In a nation where people hardly play by the rules and those in power and positions of authority are constantly looking for ways to game the system, it is not out of place for individuals and entities to use the political and socio-economic leverage to protect themselves and their interests.
Politics in Nigeria is an endeavour that is devoid of any real ideology and moving conviction; hence, the reason why political parties are seen as nothing more than a vehicle to grab power, rather than a viable platform or means to address the perennial socio-economic challenges bedevilling the country and its people. This ostensible lack of clear and defined ideology among political parties has fundamentally influenced not just our politics but our democracy.
The constant, intemperate pursuit of power and the need to hold on to it by all means necessary, if and when it is ultimately acquired, has hollowed out our democracy and continues to scuttle any serious attempt at nation-building. The utter absence of ideology and conviction in our politics and the ultra money-conscious mindset that accompanies it, a dangerous phenomenon that has now somehow crept into practically every facet of our national life and become an enduring feature of our society, has made public office holders less accountable to the people as they believe they need their vote to win elections and take power. All they have to do is join or align with the political party outright
What this phenomenon has also done is to make it exceedingly painstaking for people who have the charisma, competence, compassion and vision to change the fortune of the country to get into office, emasculate opposition party through the arm-twisting of their elected members to join the ruling party and also using public institutions and instruments of state to hound, persecute and subdue those who dare to stand up to and withstand the machinations of the ruling party.
Last week, the burgeoning opposition party, the Nigerian Democratic Congress (NDC) said there is an anti-defection clause in its constitution that bars persons elected on the platform of the party from joining another party while still in office. The party required its candidates to sign indemnity bonds aimed at discouraging post-election defections. The move by the party may be part of its deliberate and conscious effort to avoid the fate that befell other relatively small parties who were catapulted to the mainstream of Nigerian politics either by Nigerians desperation for a viable party, one untouched or sullied by avarice and rapacious disposition of the ruling elites or by the sheer goodwill and popularity of a presidential candidate only to be viciously undermined and emasculated by defection of its members to the ruling party.
However, this anti-defection clause has triggered mixed reactions among Nigerians. Some observers have cited the enshrinement of freedom of association in the constitution and an indemnity bond that blocks people from leaving a political party may be a trampling of this constitutional provision. Others see it as a proactive move and an indispensable mechanism that stands to protect NDC from the virulence of Nigerian politics.
NDC anti-defection clause may technically violate the constitution even though there is a law and judicial precedence that strips elected public officials, particularly lawmakers, of their position if they dump the party on whose platform they were elected into office, but the refusal to enforce this law by the government of the day has forced the NDC to look for other ways to address the anomaly.
The NDC decision speaks more to and underscores the level of institutional weakness and devious politicking of Nigerian lawmakers. A country where laws are selectively enforced will give way to unilateral promulgation of protective bylaws by major players to protect their interests. While the constitutional arguments against the anti-defection clause may be valid, it must be said that the inability to address the constant cross-carpeting among politicians — which clearly hampers democratic consolidation and the building of strong political entities — through legislative action as the political parties affected by these defections don’t command the numbers needed to swing things in their favour. This may have forced NDC to resort to the imposition of its will on its members.
As the conversations and debates about the legality or otherwise of the indemnity bonds continue, we must not lose sight of or forget what necessitated such a somewhat extreme decision in the first place. In a nation where people hardly play by the rules and those in power and positions of authority are constantly looking for ways to game the system, it is not out of place for individuals and entities to use the political and socio-economic leverage to protect themselves and their interests.
The characters who have signed this agreement and pledged to abide by it are fully aware of what they are getting into. While some critics may deem it an infringement on human rights, which also reeks of insecurity and the NDC’s distrust of its members, the party will argue that it has only made a strategic decision to stop actions that undermine our democracy and strengthen civic engagement.
