OBJ on presidential tickets-II

Muslim/Christian as against Muslim/Muslim or Christian/Christian ticket. To which the question was posed as to whether the format has any bearing on success or failure at the polls or even good performance in government? The 1999 Constitution has nothing to say on tickets. Apparently, its drafters chose wisely to leave such minutiae of who become […]

Muslim/Christian as against Muslim/Muslim or Christian/Christian ticket. To which the question was posed as to whether the format has any bearing on success or failure at the polls or even good performance in government? The 1999 Constitution has nothing to say on tickets. Apparently, its drafters chose wisely to leave such minutiae of who become the flag bearer, his running mate and the religions they belong to, for the parties to sort out.
Now, it must be said that the former president meant well by recommending that parties be guided by the choice that would enhance harmony. The format of a Muslim president and a Christian vice president or as we have now, a Christian president and a Muslim vice president has long become the norm at election time, which is just as well for a country where the cry of marginalisation in one form or the other, of the one against the other, is so rife and sometimes so strident as to demand attention. It would, therefore be foolhardy, insensitive and downright foolish for any party not to take cognisance of it in its operations. What’s more, unsavoury occurrences have even made it imperative. Religious disquiets, when they are not raging, are not too far from the surface, forcing authorities to constantly subject policies and programmes to intense scrutiny, less they offend religious sensitivities.
The on-going insurgency came close to causing religious hostility. No one who has lived in this country in the past 5 years would fail to see the worsening  religious tension, fuelled in large part by the long running insurgency. True, both mosques, churches and commonly used mass transit vehicles have been  bombed, claiming lives of both Muslims and Christians in equal measure, but that did not stop all manner of allegations and mutual recriminations to be hauled across the religious divide. It had to take the apex bodies of the two religions to work assiduously and painstakingly to douse rising anger and prevent a blow up.
So, with the churlish relationship existing between the two religions, no one can fault OBJ’s admonition to parties to stick to the existing norm of picking the presidential and the vice presidential candidates. It was argued last week that OBJ has developed a romance of sort with the APC, and among the party’s presidential hopefuls, he harbours a preference for General (rtd) Muhammadu Buhari. Well, it just so happened that immediately after the General’s declaration to contest the presidency at a mammoth gathering in Abuja, OBJ intervened with his comment. Of course, the whole matter could be a mere coincidence, but it looked more like a very convenient one indeed.
It seems to me that OBJ’s  comment on presidential tickets arose from the fact that sitting on the front row with the Chairman of the APC Chief John Odigie Oyegun and other party big wigs on the occasion of Buhari’s declaration was Governor Babatunde Fashola whom Buhari himself with El-Rufai and others in tow had gone to Lagos to invite for the occasion. OBJ may have thought to see Babatunde Fashola – a Muslim, if you must know, on the high table in his own right, not representing Asiwaju Bola Tinubu, as used to be the case, there surely must be more to what was taking place. If Buhari was testing the waters for a Muslim/Muslim ticket, then he must be warned, OBJ must have reasoned.
But should OBJ be overly worried about religious balance as it concerned those putting themselves forward to rule over us? The point about assuaging fears of marginalisation commends the case for balance and it is well taken. But beyond that what other intrinsic value does it offer? It certainly does not guarantee good performance in government, which should be the overriding concern. As it stands emphasis has been placed more on religious balance than on ability and good performance in government, and by doing so boxing ourselves into a difficult situation.
Though the necessity for balance predominates more in the choice of presidential tickets, still a few times it had been discarded. In 1979 late Chief Obafemi Awolowo chose Chief Phillip Umeadi as running mate and in the famous 1993 presidential election late Chief Mashood Abiola chose Alhaji Babagana Kingibe on the platform of the Social Democratic Party (SDP). The former, a Christian /Christian ticket was forced on Chief Obafemi Awolowo because it was said he could not find a Northern Muslim candidate willing the serve with him. Pitted against Alhaji Shehu Shagari’s National Party of Nigeria, his Unity Party of Nigeria lost. In 1983 he chose Alhaji Muhammadu Kura, a decision informed by the UPN’s defeat in 1979. It was a different case however with Chief Abiola and Alhaji Kingibe who despite being a Muslim/Muslim ticket recorded a landslide victory.
The reasons for this are many, but the major ones are that the religious atmosphere then was not as riddled with suspicion as it is today as to make religious balancing of utmost necessity. The other reason was that Chief Abiola gambled on the immense goodwill which he had garnered through his large -heartedness and philanthropy and it worked. It used to be said that he had put his considerable wealth at the behest of all Nigerians. All one needed to do was gain access to him and his problem was solved, literally. And this is not hyperbole. At election time in 1993, Nigerians paid him back handsomely by voting for him and KIngibe massively.
As we continue to deepen our democracy, the goal should be to work towards achieving the Abiola/Kingibe feat. They discarded the norm but still went ahead to win the 1993 presidential election. This would not have been possible had they not demonstrated other values and qualities, in this case the ability to empathise and put ones resources unstintingly at the behest of people that genuinely needed help. The voters across Nigeria in 1993 must have thought anyone who solved people’s problem with his own personal resources would probably have little or no need to mishandle and misapply government resources.
Therefore, by all means precautions should be taken to lessen religious tension and acrimony through balancing party positions. But we should also work towards lessening dependence on such by encouraging people whose work have benefitted society as a whole and not one section of it. People who have worked to break down the barriers and divisions that continue to hold Nigeria back should be recognised for leadership positions. And this can be done if we discard norms that deepen divisions and limit the impulse to chart new courses towards a healthier inter-communal relationship and integration, such that leadership can be earned through what one has done and capable of doing.