Whither Democratic Ingredients In Nigeria?

Today, the 12th day of June 2023, is being celebrated all over the country as ‘Democracy Day’.  The celebration though does not commemorate the birth of democracy in Nigeria, it  is rather significant because it represents the recovery of a lost virtue. Democracy in Nigeria, believed to have been murdered through the annulment of the June 12, 1993 general election in Nigeria by the then Head of State, Retired General Ibrahim Badamosi Babangida, was said to have been restored on May 29, 1999, when Retired General Olusegun Obasanjo took office as the president of Nigeria, following his election at the 1999 general election, which brought  an end to decades of military rule in the country. This celebration is not peculiar to Nigeria alone, countries like the United States of America, Canada, Cape Verde and United Kingdom also observe democracy day.
However, while we roll out drums in the face of a declaration of a nation-wide public holiday for this day, it is important we understand the difference between a change from military to civil rule and democracy. If the reason for the celebration is that Nigeria no longer experiences military rule,  then such should be made clear. On the contrary, if the reason be for a restoration of democratic government, then it is also important that we define the system of government Nigeria currently operates. In that case, we have to look out for things that make for democracy and be sure we enjoy them so we can have every reason to celebrate. Again, before we celebrate, does Nigeria actually have a place for public interest in its democratic experience? In any setting where productivity and general development are pursued, the interest of the people is usually given top priority.
This is so because public interest when protected, engenders peace and development. The free encyclopedia, Wikipedia refers to it as the welfare or well being of the general public. Proponents of democracy as a government of the people always see the concepts of democracy and public interest as intertwined as such, the success of any democratic setting is measured by the ability of the leaders to attend to the need or interest of the public. In his 1863 Gettysburg Address, the 16th U.S. President, Abraham Lincoln, defined democracy as the government of the people, by the people and for the people. For a personality in Lincoln’s status, his explanation of democracy could not have been a product of imagination and guesswork, but one borne out of experience, having led the United States of America through its bloodiest civil war and perhaps its greatest moral, constitutional and political crisis.
Lincoln’s acknowledgement of democracy as one that holds the interest of the public so dear, may have led to his success in preserving the union, abolishing slavery and strengthening the federal government while modernising the economy. In clear terms, Lincoln would not have achieved such feat should his sense of leadership be clouded with personal interest over public interest.Therefore, whether a government adopts the traditional, pluralist, elite or the hyper pluralism theory, the common truth is that people are involved and so, their involvement or inclusion with a view to accessing their interest must be key in effecting change. This is why a political analyst, Dr Kelly S. Meier said, “democracy is a complex concept that centres on ensuring freedom for all citizens within a country in contrast to dictatorship. It is one type of government that has captured the fancy of many people.
Its working ingredients tagged democratic model, which captured salient societal ideals endear it to all.Thus, democracy is protective, pluralist, developmental and participatory. This model serves as a mirror to any democratic set-up for self evaluation. Suffice it to say that a democratic state is known by its ability to protect the lives and property of its citizens, their rights and liberties as well as moderate the imbalance in wealth creation. In addition, the system through which democratic leaders emerge, is usually transparent, supposedly devoid of obvious irregularities that are tantamount to posing some question mark on both the popularity and the acceptability of the individual. The popularity of its leader is usually predicated on his ability to deliver democratic dividends to his subjects. In the light of the concept of democracy, as captured in this piece, could Nigeria be said to be a country practising democracy yet bereft of its tenets?
With lives and property of citizens lost on daily basis to the menace of bandits and herdsmen, where lies the protective ingredient of democracy in Nigeria? With alleged lopsided appointment of public officers and endemic unemployment that has highlighted poverty to the detriment of Nigerians, where lies the participatory property of democracy and moderation of imbalance in wealth creation? I think that the confused state of this country is borne out of its leaders’ blatant refusal to carry the masses along with a view to prioritising their interest. I believe that the  Ahmed Bola Tinibu’s  administration must as a matter of necessity defend the public interest, against selfish interest, before we can be counted among the committee of nations under democratic rule.

By: Sylvia ThankGod-Amadi