Connect with us

Opinion

The Oracle: CSOs and the Media in Promoting Democracy and Good Governance in Nigeria (Pt. 1)

Published

on

By Mike Ozekhome

Introduction

An issue that is as loaded as this puts one in a dilemma: how much of the underlying culture of sub-titles is one permitted to make incursions in to? An exhaustive discourse of same presumes that one is at the same time a lawyer, a politician, a media practitioner, a civil society activist, a public affairs analyst and an expert in electoral matters and democratic process. We shall do our best to discuss this multi-dimensional and multi-faceted topic of considerable significance and currency.

Conceptual Framework

We shall dissect this topic from the perspectives of:
i. Definitional terms of what constitutes:
a. Sound Democratic Culture.
b. Good Governance.
c. The Civil Society.
d. The Media.
ii. The Civil Society and Credible Elections.
iii. The Media and Credible Elections.
iv. Character of the Nigerian Media (influence of Ownership on
Independence and Objectivity).
v. The Civil Society and the Influence of their Sponsors.
vi. Engaging the Civil society and the Media for National Development.
vii. Recommendation/Conclusions.

“Sound” Or “Constitutional” Democratic Culture?

We shall start our discourse from the prism of a “constitutional democratic culture”.

Definitional Terms:

Democracy

While subjecting the concepts of constitutional democracy and arbitrary rule to considerable thought Prof. Ben Nwabueze, the renowned Constitutional Lawyer posited, most admirably that:

“Democracy as form of government, is man-based; it is a humanist, individualist and moralist institution, “created for the sake of what the ancient philosophers called the essential differences between democracy and socialism. “Democracy attaches all possible value to each man; socialism makes each man mere agent, a mere number… while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude”.

Democracy is the most desired concept of government in our contemporary world. Yet democracy is the most basterdised or prostituted concept in political history. As Bernard Crick rightly remarked:

“Democracy is perhaps the most promiscuous word in the world of public affairs. She is everybody’s mistress and yet somehow retains her magic even when a lover sees that her favours are being, in his light, illicitly shared by many another. Indeed, even amid our pain at being denied her exclusive fidelity, we are proud of her adaptability to all sorts of circumstances, to all sorts of company”.

Democracy

There are as many definitions and concepts of democracy as there are writers, political theoreticians, each viewing democracy from his prison. They are all right. It is akin to the theory of the three blind men and the elephant. One described the elephant as flat and hard as a wall, having touched its broad trunk. The other argued that it was as long and thin as a snake. He had actually touched its tail. Yet the third swore by all the gods of sight and vision that the elephant was large and flexible like a fan. This third blind man had managed to touch the fanny ear. Yet they were all right, albeit not completely so.
The Black’s Law Dictionary with pronunciations definition of democracy is more laconic and straight to the point. It says democracy is:

“That form of government in which the sovereign power resides in and is exercised by the whole body of the citizens directly or indirectly through a system representation as distinguished from a monarchy, aristocracy or oligarchy.”

It was Abraham Lincoln, the great slaves’ liberator and former president of the United States of America who on 19th November, 1863, in his Gettysburg Declaration, defined democracy as government of the people, for the people and by the people. This definition lives on till date. “Democracy” has been identified with government by the people, usually through elected representative. Democracy is a political system that enables people to freely choose an effective, honest, transparent and accountable government. It can equally be described as the philosophy of government in which supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly or indirectly through a system of representation, usually involving periodic free elections.

The concept of democracy originated in ancient Greece as a philosophy of popular sovereignty in Greek city states. The rise of democracy as a universal system of governance is largely a product of the 20th century. Although, it has now gained widespread acceptance, democracy took a long time to emerge. From its ancient origins in Greek City States, the growth of democracy was largely facilitated by the French and American Revolutions of the 18th Century; the widening of the franchise in Europe and North America in the 19th Century, to the heroic struggles for popular participation and social justice in the 20th Century. With the collapse of communism, democracy has become established as the “normal” form of governance.

