Fears over 2015 presidential poll

The conduct and utterances of some members of the country’s political class ahead of the 2015 general elections have made the call for an undertaking committing politicians to a violence-free elections compelling, writes JOHN ALECHENU

Analysts argue that never in Nigeria’s over 50-year-old history – as an independent nation – has the country faced this kind of multipronged threat to its national survival.

The current level of threat, which some argue, was initially posed by the activities of the Boko Haram sect, appears to have been compounded by fears being expressed about the forthcoming general elections.

A former Minister of Foreign Affairs, Prof. Bolaji Akinyemi, said this in a well publicised open letter. Akinyemi pointed to what he called the notorious prediction from United States’ semi-official sources, that the world is expecting a cataclysmic meltdown of the Nigerian nation come 2015. According to him, while most Nigerians were outraged by this prediction, there are Nigerians who have remained indifferent to the outcome of this prediction.

Going down memory lane, the former diplomat noted that the certainty of violence after the 2015 elections is higher than it was in 2011. His fear is fuelled by permutations that if President Jonathan wins, the North would erupt in violence as it did in 2011. If Maj. Gen. Muhammadu Buhari (retd.) wins, the Niger Delta would erupt in violence. He said, “I don’t believe that we need rocket science to make this prediction. The violence of 2015 is going to be horrendous and worse 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 I really wonder which is better armed, the militias or the official armed forces on the other hand.

“For the avoidance of doubt, I am not imputing the illegal importation of arms to any particular zone. Some years ago, some Iranians were arrested for bringing in a shipload of weapons into Lagos harbour. They were tried and jailed and then smuggled out of the country.”

He is not alone in expressing such fears. Jigawa State governor, Alhaji Sule Lamido, who only recently mended political fences with President Goodluck Jonathan, pointedly accused the President and his main challenger, Buhari, of inciting Nigerians to violence. Lamido observed that the two candidates have either directly or indirectly been encouraging their kinsmen and supporters to make provocative and incendiary statements capable of setting the nation ablaze before, during or after the elections.

The Jigawa State governor, who recently addressed a political gathering in Dutse, the state capital, told the crowd of party faithful that both Jonathan and Buhari should be personally held responsible if violence occurs as a result of the election. While expressing support for Akinyemi’s postulations and the call for the two candidates to sign a bond committing them to non-violent polls, he advocated that they should be held to account should the elections turn violent.

Lamido, specifically, decried the failure of both candidates to call their supporters who are leading the pack of those threatening to cause mayhem if the 2015 presidential election does not go their way.

Prominent northern leaders, including Dr. Junaid Mohammed, had warned of a possible breakdown of law and order if the 2015 election was rigged. Some other northerners were said to have threatened trouble if Buhari was rigged out.

A pro-Jonathan supporter and former Niger Delta militant, Mujahid Asari-Dokubo, on his part vowed that “blood will flow” if President Jonathan was not allowed to contest for and complete his second term.

Equally disturbing is a statement made by the Rivers State Governor and Director General of the Muhammadu Buhari Campaign Organisation, Mr. Rotimi Amaechi, threatening that his party would no longer seek legal redress but would encourage civil disobedience and form a parallel government, if the election was rigged in favour of the ruling party.

President Jonathan’s call for peace and appeal to politicians to eschew violence attracted snide remarks from the opposition APC. The APC accused the President of paying lip service to violence-free polls because neither his party nor his ardent supporters have shown any sign of slowing down on their threats of anarchy should he lose the election.

In the light of this, Lamido said, “As our leaders, both personalities (Jonathan and Buhari), should caution their supporters to guard their utterances not to allow such incitements to drift the country into chaos. It is disheartening for any responsible citizen to allow such unscrupulous statements. It ought to be condemned by all and sundry for the sake of peace and oneness of the country as a corporate entity.

“We won’t succumb to sectional and religious politics or bigotry, or personal agenda aimed at destabilising the corporate existence of our great country.”

He recalled that the 2011 presidential election, which both leaders contested, witnessed post-election violence which led to the death of dozens of Nigerians and the loss of property, a situation which some families have been unable to recover from.

The report of the Independent National Electoral Commission on the 2011 general elections observed that election violence is a phenomenon that is not strange to Nigeria’s electoral history. It noted that during the First Republic, for example, post-election violence in the then Western Region, which erupted from 1964 to 1965, precipitated political upheavals that culminated in the collapse of the republic in January, 1966.

The commission also pointed out that even the April 2011 elections, hailed as being credible by domestic and international observers, were not spared of this unwholesome reaction.

INEC explained that the 2011 electoral violence, which was recorded in parts of northern Nigeria, was not a consequence of poor handling of the process by the commission. Rather, the report said it was a practical consequence of the do-or-die attitude of the political class to electoral contests. The INEC report also said the utterances of some of the candidates that lost and the general inability of politicians to accept defeat did not help matters.

This, the report added, led to the destruction of many lives and property in Bauchi, Gombe, and Kaduna, among other northern states. It equally noted that the culture of impunity and desperation, exploitation of religious and ethnic sentiments to incite groups against one another as well as outright mischief added fuel to an already burning fire.

In Bauchi state for instance, the report said, “In one of the worst instances of electoral violence since 1973, 10 NYSC members along with over 50 other innocent persons were also killed.” This is in addition to public and private buildings burnt. Sadly, these factors have, rather than abate, increased over the last four years.

Political pundits have expressed the opinion that the country’s current security situation is a creation of her political leadership. Those in this school of thought argue that a cross-section of the nation’s leaders prefer primitive accumulation of wealth to ensuring Nigeria’s collective survival. They also stressed the fact that Nigeria’s political leadership, especially at the national level, had elevated a penchant for exploitation, and abuse of established process, corruption and nepotism to an art. They contended that this, among other things, had created an atmosphere of suspicion and distrust between the leaders and the led and has stunted the desire for socio-economic growth.

To make matters worse, the winner-takes-all approach that promotes mediocrity in governance and relegates merit to the background coupled with tension-creating comments, find expression in violence.

Many Nigerians seem to agree with the call by Akinyemi and Lamido that there is the need for political actors, especially the presidential candidates of the two leading political parties, to sign an undertaking committing them to a peaceful election. This is even more so because their supporters across board take a cue from their public conduct and utterances to draw conclusions.

A good point to start from is for candidates of political parties not to hesitate to call any of their supporters to order whenever they make divisive utterances capable of inciting violence.

Chairman of INEC, Prof. Attahiru Jega, has used various platforms to appeal to politicians, political parties and their supporters to play the game by the rules.

He has also appealed to political parties to stick to the rules in the selection of candidates. This, he explained, would go a long way in reducing tension within the political parties and the polity.

Signing a binding agreement to promote peaceful conduct before, during and after the 2015 election will be a right step in the right direction towards electoral harmony.