Much Ado About A ‘Declaration’
Most accounts of the threat of bloodshed were obviously an extrapolation from a speech the General made in Hausa when the Niger State chapter of the CPC paid him a solidarity visit in Kaduna. It is clear that in their seperate reactions, both the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and the Presidency relied on the […]
Most accounts of the threat of bloodshed were obviously an extrapolation from a speech the General made in Hausa when the Niger State chapter of the CPC paid him a solidarity visit in Kaduna. It is clear that in their seperate reactions, both the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and the Presidency relied on the reported threat allegedly contained in Buhari’s remarks to engage in an overdrive of condemnations and name-calling.
It is important however to critically go over the statement made by the General in the context it was made and the subjective interpretation from sections of the media and the government. If what General Buahari said as regards the call for government to ensure that the 2015 is not rigged, otherwise it would be ‘kare jini, biri jini’ , which simply is a metaphor often used in Hausa to define consequential outcome of an action, in no way suggests the high sensation of bloodbath which the headlines, chosen perhaps deliberately or inadvertently, and the government immediately cashed in on.
That is one of the benefits of press freedom, the freedom for the press to choose not just what makes a story, which piece is a story and how to project it to the consumer. It also underlines one one its principal drawbacks, not being able to draw a clear line between what would enhance national understanding and cohesion and what can undermine them. This seems to have become the major preoccupation in recent times.
It is an irony that the call for free and fair elections in 2015 that Buhari made during his speech was largely ignored. Yet this is the outcome that Nigerians prayed for in churches and mosques and other worship places before the 2011 general elections. The Presidency noted in its statement joining issues with Buhari, that international observers had adjudged those elections, particularly the presidential, as free and fair. The question arises from that assertion whether a democratic government derives its legitimacy from the votes of the people or from the opinion of outsiders. The larger question however is whether a call for such free elections in 2015, even it was made by a former military ruler and a potential runner in those elections, is not a legitimate one. The most important thing that needs to be done is to ensure that Nigerians do not suffer as a result of the unwillingness of politicians, whether by those in the corridors of power through the deployment of state power and huge material resources, or those outside it, to thwart the aspirations of the people during elections.
Given the nation’s antecedents in such matters, it is vital that the government listens to wise counsel and work towards the attainment of free, fair and credible polls at all levels of the nation’s electoral process, instead of seizing on statements made by political rivals to sow discord.
The Presidency and its supporters may disagree, but the 2011 elections were not as free and fair, and therefore not as credible as they have suggested. True, the Supreme Court did give its seal of approval to the outcome of the 2011 presidential polls, but the judicial and political realities of the measure are something everyone understood.
But a practical example is illustrated with the over 90% voter turnout recorded during the presidential election in South East, which has the least number of registered voters of little over seven million, according to INEC’s 2010 record. Almost all votes went to the candidates of the PDP, while the North West, which had, after the registration, a little less than twenty million voters, with less than 40% voter turnout.
Legally, that may be right before the courts; but politically it is impossible to attain such a massive voter turnout in one direction. Similarly was the case in most of the South-South states, except in Edo and Delta states.
The 2011 elections therefore are not the yardstick to measure a credible poll, regardless of what the conclusion of external observers was. In fact, there is ground to question the credbilty of these observers. At the end of the 2003 and 2007 elections, the views of the observer groups were that both polls were flawed. The response of the Nigerian government then was that the international groups were not capable of teaching Nigerians democracy and elections.
The government’ reaction to the Buhari statement was therefore uncharitable and devoid of reason in view of the fact that the substance of the statement, which is the call free poll, was completely disregarded.
At the same time, it is important that politicians, both in government and in the opposition, should sensitive to their environment each time they speak in public. The mark of leadership also includes knowing what to say, and how to say it in public. The overall goal, whether that of government or opposition, is a united, strong nation and an understanding citizenry.