CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1. BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

According to Wikipedia (2009) such elections are supposed to be competitive, free and fair both substantively and procedurally; and in which the ability of the elected representatives to exercise decision-making power is subject to the rule of law, and usually moderated by a constitution that emphasizes the protection of the rights and freedoms of individuals, and which places constraints on the leaders and on the extent to which the will of the majority can be exercised against the rights of minorities. Despite the legal framework that guides the electoral process, there is usually a contest between those who want to acquire power and those who are likely to lose power. The contest normally put the toga of violence because some politicians usually want to cut corners. A cursory look at democratic history of Nigeria reveals that of electoral cum political violence that sometimes threaten the country to its very foundation. This development in part had made democratic consolidation somehow problematic, and on the other hand has made it difficult for Nigeria to be referred to as a democratic state even though operators vehemently lay claim to it.

Elections ideally reflect and impact on the orderliness within society and the possibility of rejuvenating the political leadership through the change of decadent members of the elite and the advancement of the non-elite element. Properly managed elections provide a veritable platform for conflict resolution and transformation (Odukoya, 2007). Unfortunately, in Africa and Nigeria in particular evidences suggests that elections are fast becoming the very opposite of the above. Odukoya (2007) further pointed out that while much lip-service is paid to norms of free elections, too often the reality is a travesty of democracy. Devoid of the attribute of freeness and fairness, elections become empty shells, lacking any real democratic content. Commenting on Nigeria’s elections, Aluaigba (2008:2) maintained that credible election most relevant to the quality of democracy has been dented with terribly festering irregularities. This explains why the conduct of free and fair election has remained elusive and problematic in Nigeria since independence. He further argued that public polls held in 1959, 1964-65, 1979 and 1983 were all fraught with various levels of anomalies ranging from bribery, electoral violence, intimidation and harassment of voters, ballot box snatching and ballot stuffing, under age voting, vote buying, and so on. This misdemeanor has cost Nigeria its political stability, leading to military coups that over-threw the civilian regime. It is clear that this trend has not changed as exemplified by the 1999, 2003 and 2007 elections in the country.

Struggle in politics is a normal phenomenon since it has to do with competition, what is abnormal is the violence that has engrossed political struggle and power relations in Nigeria. Electoral violence is motivated by political actors who see politics not only as do or die affairs, but also as an extension of birth rights of individuals or group and so real or imagined opposition is silenced, worst still, eliminated. For the purpose of political recognition and relevance, well-placed individuals and groups continue to enjoy tenacity of office at the detriment of other ‘disadvantaged’ groups and individuals. Politics and political relations become stressed and strained. Intolerance ensues rather than accommodation; rancour rather than harmony and conflict in place of cooperation. Electoral violence is gradually becoming a permanent feature of democratization in Nigeria. This is because most campaign grounds are soaked with violence and killings. Arowolo and Aluko, (2012) argued that electoral violence seems to be institutionalized since it emanates from the corridors of power and so politics and political activities become exclusive rights of the politicians who make politics dirty in the first place. The fact that political game in Nigeria is played at variance with set rules makes it a dirty game. They maintained that Politics in Nigeria must have been infested with greed, tribalism, intolerance, injustice and parochial instinct of political leadership.

Commenting on reasons for escalation of electoral violence in Nigeria, Tamuno (2003) gave primacy to the fact that it was only the industry of politics as practiced in Nigeria that promised or delivered to the lucky ones the scarce commodities of wealth, power and fame, which he believes are the three dividends of public office holding at all elective levels in Nigeria. It is in this vein, that Tijjani (2003) also maintained that political and election-related violence is nothing but an expression of the deeply-seated culture of corruption in Nigeria. Therefore, political contests become fiercer than necessary in game where winners took all and losers become more desperate to such an extent that they could hire assassins, readily available among the poor not gainfully employed to do dirty jobs for the rich and angry politicians.

In examining the potential determinants or conditions that fuel violence in connection to polling, Lyons (2005) identifies the context within which conflict occurs in the electioneering process. In conflict societies, elections are contested fiercely because of the perceived stakes involved. Violence thus becomes an attractive tool to garner votes in an election. Also, the competition between parties during electioneering process may invite the use of violence as a way out of accepting electoral defeat. The culture of violence and impunity which characterizes conflict societies further fuels the situation since perpetrators of electoral violence are not brought to book because the political parties are afraid of losing their support.

1. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

According to Igbuzor (2010), Nigerians were dissatisfied with the annulment of June 12 Presidential election. Vociferous groups emerged, pressing on the Military to return the Country to democracy. Faced with this pressure, General Babangida formed an Interim National Government (ING) headed by Chief Earnest Shonekan, The ING was overthrown by General Sani Abacha. With the death of General Abacha on June 8, 1998, General Abdulsalami Abubakar instituted a Transition Programme with the view of returning the State to civil rule in 1999. Beside other programmes, the Regime set up an Electoral Body known as the Independent National Electoral Commission. The inauguration of this Body crystallized the beginning of the journey to Nigeria’s 4th Republic. The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) set the rules and time - table for the commencement of political activism, thus, Political Parties were registered and only three Parties, namely: Alliance for Democracy (AD), All Peoples Party (APP) and Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) scaled through the huddle and were registered.

Recently, a former Minister of External Affairs, Professor Bolaji Akinyemi, warned of a possible post-election crisis this year and the need to do everything possible to avert or minimize it. He states as follows: ‘the certainty of violence after the 2015 elections is higher than it was in 2011. If President Jonathan wins, the North would erupt into violence as it did in 2011. If General Buhari wins, the Niger Delta will erupt into violence. I don’t believe that we need rocket science to make this prediction. The violence of 2015 is going to be horrendous and worst than the one of 2011 for the simple reason that the illegal massive importation of weapons into the country has reached such alarming proportions that 1 really wonder which is better armed, the militias on one hand or the official Armed Forces on the other hand (Egobueze, 2013). In the light of the above, the study will try to investigate the effect of electoral violence on Nigeria’s democracy 1999-2019.

1. AIM AND OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The aim of this study is to examine the relationship effect of electoral violence and Nigeria democracy 1999-2019. Specifically, the study sought to:

1. Investigate the lingering prevalence of electoral violence in Nigeria
2. Examine the negative effect of electoral violence on Nigeria’s democracy
3. Examine the root cause of electoral violence in Nigeria
4. Ascertain the role of electoral umpire in the control of electoral violence in Nigeria

1. RESEARCH QUESTONS

Arising from the research objectives, the following research questions will be address in the study:

1. Why is the lingering prevalence of electoral violence in Nigeria?
2. What is the negative effect of electoral violence on Nigeria’s democracy?
3. What is the root causes of electoral violence in Nigeria?
4. What are the roles of electoral umpire in the control of electoral violence in Nigeria?

1. RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS

H0 there is no relationship effect of electoral violence and Nigeria’s democracy.

H1 there is relationship effect of electoral violence and Nigeria’s democracy.

1. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The study is highly important because through the findings of the study, it will help most political actors especially those contesting to let go pride and ego in order to allowed justice and peace prevail.

It will help the nation to be able to achieve its democratic strength, institutions and deepen democracy, politicians, their supporters and the electorate alike will shun all forms of electoral and political violence.

It will also enable policy makers to make policies that will sustained process and strategy of political education, apprehended perpetrators of electoral violence and politics of bitterness will be punished according to the existing law. It is only through this strategy that the battle can be won.

1. SCOPE OF THE STUDY

The study is on the effect of electoral violence on Nigeria’s democracy. It is limited to examining the root cause of electoral violence, the negative effects and the role of the electoral umpire in curtailing the effect of electoral violence in Nigeria.

The study focuses on male and female politicians, electorates, electoral umpires and the political educationist.

1. LIMITATION OF THE STUDY

TIME CONSTRAINTS: One the challenges experienced by the researcher is the issue of time; the research will simultaneously engage in departmental activities like seminars and attendance to lectures. But the researcher was able to meet up with the deadline for the submission of the project.

FINANCIAL CONSTRAINTS: Every research work needs funding; however lack of adequate funds might affect the speed of the researcher in getting materials for completion of the project.

1. DEFINITION OF TERMS

Election: Election is the formal process of selecting a person for public or of accepting or rejecting a political position. Roberts and Edwards as cited in Omotola define election as: “A method for the selection of persons to fill certain offices through choices made by an electorate; those (citizens who are qualified to vote under the rules and procedures of the electoral system” Elections are organized channel of popular expression.

Violence: The word violence has been viewed from different angles by different scholars from distinctive standpoints. Thus, for the purpose of this discourse, we are looking at violence in terms of both violation of human rights and social injustice. According to Gilula & Daniels as cited in Wikipedia, violence is ‘destructive aggression’. This conceptualization of violence implies the use of physical force to injure persons or property; and this is the core of most definitions of violence.

Electoral: Violence Igbuzor, defines electoral violence as: ‘any act of violence perpetuated in the course of political activities, including pre, during and post election periods, and may include any of the following acts: thuggery, use of force to disrupt political meetings or voting at polling stations, or the use of dangerous weapons to intimidate voters and other electoral process or to cause bodily harm or injury to any person connected with electoral processes.

Political Instability: Political instability is a situation where by a country is going through political turmoil. It may also involve the death of people within that country and in many cases the country deteriorates in terms of its economic progress.