Political Promises And Actual Performances: Exploring The Attitudes Of Nigerian Political Leaders Towards Good Governance
By Jerry Uhuo

In all democratic societies where elections constitute the process through which leaders emerge, politicians through their political parties solicit support and votes from the people to get into power. In doing so, they present manifestoes that outline various programmes and projects which they promise to accomplish if elected into political offices. The people most often relying on those promises and depending on the influence of the political parties and other actors will be swayed into supporting the candidates of the parties and vote them into power. However, the worrisome challenge is that when most of the political leaders get into the position of power and authority, they fail to keep those promises they made to the people during their campaigns and instead, embark on programmes that have no direct or any positive effect on the life of the people. By so doing, they create a widening gap between the rich and the poor as a few people will take over government resources and use them to oppress the people. The implications of such government attitude towards the people usually manifest through increased rate of corruption, unemployment, insecurity or political violence.

Without doubt, in many emerging democracies especially in developing countries of Africa, there are increasing causes for concern following the level of violence witnessed on daily basis as a result of protest by citizens who demand good governance from politicians or their leaders. The uprising in Egypt, Libya, and the current civil war in Syria are indications of the increasing consciousness among the citizenry on their political rights and the demand for leaders to recognize that it is the people that hold the sovereignty while the ruling elites are mere trustees in office. Partly, the current security dilemma in Nigeria is another example of such cases. Rather than focus on developmental agenda, such government will begin to battle with combating avoidable political or sectarian violence thereby dissipating energy on issues that would have been settled by proper government programme targeted at the people.

It is therefore, no wonder that a former Soviet leader and one of the most complex and important political figures in the defunct USSR Nikita Kruschev once referred to politicians as people who promise to build bridges even where there is no river. According to him, “Politicians are the same all over. They promise to build a bridge even where there is no river”. It is not surprising that the level of political instability in emerging democracies in some African countries including Nigeria has continued to be on the increase despite the effort on democratic consolidation. What this trajectory depicts is that for there to be a consolidation of democracy in Africa, politicians must close the gap between promises and performance. Pippa Norris recognized this in his work: “Democratic Deficit: Critical Citizens Revisited” where he posited that “it has long been thought that regimes are more likely to endure and flourish where a balanced equilibrium exists between citizens aspiration for democracy measured by how much people valued democratic ideals and reject autocratic alternatives and the perceived supply monitored by public satisfaction with democratic performance of their countries”. Pippa states that a democratic administration that does not fulfill the aspiration of its people in line with its promises on coming to power will experience “democratic deficit”- a gap between promises and performance which leads to instability. Samuel Huntington had in 1981 examined the American politics and came up with the conclusion that there was a “persistent, radical gap between the promise of American ideals and the performance of American politics”.

According to him, “Americans throughout their history as a nation have been united by democratic creed of liberty, equality and hostility to authority… (but) these ideals have been perennially frustrated through the institutions and hierarchies required to carry on the essential functions of governing a democratic society”. Huntington believes that there is “antagonism between the ideals of democracy and the realities of power” and this is the reason why many countries take long to consolidate democratic ideals and entrench development.

In Nigeria, the situation is as challenging as it is in other countries which were victims of military regimes. Nigeria gained independence in 1960 and within 53 years of independent history, the military ruled the country for over three decades. The country has witnessed several political upheavals ranging from civil war, military rule, political instability arising from opposition to military incursions in governance or electoral manipulations, prodigious official corruption and general insecurity. The return of democracy in 1999 ushered another level of democratic experiment after a long military dominance in power. For the past 14 years, Nigeria has been on steady path of democratic growth, yet the issues of governance have been a daunting task for political leaders. Within this period, Nigeria has witnessed several upheavals: ethnic violence in many parts of the country, political instability occasioned by manipulation of the electoral process especially in 2007 general elections which led to loss of lives and property, many cases of industrial action by the organized labour due to wrong policies of government which had adverse effects on the life of the people and the current security challenges which has claimed many lives between October 2011 and today. These crises are attributed to the kind of policies government make and implement and the inability of the political leaders to keep to their political manifestoes sold to the people during their aspiration to public offices.

Jon Bond and Kevin Smith are of the view that for any government to perform effectively in office, such government must ensure that the core principles of democracy are respected. These core principles according to them are: Majority rule: they hold that popular sovereignty implies that in a democracy, political decisions should be responsive to the needs of ordinary people and that where government fails to respond to the needs of the people, the people have a duty to hold the government accountable. The second is Political Freedom, the duo contends that government has a duty to uphold and respect the freedom of the people including the minority groups and thirdly, Political equality where government must ensure that all citizens have equal opportunities to influence the process of governance. In other words, when citizens vote, the vote must be made to count irrespective of the status of the voter.

It is not in doubt, that there has been steady progress in governance in Nigeria since 1999, despite the challenges faced on daily basis. The improvement in the area of power, road infrastructure, the banking sector, small and medium enterprises through skill acquisition programmes, housing through public private partnership projects at the federal and state levels as well as transportation. But a lot still needed to be done. Nigeria has a large population but God has blessed the country with abundant natural resources to take care of the population. What is lacking is good management these resources through quality leadership. When the leadership is weak or ineffective, the entire structure of government crumbles. That is why you witness corruption as accepted norms in public service as it is today in Nigeria. Government must address the issue of employment aggressively; education must be given priority attention by revitalizing our higher institutions. It makes no sense that the entire education system is in comatose through incessant strikes by lecturers and workers of the institutions, and we hear or read stories of certain government functionaries who acquire for themselves bulletproof vehicles that worth over one million U S Dollars, amount that is enough to change the story of five universities in Nigeria. That is just in addition to stories of cases of embezzled pension funds and abuse of office by public officers who misappropriate funds meant for public projects at the expense of the Nigerian public.

The world today is technology driven and leaders no longer have any hiding place when they hold public office in trust. The advent of internet and its associates-twitter, facebook and all others have given citizens good platform to monitor their leaders and challenge them where and when necessary. This is why it has become a herculean task for security agencies especially in Nigeria without viable central database to deal with insecurity whether of Boko Haram, kidnapping, armed robbery, rape or assassinations. It is imperative on government to match its political promises with actual performance in all sectors: education, road, power, youth’s empowerment, capacity building through skill acquisition programmes for the less privileged at all levels of government. Above all, leaders must see their position as service and not opportunity for primitive and wicked acquisition of public resources for private gains. So long as public officers flaunt wealth and affluence as ingredients of public office, it will be difficult to curb violent protest among the citizenry who feel betrayed by their leaders. Therefore, the solution to our problem in Nigeria is for leaders to match political promises with actual performance.

more articles at www.jerryuhuo.com.ng