Challenges Among Emerging Democracies

It must be emphasized that in emerging democracies across countries such as Nigeria, the key challenge is how to deepen and widen democracy democratic structures and the political space. Central to this challenge is how to effectively bulk the key institutions democratic governance, to wit.

i. A system of representation, with well-functioning political parties and civil society organizations;
ii. An independent electoral system that guarantees free and fair elections;
iii. A system of checks and balances based on the separation of power, with independent judicial and legislative branches of government;
iv. A vibrant civil society, able to monitor government policies and to provide alternate forms of political participation;
v. A free and vibrant independent media with strong dedication to professional ethics;
vi. Effective civilian control over the military and other security forces.
Inspite of the divergent opinions on the concept of democracy and its amplitudinal ramifications, it is generally agreed and accepted that democracy consists of five core values. They are:
i. The right of the people to freely choose their governments in periodic but free and fair elections;
ii. The right of freedom of association, especially in forming political parties;
iii. The right to freedom of expression, especially freedom of speech and press freedom;
iv. The primacy of the rule of law and independence of the judiciary; and
v. The commitment to transparency and accountability of governments to the people.
Variants of Democracy.

The practice of democracy differs from one place to another. In the United States of America and Nigeria for example, democracy is predicated on presidentialism, separation of powers, checks and balances and an independent judiciary. In Britain and many other commonwealth countries, there is almost an imperceptible integration and intertwining of the executive and legislative Organs of Government. As Emeka Anyaoku, former Commonwealth Secretary General has noted, whatever variants of democracy we may have, there are universally acceptable ingredients that define a truly democratic country. They are:
• The right of the people to choose freely their governments periodically;
• The right to freedom of association especially in forming political parties;
• The right to freedom of expression, especially freedom of speech and a free media;
• The primacy of the rule of law and the independence of judiciary; and
• The continuing transparency and accountability of government to its electorate.
Democracy is not a magical wand. It is not an end in itself. Rather, it is a means to an end.

Democracy that does not yield “democracy dividends” is as accursed as military dictatorship. Democracy goes beyond the mere holding of periodic elections of Government. In the words of Salim Ahmed Salim:

“Democratic governance is not simply structures or only rituals; it is also a modality of behavior and interaction. It constitutes relations as well as values to be internalized. It is a means of societal empowerment and with such a complex composition. Democratic governance is not a “one-off” static phenomenon to be juctaposed or grafted into a society. It is a dynamic process that is nurtured and enriched with the growth and evolution of society…

I need to also point out in this regard, that democratic governance is not only a relationship between state and society, but it also refers to relationships within society. At this second level, it underscores such virtues as tolerances, dialogue and understanding, social integration, gender equality, abidance to norms, respect for fundamental human rights, adherence to the rule of law negation of corruption.”

It is very important that access to political power is extended to every citizen of the country and that he is given an opportunity to participate in the choice of those who govern him. This is called public participation and it helps to nip conflict in the bud and balance centripetal and centrifugal forces. In like manner, we must emphasis that the use of acquired political power is not synonymous with the mere holding “free and fair elections”, “but should go beyond that and critically explore hoe the management of the acquired political power affects the generality of the people. If instead of its being used to promote the basic needs and aspirations of the generality of the people, the acquired political power is merely used to promote the needs of a microscopic ruling elite, then democracy cannot deliver peace and public harmony”.

In the illuminating words of Lord James Bryce, Modern Democracy. Democracy is supposed to be the product and the guardian both of Equality and of Liberty, being so consecrated by its relationship to both theses precious possessions as to be almost above criticism.”

Prof. Ben Nwabueze, the erudite and renowned constitutional lawyer note with precision that: “Democracy as a form of government, is man-based; it is a humanist, individualist and moralist institution,

“created for the sake of what the ancient philosophers called the “Good Life” of society. Herein lies one of the essential differences between democracy and socialism.

“Democracy attaches all possible value to each man; socialism makes each man mere agent, a mere number … while democracy seek equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude”.

To be continued…

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Opinion

A Vindicating Truth: A Factual Presentation on the Supreme Court’s Intervention in the ADC Leadership Matter

Published

on

By

By Comrade IG Wala

To All Nigerians, Party Stakeholders, and Lovers of Democracy,

In the life of every great political movement, there comes a moment where the noise of confusion meets the silence of the Law. For the African Democratic Congress (ADC), that moment arrived on April 30, 2026.

For months, the ADC was held in a state of judicial paralysis caused by a lower court order that froze the party’s activities. This order did not just affect a few leaders, it threatened to delete the ADC from the Nigerian political map and disenfranchise millions of supporters ahead of the 2027 General Elections.

Today, we present the facts of the Supreme Court’s intervention to ensure that every Nigerian, from the city centers to the grassroots, understands that Justice has spoken, and the ADC is alive.

