Let us build a system that reflects who we are, that draws on the wisdom of our past, and that provides us with the strong and just leadership we so desperately need. In doing so, we can create a Nigeria that is truly united, where the will of the people is respected, and where our leaders are worthy of the trust we place in them
Chapter 3: Rise of the Military and the Struggle for Democracy
AS Nigeria emerged from the euphoria of independence, the promise of self-governance quickly gave way to the harsh realities of a nation still grappling with deep-seated divisions. The challenges of building a unified country out of a patchwork of diverse regions, ethnicities, and religions were immense. It wasn’t long before the fragile democracy we had fought so hard to establish began to show signs of strain.
The first cracks appeared in the early 1960s, as political tensions escalated and mistrust among the regions deepened. The regionalism that had characterized the pre-independence political landscape persisted, making it difficult to forge a cohesive national identity. The political parties, still largely aligned along regional and ethnic lines, struggled to find common ground. The result was a series of conflicts and crises that brought the country to the brink of collapse.
By 1966, the situation had reached a boiling point. The country was engulfed in political chaos, with accusations of corruption, electoral malpractice, and regional favoritism flying in all directions. The final straw came with the highly contentious 1964 federal elections, which were marred by widespread violence, voter intimidation, and allegations of rigging. The election results were contested, leading to a deepening crisis that the civilian government seemed unable to resolve
Amidst this turmoil, the military, which had remained largely inthe background since independence, decided to step in. On January 15, 1966, Nigeria experienced its first military coup. Led by a group of young officers, the coup was justified as a necessary intervention to save the nation from the brink of disaster. The military leaders accused the civilian government of failing to unite the country and of perpetuating corruption and mismanagement. The Prime Minister, Sir Abubakar Tafawa Balewa, was overthrown, and Major General Johnson Aguiyi-Ironsi took control as the head of state.
With the military in power, the system of governance shifted dramatically. The military leaders, many of whom had been trained in the traditions of discipline and order, sought to impose a new form of rule on the country. The concept of selection, which had once been a hallmark of our traditional leadership, was reintroduced—this time, however, it was the military that made the selections. Positions of power were no longer determined by elections or the will of the people but by appointments made by those who held the guns. This marked the beginning of a long and troubled era in Nigerian politics, where the military would dominate the political landscape for decades.
Despite their intentions to restore order, the military rulers quickly found themselves embroiled in the same challenges that had plagued the civilian government. The regional divisions, far from being resolved, were exacerbated by the military’s centralization of power. Tensions escalated further, leading to a series of coups and counter-coups, each one plunging the country deeper into instability.
In an attempt to return to civilian rule, the military organised elections in 1979, hoping to establish a credible democracy. The government allocated a significant budget to ensure that the elections were free, fair, and credible. Huge sums were spent on voter registration, polling infrastructure, and security to prevent the violence and malpractice that had marred previous elections. However, despite these efforts, the elections were far from perfect. Allegations of rigging, vote-buying, and other irregularities were rampant, leading to numerous legal challenges. The courts became the battleground where political contests were fought, with almost every major election result ending up in prolonged legal battles.
The cycle of flawed elections and military interventions continued into the 1980s and early 1990s, with successive regimes promising, but failing, to deliver a stable democratic government. It was in this context of political uncertainty that a new figure emerged on the national stage—Moshood Kashimawo Olawale Abiola, popularly known as M.K.O. Abiola.
Abiola, a wealthy businessman and philanthropist, entered the political arena with a promise to bring change. He was charismatic, with widespread appeal across the country, transcending the usual regional and ethnic divides that had plagued Nigerian politics. In 1993, he contested the presidential election under the banner of the Social Democratic Party (SDP). The election was historic, not just because of Abiola’s popularity, but because it was widely regarded as the fairest and most transparent election in Nigeria’s history.
On June 12, 1993, millions of Nigerians went to the polls, hopeful that this election would finally bring about the change they had longed for. The results, as they began to trickle in, showed a clear victory for Abiola. He had won the hearts of the people with his message of hope and his vision for a better Nigeria. But just as the nation was on the brink of a democratic breakthrough, the unexpected happened. The military, led by General Ibrahim Babangida, annulled the election, citing vague security concerns. The annulment sparked outrage across the country, leading to widespread protests and civil unrest.
Abiola’s refusal to accept the annulment and his insistence on claiming his mandate set the stage for a protracted struggle. He declared himself the rightful president and was subsequentlyarrested and detained by the military government. His detention and the events that followed would mark a dark chapter in Nigeria’s history. Despite international pressure and calls for his release, Abiola remained in prison, where he continued to fight for his mandate.
Tragically, on July 7, 1998, just as negotiations for his release were reportedly underway, Abiola died under mysterious circumstances. His death was a devastating blow to the pro-democracy movement and to millions of Nigerians who had seen him as a symbol of their hopes and aspirations. The dream of a true democratic Nigeria seemed further away than ever, as the nation was once again plunged into uncertainty and despair.
