By Chuks Akamadu
A good take-off for us may well be to admit upfront that theoretically speaking, subscription to a party ideology and earnest promotion of same are generally healthy for democracy; more so, when no one can refute the fact that ideology is indeed the soul of a party whilst party is the wheel on which modern democracy runs. It is therefore generally desirable for politicians; in the overall interest of democracy, to lean towards parties whose ideologies best approximates their individual political convictions.
It is against the fore-going background that some thinkers, authors and scholars have repeatedly cited the Democrats/Republicans ideological divide in the United States of America and the obvious parallel that the Conservative Party and the Labour Party present on the British political turf as a template for sustaining democracy through demonstrable commitment to party ideology. This interestingly agrees with Brennan Manning who opined that: “The person who uncritically embraces any party line is guilty of an idolatrous surrender of her core identity as Abba’s (God’s) Child”.
However, democracy as history has shown is an on-going conversation that cannot be bound by the strictures of party ideology – it sure transcends it. Put differently, democracy is a continually evolving purposive enterprise which beauty and functional value can only be located in its dynamism, even as it struggles to effectively respond to the need of the society.
Whilst we grant that the ideological content of political party should, in the main, determine where a politician finds accommodation, the party and party members on their part have an obligation to ensure that at all times neither party ideology nor quest for power takes primacy over the collective aspiration of the society. The imperatives of elevating public good above individual or group interest should not be found in realm of debate, given the glaring superiority of the former to the latter.
Furthermore, when a party’s ideology, manifesto, operations and activities begin to depart from or clearly conflict with the corporate goal of the society, it becomes incumbent on the political actors, both as patriots and as moral agents, to interrogate the prevailing drift, with a view to retuning such party to a point of convergence with broader national interest. For anything short of this would run a tar brush on democracy and present it falsely as wrong prescription. And nothing can be more unpatriotic!
We dare say that slavish loyalty to a party or party creed even in the face manifest derailment would inescapably operate to detract from both the worth and essence of democracy. Little wonder Manning was quick to add that “…neither liberal fairy dust nor conservative hardball addresses our ragged human dignity. Salvation, so to speak and in our estimation rests on the ability of the broadest spectrum of political stakeholders to reach a consensus on the supremacy and inviolability of the common good.
Historically, our dear nation, Nigeria, is a product of the ability of politicians to recognize the utility value of political mobility and handshake across political party lines. Otherwise, Nigeria would not have gained independence in 1960. Irrespective of sharp ideologically differences among the three pre-independence political parties (National Council of Nigerian Citizens, NCNC; Action Group, AG; and Northern Peoples Congress, NPC), NCNC and NPC, had to align with their eyes on the ball of independence. It was that strategic alignment that lowered the British Jack and hoisted in its place Nigeria’s Green-White-Green national flag on October 1, 1960.
In the second republic, National Party of Nigeria (NPN) had to align with Nigerian Peoples Party (NPP) in her first four-year mandate which commenced in 1979. In the run-up to the 1983 general elections where NPN sought renewal of mandate, parties such as NPP, Great Nigeria Peoples Party (GNPP) and Peoples Redemption Party (PRP) were involved in alignments and realignments in their shared desire to dislodge NPN from power and came close to birthing a mega-party called “Progressive Peoples Party” (PPP) .
Under President Ibrahim Babangida’s transition programme, we witnessed the excitement that greeted the lifting of ban on political activities and the springing up of various political associations that sought registration as parties. Suddenly, the military authorities woke up one morning and decreed two parties into existence. Once more, politicians and their associations had to align and realign and eventually found shelter under either the Social Democratic Party (SDP) or National Republican Convention (NRC).
Similarly, under the late Gen. Sani Abacha’s transition programme, the five registered political parties (Congress for Nigerian Consensus, CNC; Democratic Party of Nigeria, DPN; Grassroots Democratic Movement, GDM; United Nigeria Congress Party, UNCP; and National Centre Party of Nigeria, NCPN) aligned in their unanimous adoption of the late head of state as sole for the presidential election.
The case was also not markedly different under the Gen. Abdusalami Abubakar-supervised transition programme that birthed the fourth republic. When the whistle was blown for political activities, there were alignments and realignments almost on a daily basis. Politicians had to switch political bases at will in response to changing circumstances of the time. By the time the dust settled, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) had registered three political parties namely: All Peoples Party (APP), Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and Alliance for Democracy (AD). To underscore the extent of the alignments and realignments, some key political actors like late Chief Bola Ige who co-authored the PDP constitution ended up on the AD boat before the elections. And for the presidential election, APP and AD had to align to present a joint candidate – Chief Olu Falae.
Quite frankly, the present dispensation has had a fair share of its own political alignments and realignments, the climax of which was the formation of All Peoples Congress (APC) which made history by being the first opposition party in Nigeria to defeat a ruling party in a presidential election. At present, there is a disconnect between both the Buhari phenomenon and the Buhari persona and the corporate aspiration of mainstream All Peoples Congress (APC) stalwarts. Obviously, President Buhari has a “salvation agenda” etched on his heart whilst what a section of his party meant by “change” in the run-up to the 2015 general elections was “depose and replace Goodluck Ebele Jonathan” simplicita! On the other hand, the terminally ill (as some would argue) Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) appears finally ready-to-go-to-the-grave with her recent Ali Modu Sheriff blunder.
With this brief excursion into the past of political Nigeria, it becomes glaring that political realignments have featured prominently in our democratic evolution; helping at various stages to define, promote and deepen our democracy. What is more, they have also proved indispensable in our progressive march to much more robust democracy. It actually is in political realignments that we can find the inherent capacity in democracy to ventilate and reinvigorate self. They humanize democracy and possess the moral compass that retains democracy on the waterways of national interest. Otherwise, the democratic cruise would be unnecessarily mechanistic.
In conclusion, a cursory look at Nigeria’s political trajectory when juxtaposed with contemporary political realities would indicate that our dear nation has never being in greater need for urgent political realignments than she is at present. The times are evil…so are the signs! Consequently, the question that begs for an answer is: Where are the true patriots who can afford to abandon their comfort zones to embark on this sacrificial Rescue Mission? History beckons!
Chuks Akamadu LL.B, BL, PGD, FIPMN, MNIPR, MNIM
Lawyer and Public Relations Consultant