institutionalization of
political parties and party system in Nigeria.
HR: There is a relationship between
respondents’ marital status and their opinion about low institutionalization of
political parties and party system in Nigeria.
3.
Ho: There is no relationship between respondents’ age and their
opinion about ethnicity still influencing political parties and party system in
Nigeria.
HR: There is a relationship between
respondents’ age and their opinion about ethnicity still influencing political
parties and party system in Nigeria.
4.
Ho: There is no relationship between
respondents’ educational level and their opinion about the simple plurality
(FPTP) electoral system being the best option for the Nigerian state.
HR: There is a relationship between
respondents’ educational level and their opinion about the simple plurality
(FPTP) electoral system being the best option for the Nigerian state.
5.
Ho: There is no relationship between
respondents’ occupation and their opinion about the multi-party system being
the best option for the Nigerian state.
HR: There is a relationship between respondents’
occupation and their opinion about the multi-party system being the best option
for the Nigerian state.
1.5 SIGNIFICANCE
OF STUDY
This study is important because its findings will
help beam the searchlight on the factors and dynamics shaping political party
development in Nigeria. The findings will provide the basis for understanding
the intricacies embedded within political parties and other electoral institutions as they affect citizen’s
participation in the political process.
Secondly, the study will add to the reservoir of
knowledge in the areas of political party development and party polities as
they affect a country’s democratic endeavour.
Thirdly, the research study will be a stepping
stone for further research into political party related issues and perhaps, as
well as, the ways the parties themselves are formed that make them the
albatross of elections.
Fourthly, the study will contributes in no small
measure in the understanding of the various institutional designs as they
affect the development of political parties and party systems in Nigeria.
Fifthly, if the findings of this study are
accessed by policy makers, they will surely provide impetus and data that will
ensure the formulation, evolution, and development of vibrant, strong and
viable political parties in Nigeria.
Finally, it is the researcher’s hope that the
study will make good readership piece for scholars, students and others who are
interested in political party and party system related issues in our
contemporary world.
1.6 SCOPE
AND LIMITATIONS OF STUDY
The scope of this study was limited to the
examination and analysis of the nature and role of political parties as well as
on the opinion of Nigerians on the factors that influence party and party
system development in Nigeria, covering the period of 1960 till date, but with
a particular focus on the Fourth Republic.
One major limitation to this study was the
vastness of the Nigerian landscape, the coverage of which will be problematic,
and as such the three senatorial districts of Edo State served as the sampling
frame from which data was elicited from respondents.
Moreover, the clandestine nature of political
parties in Nigeria also limits the extent to which accurate and reliable
information was elicited from the respondents. Thus, the variables selected as
factors influencing political party development are by no means exhaustive with
particular reference to the Nigerian State.
1.7 DEFINITION OF TERMS
To minimize confusion
it is helpful to define some of the concepts that were used in this research
study.
Political
Party
The concept of
political party is the most frequently used in political discourse and arguably
in need of defining most because of its variety of meanings in different
contexts and time periods. One of the most famous and widely used definitions
is that by Edmund Burke (1770) as cited by Paul Langford (1981:312), who
defines a party as “a body of men united for promoting by their joint
endeavours the national interest upon some particular principle in which they
all agreed”. However, the emphasis on a shared ideology among party members in
this definition does not seem to apply to most parties in non-western nor to
some parties in contemporary western democracies- that lack a clear ideological
profile, have a much more fluid membership and operate on a more pragmatic,
clientelist basis. A more minimalist definition that still captures the
representational function of political parties is more appropriate. This
research study therefore uses Giovanni Sartori’s (1994) definition: “a party is
any political group that presents at elections, and is capable of placing
through elections, candidates for public office”.
Party
System
The concept of party
system subsequently will refer to a collection of parties competing with other
parties in elections for the control of public office (Wolinetz, 2002).
Political
Party Development
The term political
party development is defined as the process through which a political party
originates, evolves into an organized structure and becomes either more or less
electorally accountable. It is important to note that in practice this is a
non- linear, multi-dimensional process.
Institutionalization
This is a closely
related concept to political party development and is primarily used in the
context of party and party system institutionalization. Following Randall and
Svasand (2002) analysis, it is here defined as the process by which the party
(or the party system) becomes established in terms both of integrated patterns
of behavior and attitudes, or culture.