Looking at the crisis rocking the Rivers
State Government and the Nigeria Governors’ Forum, it is hard not to
see parallels with similar crises that have bedevilled several other
states over the relatively few years of our Third Republic.
During President Olusegun Obasanjo’s
administration, the states of Anambra, Ekiti, Oyo, among others were in
convulsion. In some of the cases —Ekiti, for instance — the crisis
outlasted the Obasanjo administration and dragged on into Umaru
Yar’Adua’s.
Just as President Goodluck Jonathan is
being blamed for the Rivers State crisis, Obasanjo was implicated in the
crises in the states during his administration. They invariably
involved states in which the governors were out of favour with him.
Yet, then and now, the crises is about
the broader issue that Nigeria is a democracy that has a shortage of
democrats. The problem of deficit in the democratic spirit is one that
even long-established democracies still grapple with, though to a much
lesser degree.
I will return to our current crises, but first here is an emerging and instructive case in America’s governance.
Throughout his presidency, President
Barack Obama has had difficulty having his appointees confirmed by the
Senate, though his party, the Democratic Party, has a significant
majority in that chamber of Congress.
It is not that Obama’s appointees do not
have the support of his party’s senators. It is that the rules of the
US Senate make it easy for the minority party to block nominees.
Specifically, a super-majority of 60 per cent is required to end
procedural obstructions, including the filibuster or threat thereof.
And so a cynical Republican caucus that
is hell-bent on obstructing Obama has used the tactic willy-nilly to
deny confirmation to a throng of Obama appointees. And so cabinet and
judicial positions have remained unfilled, thus impeding the proper
functioning of the government.
Over the years, minority parties,
including the Democrats, have used the tactics. Problem is that the
Republicans have gone far beyond the norm in flexing that muscle.
Whereas minority senators in the past were careful and selective in
invoking the obstructive privilege, the Republicans are now deploying it
carte blanche.
Well, early last week, the Senate
Majority leader, Harry Reid threatened to have his party’s majority vote
to remove the option of the filibuster, especially for appointments to
the judiciary.
It is an option that the Democrats have
had all along but were reluctant to use, because it is, as the press has
dubbed it, “the nuclear option.” It is so characterised because it
would substantially change the character of the Senate, the upper
chamber, whose procedure is intended to protect interests beyond the
wishes of the majority.
But to avert the nuclear option, Reid
invited the senators to a special overnight retreat, where they could
negotiate in good faith without the ideological posturing and blinders.
It worked.
The Democrats agreed to withdraw (via
the president, of course) two nominees that the Republicans found
particularly unacceptable. In return the Republicans would allow the
confirmation vote on the rest of nominees to proceed. In fact, a number
of them were confirmed within hours of the deal.
For renascent democracies such as
Nigeria, there are two lessons to be learned from this episode of
American governance. First, regardless of its tenure in a given country,
democracy is always vulnerable to civic and political cynicism.
Second — actually this is a corollary —
the success of any democratic order depends more on the spirit with
which it is approached than on the soundness of the constitution and
procedures.
Democracy is vulnerable to subversion
and cynicism because it lacks the procedural rigidity of autocracies.
The checks and balances between the three branches of government, as
well as within each branch, are intended to deter any form of despotism.
Alas, the checks are also the causes of the vulnerability of democracy.
For the checks and balances to work, all
players in the system have to have as their guiding principle the
viability of the system. Without that, the most thoughtful constitution
will fail to hold up. Even the mechanisms for corrective action will
fail.
For instance, though the judiciary is
empowered to rule on procedural matters, there are logjams about which
it is powerless to intervene.
For instance, Republican senators’
obstruction of Obama’s nominations is purely a legislative matter. Obama
could not have sought judicial intervention, regardless of the adverse
effects on the country. Only the senators could find within themselves
the means of resolving it.
That they have found a compromise is an
indication that even the most cynical legislative posture in recent
American history can be made to see reason. No illegalities were
involved. Certainly, no fist fights or mayhem.
The crisis in Rivers State, as well as
that of the Nigeria Governors Forum, clearly indicates that some of our
politicians still don’t have the intellectual or emotional requisites to
be entrusted with running a democracy.
It is one thing to exploit procedural
loopholes to advance personal or ideological interests. And that can be
bad enough. It is another, still, to disregard the democratic process
entirely. That is crudely undemocratic.
And that is what is happening in Rivers
State. Whatever may be the desired end, it is untenable subversion of
the democratic process for a handful legislators to arrogate to itself
the power to remove its Speaker.
But then, such flagrant contravention of
the democratic process still shouldn’t precipitate mayhem. There is a
constitutional means for rectifying it, and that is judicial
intervention.
That is what happened during Obasanjo’s
administration when chaos reigned in the Plateau State government. Then
eight of the state’s 24 legislators met and voted to impeach Governor
Joshua Dariye, while the rest of the legislators were in the custody of
the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission.
The legal question that arose then was
what constitutes a quorum, whether it is a percentage of the full house
or a percentage of those eligible to vote. The impeachment was properly
nullified by the judiciary.
From all indications, Dariye did not
deserve to be in office, given the evidence of massive corruption. But
what would have been worse was to subvert the democratic process in
order to get him out.
Of course, the judiciary can easily be
overwhelmed if we continue to have so many undemocratic people running
our democracy. Besides, some judges have issued errant decisions in the
past. Still, the civil process is better anytime than thuggery.
culled from the punch.
The House of Representatives yesterday Thursday May 29th approved 14 years
imprisonment for persons who contracted same sex marriage in the
country.