The Three Pillars of the Supreme Court’s Ruling:

1. The End of Paralysis (The Status Quo Order)!

The Supreme Court, led by Justice Mohammed Garba, was clear and firm: the Court of Appeal’s order to maintain a “status quo” was improper and unwarranted. The apex court recognized that you cannot freeze a political party indefinitely without a trial. By setting this aside, the Supreme Court rescued the ADC from a leadership vacuum that was being used to justify de-recognition by INEC.

2. The Restoration of Administrative Legitimacy.

By nullifying the appellate court’s freeze, the Supreme Court effectively restored the David Mark-led National Working Committee to its rightful place. This means that for all official, administrative, and electoral purposes, the ADC now has a recognized head. The party is no longer a ship without a captain; the doors of the headquarters are open, and the party’s name remains firmly on the ballot.

3. The Order for a Fresh Trial on Merits.

True to the principles of fair hearing, the Supreme Court did not simply gift the party to one side. Instead, it ordered the case back to the Federal High Court for an accelerated hearing. This is a victory for the Truth. It means the court is not interested in technicalities or stopping the clock, it wants to see the evidence, read the Party Constitution, and deliver a final judgment based on the Right vs. Wrong.

Note: I will drop the 7 prayers made to Supreme Court by ADC in the comment section.

A Message to Our Members and Supporters.
To our members who have felt a sense of fear, apprehension, or a lack of confidence in the Nigerian courts, let your hearts be at peace.

It is a delusion to believe that gross injustice can simply walk through the doors of our highest courts unnoticed. This matter is currently one of the most publicized and people-centric cases in Nigeria. In such a bright spotlight, the Judiciary acts not just as a judge, but as a shield for the common man.

The Law is not a tool for the crafty, it is a searchlight for the Truth.
Inasmuch as they say the Law is blind, it sees with perfect clarity the difference between a lie and the truth, between right and wrong. The Supreme Court’s refusal to let the ADC be strangled by procedural delays is proof that the system works for those who stand on the side of justice.

Our confidence is not in personalities, but in the Process. We are returning to the Federal High Court not with fear, but with the armor of Truth.

The Handshake remains strong, the vision is clear, and our participation in the 2027 elections is now legally anchored.

Stand tall. The ADC has been tested by the fire of the courts, and we have emerged not just intact, but vindicated.

Signed,
Comrade, IG Wala.
02/04/26. — with Shareef Kamba and 14 others.

Continue Reading

Opinion

The Police is Your Friend and Other Lies We No Longer Believe

Published

on

By

By Boma Lilian Braide (Esq.)

There was a time in Nigeria when the phrase The Police is Your Friend was not a national joke. It was a civic assurance, a symbolic handshake between the state and its citizens. It represented the ideal of a civil security architecture built on trust, service, and protection. Today, that once reassuring slogan has decayed into a bitter irony. It no longer evokes safety; it provokes fear. It no longer signals partnership; it signals danger. What should have been the soul of Nigerian civil state relations has become a cruel parody of our lived experience at checkpoints, stations, and on the streets.

The Nigerian security apparatus has undergone a transformation so profound that it now resembles a predatory machine rather than a protective institution. The sight of a police patrol vehicle, which should ordinarily bring comfort, now triggers anxiety. Citizens instinctively brace themselves, not for assistance, but for extortion, harassment, or violence. We are not merely witnessing isolated incidents of misconduct. We are watching a pattern of state enabled brutality unfold in real time, a pattern so consistent that it feels like a televised execution of the social contract. In this grim theatre, the Nigerian state often appears not as the protector but as the principal aggressor.

On Sunday, April 26th 2026, the quiet air of Effurun in Delta State was shattered by the crack of a service pistol. What should have been an ordinary Sunday afternoon became the final chapter in the life of twenty-eight year old Mene Ogidi. A viral video, barely two minutes long, captured the horrifying scene. Ogidi sat on the dusty ground, his hands tied behind him with a rope. He was unarmed, exhausted, and pleading in his mother tongue for a chance to explain himself. Standing over him was a man in plain clothes, a man sworn to protect the very life he was about to extinguish. Assistant Superintendent of Police Nuhu Usman raised his pistol and fired two shots at close range into the body of a restrained, helpless citizen.

This was not a confrontation. It was not a crossfire. It was not a struggle for a weapon. It was an execution. A daylight assassination carried out by a state paid officer who felt so insulated by impunity that he performed his violence in front of a digital audience. The collective outrage that followed was not simply about one death. It was the eruption of a nation that has watched this script repeat itself far too many times.

