APC AND POL 101-A Digress into Tyranny.

One of the introductory courses any first year student is taught in the department of political science is POL. 101. In some universities the code is simply given as PSC 101. In several universities, this course abbreviates the Introduction to Politics and Government. As a matter of fact, in many universities the course is compulsory for all the students in the faculty of social sciences because it equips students with the rudiments of socio-political engineering. This is basically so because the course, among other benefits, helps the students to understand the difference between politics, state, government, governance, influence, authority, legitimacy, etc.

In POL 101, one comes to appreciate that democracy is the best form of government; and that it is achieved through an electoral process. One will also be exposed to the anathema of dictatorship and imposition of leaderships and their deleterious effects on society. In addition, one will become conversant with the principles of separation of power relating to the three arms of government (legislature, executive and the judiciary) and the overarching role of the legislature as the engine room of functional democracy.

It was Thomas Hobbes (1588-1579) who in recommending well-defined roles for the separate arms of government lamented that ‘’any organ of the government is wolf to the other’’. John Locke (1652-1701) had even before the 1688 Glorious Revolution in England depicted the superiority of the legislature over the other arms of government. Locke also cautioned that the “collapse of any government is indicated if any form of….hindrance or limitation of the legislature; and finally, diminution of legislature through appointments or imposition of candidates” It was Baron de-Montesquieu, the most prominent espousals of the principles of separation of power who admonished against a digress to tyranny, if by any default, the executive exercises power over the legislature.

Any student of political history will always know that the legislature, beginning from 1688 to the present day, must always resist any form of imposition of candidates by the executive. Nigeria has had a surfeit of such awful experiences in the past. For the All Peoples Congress (APC) to believe in their wildest imagination that they can impose leadership on the Nigerian National Assembly is to say the least, an overstretched political naivety.

For instance, in1999, the Olusegun Obasanjo regime threw up Sen. Evans Enwerem as the Senate President but he was removed and replaced with Dr. Chuba Okadigbo, the popular choice. In 2003, Sen. Ike Ekweremadu was the preferred candidate by the Obasanjo executive but the senators preferred and enthroned Sen. Ken Nnamani; and Salisu Buhari the preferred Speaker was replaced with Alhaji Ghali Umar N’Abba; and so were Patricia Etteh (Mrs.) and Hon. Mulikat Akande displaced with Bayero Nafada and Aminu Tambuwal respectively. Even at zonal caucus levels, Sen. Rowland Owie narrates on how the PDP had zoned the position of the Chief Whip to Edo and Delta States during the Obasanjo administration; the party also recommended Sen. Oserheimen Osunbor for the position but according to Owie “we went to the floor of the Senate and I defeated Osunbor. In fact, nobody seconded Osunbor’s nomination

This introductory course in political science as we have stated above, in drawing a line between the parliamentary and presidential democracy, teaches any serious-minded student that while the party discipline is strong in the parliamentary system, party supremacy is usually very diffuse and tenuous in the latter. With respect to the present composition of the Nigerian Senate, the APC failed woefully by investing their interest in a particular candidate; by fanning the embers of hatred among the legislators and unwittingly sending the wrong signals that tended to declare the ebullient and charismatic Sen. Bukola Saraki as a persona non grata.

On the other hand, if the APC chieftains had heeded President Muhammadu Buhari’s stand on non-interference with the legislature, perhaps the National Assembly members would have sorted themselves out; but to sanctimoniously preach against interference and zoning of leadership positions in the legislature on one hand and with the other hand, reeling out a list for zoning and leadership in the legislature is the most regrettable and irredeemable doublespeak that lends credence to the widely acclaimed view that the APC lacks focus and direction.

A fresher in the political science department would be equipped enough to educate the leadership of the APC that the party does not enjoy an overwhelming majority in the Senate and that any division among them would tilt the leadership to the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). It is, therefore, preposterous to expect the highly experienced PDP senators to fold their hands in the melodrama or take instructions from the APC. The APC leadership should have been more articulate, visionary, predictive and pre-emptive in handling the leadership process.

For the APC to have spent over 80 days since the presidential and national assembly elections frolicking in jubilation without the necessary strategies to manage success, underscores the widely acknowledged fears for the black race. The mantra of the APC before and during the elections was “change”. But change for its sake without adequate framework for visible and positive change is not only dubious and criminal but also hypocritical; and amounts to huge electoral scam on Nigerians. As I write, I watch on the television, the AIT sad commentary with the caption, House of Reps in Commotion. It showcases to the entire world, the elected members of the House of Representatives in a free-for-all fisticuffs in an attempt to resist the Tinubu-Oyegun tyranny. To my mind, this is a debacle foretold and which Bola Tinubu and John Odigie Oyegun in their desperation, will not admit. My sympathy goes to Mr. President, who in a bid to identify with his party has failed to upbraid the hawkish desperadoes for the opprobrium they have attracted to democracy in Nigeria and Africa.

Election of principal officers has taken place at both chambers of the National Assembly on June 9, 2015. The elections complied with the rules and regulations guiding the inauguration of the National Assembly. They were adjudged very transparent and credible. All the existing literatures in politics insist that democratic leadership should emerge through free and fair election and not by imposition. That accounts for the ascension of Mr. President against Dr. Goodluck Jonathan. ”. As a former parliamentarian, I can inform from both experience and scholarship that the Parliament, all over the world, is allergic to imposition of candidates by the executive, irrespective of party loyalty.

Furthermore, our basic introductory political science course reflects fully on the distinction between politics and governance; that government is the agency of the State and that governance is through the policies and programmes enunciated by the executive arm of the government. Governance takes over after the intrigues and politics in the process of the acquisition of power.

President Muhammadu Buhari has acquired power and he is expected to define the philosophy, content, logic, character and direction of his government by sending his ministerial nominees to the Senate for ratification. Mr. President may know that the legislature by statute exists to lend supports to noble policies and objectives by the executive and are at the same time, expected to oppose policies that do not resonate with the consciousness of the people they represent. The masses are waiting for any legislator, whether in APC or PDP, that stands against the fight on corruption, transparency in government, cost of governance, efficient service delivery among others.

Chiedozie Alex Ogbonnia teaches political science at Godfrey Okoye University, Enugu.