******
Chapter 4: A Sober Reflection on Democracy
Elections in Nigeria have become a game of who can outmanoeuvred whom, who can spend the most money, and who can wield the most influence. The integrity of the process has been eroded to the point where many Nigerians have lost faith in the very idea of democracy
AS we look back on the journey our nation has taken, it becomes increasingly clear that the promise of democracy has, in many ways, failed us. The vision of a Nigeria where the people would have a voice, where elections would reflect the true will of the populace, has not materialized. Instead, we find ourselves in a system that is deeply flawed, plagued by corruption, and increasingly detached from the aspirations of ordinary Nigerians
Democracy, as we have practiced it, has not brought the peace, prosperity, or unity that we hoped for. Instead, it has often been a source of division and conflict. Elections, which should be a celebration of our collective will, have too often turned into battlegrounds for the powerful and the privileged. Votes are bought and sold, elections rigged, and the will of the people is subverted by those with the means to manipulate the system. The judiciary, once seen as a beacon of hope for justice and fairness, has been compromised, becoming a tool in the hands of the corrupt to legitimize their hold on power.
In reflecting on our journey, it is worth considering whether democracy, as it is currently practiced, is truly the best system for us. There are countries around the world where governance by selection, rather than by election, has produced stable and prosperous societies. In nations like Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and some parts of Asia, leaders are chosen through a process of selection that is deeply rooted in tradition and cultural values. These systems, while different from the democratic model, have often succeeded in providing strong leadership, social stability, and economic progress.
In these countries, the selection process is not a free-for-allcontest, but a careful and deliberate process designed to choose leaders who are best suited to govern. The emphasis is on merit, experience, and the ability to lead, rather than on who can win the most votes. The results speak for themselves: these nations have managed to avoid many of the pitfalls that come with electoral democracy, such as corruption, political violence, and division.
As we contrast these systems with our own, it becomes clear that our electoral system has been deeply compromised. Elections in Nigeria have become a game of who can outmaneuver whom, who can spend the most money, and who can wield the most influence. The integrity of the process has been eroded to the point where many Nigerians have lost faith in the very idea of democracy. The judiciary, which should serve as the guardian of our democracy, has too often been complicit in the corruption, turning a blind eye to electoral fraud and upholding dubious election results.
In this moment of sober reflection, we must ask ourselves: Is there a better way? Is there a system that we can turn to, one that is more in tune with our history, our culture, and our values?
*****
Closing Notes: A Call to Rediscover Our Roots
Let us build a system that reflects who we are, that draws on the wisdom of our past, and that provides us with the strong and just leadership we so desperately need. In doing so, we can create a Nigeria that is truly united, where the will of the people is respected, and where our leaders are worthy of the trust we place in them
AS we ponder these questions, I am drawn to the political systems that existed in our land before the British invasion. These systems, though far from perfect, were deeply rooted in our traditions and values. They were systems of selection, not election, where leaders were chosen not by the many, but by the wise and the respected—those who had earned their place as kingmakers.
These kingmakers were not appointed by power or wealth but were selected through a process that valued wisdom, experience, and the ability to lead with integrity. The leaders they chose were not imposed upon the people; they were received with respect and reverence because they were seen as the rightful representatives of the community. The kingmakers had a sacred duty to choose leaders who would uphold the values of the land, protect the people, and govern with fairness and justice.
Perhaps it is time for us to revisit these systems. To look back at the way our ancestors chose their leaders, and to learn from the principles that guided them. We must research the methods used to select the paramount leaders, the ones who were able to unite their people and command respect. There is wisdom in our history, and we would do well to rediscover it.
We must ask ourselves: Who were the kingmakers? How were they selected? What qualities did they look for in a leader? These are the questions that can guide us as we seek a new way forward. A way that honors our past while addressing the challenges of the present.
If we can find a way to adapt these principles to our modern context, we may discover a system that works better for us—a system where leaders are selected not through a corrupt and flawed electoral process, but through a careful and deliberate selection process that values merit, integrity, and the ability to lead.
This is not a call to abandon democracy altogether, but to refine it, to make it more reflective of our unique history and culture. We must seek out a hybrid system that combines the best of both worlds—a system where the people still have a voice, but where the leaders who rise to the top are those who have been carefully chosen for their ability to govern with wisdom and justice.
In this new system, the people will have a deeper respect for those who lead them because they will know that their leaders have been chosen with care and deliberation. The kingmakers, those who select our leaders, must themselves be chosen with the same care, ensuring that they are individuals of integrity who cannot be swayed by money or power.
Let us take up this challenge, not as a rejection of democracy, but as an evolution of it. Let us build a system that reflects who we are, that draws on the wisdom of our past, and that provides us with the strong and just leadership we so desperately need. In doing so, we can create a Nigeria that is truly united, where the will of the people is respected, and where our leaders are worthy of the trust we place in them.
This is the future we must strive for—a future where our nation is led by those who have been chosen for their ability to lead, not for their ability to manipulate the system. It is a future that honors our past, respects our present, and promises a better tomorrow for all Nigerians.