Barely days later, in Dei-Dei Abuja, another life was cut short. A National Youth Service Corps member was shot inside his father’s compound. Authorities described it as a mistake during a crossfire, but the silence that followed spoke louder than any official explanation. These tragedies are not anomalies. They are symptoms of a deep institutional rot, a rot that has turned the badge into a license for violence rather than a symbol of service.

Extrajudicial killings in Nigeria represent a direct assault on the fundamental right to life and the presumption of innocence. When a law enforcement officer assumes the roles of accuser, judge, and executioner, the very foundation of the state begins to crumble. In the case of Mene Ogidi, the Delta State Police Command admitted that the officer acted in gross violation of Force Order 237, the regulation governing the use of firearms. This admission is significant because it reveals that the problem is not the absence of rules. The problem is the collapse of discipline, the erosion of accountability, and the entrenchment of a culture of impunity.

Between 2020 and 2025, Nigerian security agencies were implicated in nearly six hundred violent incidents against civilians, resulting in more than eight hundred deaths. The Nigeria Police Force accounted for over half of these fatalities. These numbers paint a disturbing picture. The institutions funded by taxpayers to provide security have become one of the greatest threats to their safety.

The psychology behind this brutality is rooted in the absence of consequences. When officers believe that nothing will happen after they pull the trigger, the threshold for using lethal force drops to zero. In the Effurun case, reports suggest that the suspect was even transported to a station after the initial shooting, only to be shot again. This level of cruelty reflects a complete dehumanization of the citizenry. The victim is no longer seen as a person with rights. He becomes a disposable suspect. This mindset is a legacy of the defunct SARS unit, whose methods and mentality continue to shape policing culture. Rebranding SARS into SWAT or the Rapid Response Squad means nothing if the same men, trained in the same violent ethos, continue to operate with the same predatory instincts.

The Nigerian police system has evolved from a flawed institution into what many citizens now describe as a state sponsored cartel. The Zero Tolerance mantra often repeated by the Inspector General of Police, Olatunji Disu, has become a public relations slogan that evaporates at every checkpoint. The immediate dismissal and recommended prosecution of ASP Usman and his team may satisfy the public’s immediate hunger for justice, but it does not address the deeper institutional vacuum that allowed an officer to believe he could execute a restrained suspect without consequence. If accountability only occurs when a video goes viral, then we are not being policed. We are being hunted by a uniformed gang that is occasionally caught on camera.

This raises critical questions. Where were the superior officers? Where was the Area Commander while this culture of execution was taking root? Command responsibility in Nigeria remains a myth. Until a Commissioner of Police is removed for the actions of their subordinates, there will be no internal incentive to reform. The decay is structural. We are recruiting frustrated individuals, training them in aggression rather than professionalism, and unleashing them on a population they are conditioned to view with suspicion and contempt.

The mistake narrative used in the Abuja NYSC shooting reflects this tactical incompetence. A professional force does not mistake a youth corper in his bedroom for a combatant. Nigerians are effectively subsidising their own endangerment, paying for the bullets that cut down their brightest young citizens. A nation cannot survive this level of uniformed recklessness. The state has lost its monopoly on violence to its own agents. When police officers fear the citizen’s camera more than they respect the citizen’s life, the system has failed.

Five years after the historic 2020 End SARS protests, the systemic reforms promised by government remain largely unfulfilled. Only a handful of states have implemented the recommendations of the judicial panels or compensated victims. The National Human Rights Commission reported in July 2025 that it had received over three hundred thousand complaints of abuses. This staggering figure reflects the scale of the crisis. While the current Inspector General has introduced new regulations to align the Police Act of 2020 with operational realities, the gap between a gazetted document in Abuja and a patrol team in Delta remains vast.

The solution to this bloodletting must be radical and structural. First, police oversight must be decentralised. Relying on Force Headquarters in Abuja to discipline an officer in a remote community is inefficient and ineffective. Each state should have an independent, citizen led oversight board with the authority to recommend immediate suspension and prosecution without interference from the police hierarchy.

Second, Force Order 237 must be overhauled to strictly limit the use of firearms to situations where there is an immediate and verifiable threat to life. Under no circumstances should a restrained or surrendering suspect be shot.

Third, Nigeria must address the mental health and welfare of police officers. Men who live in dilapidated barracks, earn inadequate wages, and operate under constant stress are more likely to lash out at the public. However, poverty cannot be an excuse for murder. Welfare reform must go hand in hand with strict accountability.

