Democratic blacklegs

but events leading up to the postponed elections leave one with the impression that the same process that gave some people political ascendancy is assaulted, undermined or even subverted as soon as these people sense their positions are being threatened. It may well be that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) was having difficulties in […]

but events leading up to the postponed elections leave one with the impression that the same process that gave some people political ascendancy is assaulted, undermined or even subverted as soon as these people sense their positions are being threatened. It may well be that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) was having difficulties in putting final touches to the distribution of election materials, which could likely create hitches on election day, but it should not be forgotten that long before the nation got into election frenzy, someone high up in the political structure let slip that Nigeria was in a state of war, by which he meant the raging insurgency, and therefore any talk of election was futile and a waste of breath. This makes the shifting of the elections far from being a decision taken on the spur of the moment but rather a premeditated one.
The point that elections, if it must hold at all, must take place nationwide, including the north east, so as not to give the impression that a part of Nigeria is not under the full control of Nigerian authorities, sound germane. However, why this fact dawned on the government when the elections were about to begin begs for answers. Indeed, a government facing an election should have known that subduing a nagging subversion would stand it in good stead for re-election, and therefore a strong reason why it should have done everything to wipe out the scourge of Boko Haram way before the elections became imminent.
President Goodluck Jonathan has said even with the renewed vigour the military was battling the insurgents, it would be difficult to defeat them before  March 28th, the rescheduled election date. Well, insurgencies by their nature don’t just disappear. It will take much more than a belated onslaught of military action to wipe them out. Even so, even if the insurgents were wiped out, it would still amount to doing too little too late, as people are bound to see through the subterfuge that prompted government to halt an already scheduled election to fight an insurgency that has been ongoing for several years. They would see it, and correctly too, as aimed solely to make it gain an unfair upper hand in the election.
Since the postponement, especial care has been taken to douse people’s anger and apprehension, not only of the sincerity of government but also about its willingness to subject itself to evaluation through election. Jonathan and his men have spared no moment in reiterating that elections would hold on the new date. Yet under this general assurance could be discerned another current totally different from what is being said. For instance, the kite of interim government given expression has taken on a life of its own and it virtually has become a mantra as errant PDP politicians keep raising its spectre every now and then, leaving one wondering about the notion’s necessity when there is a  government still holding sway. Never mind that the government is one that is reluctant to subject itself to election. Moreover that it is only an election that has been postponed and no crisis has ensued yet to demand such a makeshift government.
Another one which even a cursory watcher of the political situation would notice is the tendency to call to question and declare illegal measures taken by INEC aimed at thwarting election rigging. For example, some people have started raising dust on the innovation of the “card readers,” calling it illegal. Soon it would become a subject of litigation, just like many other flimsy issues that have since become matters before the courts, all geared at stalling and, at worst stopping the elections. When all these anti-democratic stratagems are taken together, their aim is hardly difficult to discern-to frustrate Nigeria’s democratic aspiration of freely choosing its own rulers, perpetrated by the same people who have profited immensely by it.
So, it must be asked why do those who find themselves as incumbents, as in those calling the shots, less willing to play the game as the rules stipulate? To be sure, the malady did not start now. It partly led to the downfall of the first republic. In 1993, Nigerians witnessed a presidential election whose clear-cut outcome was annulled. Some years later the reasons for such a traumatic action have remained mere conjectures. What is playing out in the unfolding scenario of 2015 is not any different, with a section of the political group so hell bent on forcing the nation into a political dead end, a cul de sac, using all the underhand tricks they could muster, with the only institution-the military-that should serve as the bulwark against such tendency practically becoming a willing tool in the disreputable act.
It should be noted that as endemic as instability has been in Africa, a number of countries have outlived the odious practice. Senegal and Zambia hold the trophy for observing periodic elections as and when due with no hitches at all.  In Senegal the late Sedar Senghor was succeeded by Abdul Diouf, now in retirement in France. And Abdullahi Wade lost gallantly to the new president. Zambia has been a shining example of democracy in Southern Africa with Kenneth Kaunda, its first president now in superannuation having led the country out of colonial rule and nurtured a civilised democratic culture. Ghana has since broken the jinx of the scourge of one party seeking to rule forever with governance becoming a relay race between the National Democratic Congress (NDC) and the Patriotic Party (PP).
Evidence that Nigeria is still locked in the vice- grip of one party’s perpetual dominance is that for all of its 16 years of democracy, it has been largely ruled by one party, particularly at the centre. But ripped apart by conflict and infighting, the PDP has become a shadow of its self and about to run Nigeria aground and casting about to clutch at every straw to remain relevant to a Nigerian populace that have since decided on a more purposeful party with a better vision.
So let’s go back to the poser why those in control dig in and become reluctant to provide a level playing field for Nigerians for whom they purport the govern to exercise their democratic right of free choice. In other words why must they plunge Nigeria into electoral crisis whenever it is time for the periodic exercise of that choice? Surely they cannot be oblivious of the clockwork manner similar elections are held in other countries, some of which are in Africa. The UK is billed to hold a general election in May, there is no doubt that it will come and go seamlessly as planned. Of course, this would elicit retort such as Nigeria is not the UK whose democracy dates back to the time of the Magna Carta, and that one must not expect to achieve the UK’s level of political dexterity at one go. Such excuses ignore inherent flaws embodied in our system that make deviousness and a tendency for some to see the whole democratic enterprise as a zero sum game which they must not lose.  Some of these flaws would be explored subsequently.  
Meanwhile, it is a moot point whether on 28 March the polls would open as promised or the unthinkable would happen.