A pawn is someone who is used by a more powerful person or group as a means of gratifying some personal benefits, after which such pawn is discarded or dumped. Two dominant political parties in Nigeria have applied the use-and-dump strategy on the Nigerian masses in the past 22 years. For the information of those unaware of the truth, a major reason why the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) lost power was because of an arrogant statement that the party would rule Nigeria for 50 years without challenges. It ruled for 16 years.
Currently, we are beginning to see a similar arrogant postures for Nigerians to be led by the nose like asses, for perhaps another 50 years. A radical Nigerian lawyer, Femi Falana (SAN) made such a relevation recently. We are being told that the All Progressives Congress (APC) is tinkering with the idea of holding onto power for as long as the party can play the pawn game successfully.
Yet, PDP’s National Publicity Secretary, Kola Ologbondiyan, told Nigerians that “the APC, as a party, does not have any iota of regard for their aspiration as a people, and as such must not be further entrusted with the fate of our nation after the Buhari’s abysmal tenure”. Did we not hear APC say worse things about PDP when the masses were being wooed to vote for APC?
The pawn game provides useful learning opportunities for a better understanding of what is going on in Nigerian politics. The principle of popular sovereignty which is one of the pillars of democracy states that, real political power lies and is vested in the masses, through their popular will and collective consent. Thus, democracy means that it is the collective will and interests of the majority which should prevail and serve as the basis of public policies and programmes. In a common slogan, this principle is expressed as “power belongs to the people”, while those who use it, do so on trust, or a mandate from the masses.
It was based on the principle of popular sovereignty that the PDP’s Publicity Secretary said: “It is instructive to inform President Buhari that, as citizens of a democratic state, Nigerians have every right to demand for a constitutional restructuring as well as a democratic forum to deliberate on good governance and national cohesion”. There was a promise of restructuring by APC in 2015, but a demand for its implementation in 2021 was deemed as “mischievously dangerous”.
If democracy is basically the collective will and interests of the largest majority, then anyone would wonder why power holders often shy away from addressing popular demands by the masses. There are many strategies adopted for the purpose of shying away from demands of the masses, which constitute what is commonly known as real politics.
Using the open grazing controversy as a case study, anyone would wonder why, in spite of the concerns expressed by 17 Southern Governors, the President would ask anyone to “go and dig the gazette of the First Republic when people were obeying laws. There were cattle routes and grazing areas …” If the purpose of digging out old gazette on open grazing, is to perpetuate that practice, then there would be Nigerians who would use that precedent to make other demands. No nation can move forward by reviving old laws which modern experiences would not accommodate. Open grazing is quite archaic!
Most likely there are interest groups asking for revival of an old law that would suit their aspirations. But, must the interest of one group undermine the rights of others, without exploring alternative means of avoiding conflicts? Open grazing has accounted for series of communal conflicts and a large number of honest Nigerians have expressed the opinion that the issue be addressed wisely and objectively. Yet, some vested interest groups would want to brush aside popular opinions.
The popularity of a democratic system of governance is the freedom which it grants all citizens irrespective of status. Such freedom includes expression of personal opinions, so long as the law is not breached, which includes the possibility of inciting rebellion against a constituted authority. While the opinion of the majority would hold sway, the right of the minority to a fair hearing must not be denied. Therefore, to suppress the opinion or other rights of a minority group is undemocratic.
A common strategy of reducing the masses to the status of pawns in a supposedly democratic system of governance, is the use of ruthless force by a small group of powerful people. In that case, a democracy can be perverted into an oligarchy, whereby the principle of “majority rule and minority right” becomes breached. It is true that elected rulers holding power on behalf of the electorate, can use such power to ensure security. But the concept of security can also be perverted to mean selective protection of a few powerful people while the masses are left to protect themselves and their interests.
When a society degenerates into that position of security for a small powerful group, the masses would be tempted to take steps to protect and secure their own interests in whichever ways they can. This was exactly what retired General T. Y. Danjuma alluded to when he said that the masses should protect themselves if those paid to do so are seen to be complicit. For the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) to lament that “nothing is safe in Nigeria”, means that the unprotected masses bear the greatest brunt of the sad situation.
The masses become pawns when poverty and hunger increase in the midst of high rate of insecurity, coupled with political shenanigans that shift blames and responsibility to the helpless masses. Pawn-holders, like slave masters, know how to use statistics to present a false picture of bliss for those in chains.
Dr Amirize is a retired lecturer from the Rivers State University, Port Harcourt.