Finally, justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done. The trial of ASP Usman and others like him should be public, transparent, and swift. It must serve as a deterrent that resonates in every police station across the country. The era of secret disciplinary rooms must end. Nigeria must invest in technology driven policing, not only in weapons but in body cameras and digital accountability systems. When officers know they are being recorded, hesitation replaces recklessness.

A NATIONAL CALL TO ACTION

The era of Orderly Room secrecy must end. Nigeria must decentralise police disciplinary trials, moving them from closed sessions in Abuja to open, civilian led inquiries in the states where the abuses occur. A National Firearms Audit is urgently needed. Every officer must account for every round issued, and any missing ammunition should trigger automatic suspension for the entire chain of command.

The National Assembly must fast track the Victims of Police Brutality Trust Fund, ensuring that compensation becomes a legal right funded directly from the budgets of offending commands. Nigeria must stop being a nation of post script outrage. Command responsibility must become law. If an officer under a Commissioner’s watch executes a handcuffed suspect, that Commissioner must lose their job alongside the shooter.

The blood of Mene Ogidi and the NYSC member in Dei Dei is a stain on our national conscience. It is a reminder that as long as one Nigerian can be tied up and shot without trial, no Nigerian is truly safe. Silence is no longer an option. Waiting for the next viral video is no longer acceptable. The time to demand change is now.

Continue Reading

Opinion

Kwankwaso-Obi Anti-Coalition Alliance and the Perception of the North

Published

on

By

By Dr. Sani Sa’idu Baba

Let’s not sugarcoat it, what is unfolding is not just political maneuvering for 2027, but a carefully calculated roadmap to 2031. Anyone who believes Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso is acting out of patriotism or prioritizing Nigeria above his personal ambition is simply ignoring the pattern before us. His willingness to deputise Peter Obi is not born out of ideological alignment or national interest, it appears to be a strategic move aimed at one target weakening Atiku Abubakar and ensuring he does not emerge as president in 2027.

Kwankwaso’s real calculation seems anchored in 2031. He understands that as long as Atiku remains active and contesting, his own presidential ambition struggles to gain traction, especially in the North where Atiku’s influence remains deeply rooted. By positioning himself in a way that could undermine Atiku now, he potentially clears the path for himself later, when he can conveniently lean on the “it is the turn of the North” narrative with stronger moral leverage. This is not about helping Obi win, it is about ensuring Atiku is completely removed from the equation.

It is also important to state plainly that Kwankwaso is fully aware of his electoral limitations in this arrangement. He knows he cannot significantly attract Northern votes for Obi beyond a few pockets, even within Kano State. And even there, the good people of Kano are far more politically aware and discerning than to be swayed purely by sentiment. This makes the entire proposition even more questionable, if the electoral value is limited, then the intention behind the alliance becomes even clearer. It suggests that even if he joins an Obi ticket, it is not driven by a genuine commitment to Obi, the Igbo, the South-East or Nigeria but by a broader personal calculation.

Northerners must understand that this is a long game, and every move appears deliberately designed. Kwankwaso seems cautious not to overtly confirm growing suspicions that he is working, directly or indirectly, to the advantage of Bola Ahmed Tinubu. Yet, many are beginning to connect the dots. The belief that there is an underlying alignment is gaining ground, especially when actions repeatedly result in one outcome, a divided North that weakens its collective electoral strength, a repeatation of 2023 in a different style. The alignment of Kwankwaso’s political godson and the governor of Kano Abba Kabir Yusuf with Tinubu only fuels this perception, suggesting a dual-front approach: one operating directly and visibly, the other indirectly and subtly.

This is not the first time such a pattern is being observed. Many Northerners still recall similar dynamics from 2023, and recent developments have only intensified the conversation. In fact, within just the last 24 hours, the level of criticism and open dissatisfaction directed at Kwankwaso across Northern Nigeria has been unprecedented. What was once dismissed as mere suspicion of a quiet alliance is now, in the eyes of many, being confirmed by actions seen as disruptive to any meaningful coalition.

For Kwankwaso, this moment carries significant weight. The long-circulating “sellout” label, which many had hesitated to firmly attach, now appears to be finding a resting place in public discourse. Should he once again position himself outside a collective Northern arrangement, that perception may become permanently entrenched.

The implications for the North are serious. Voting Obi because of Kwankwaso, which is unlikely, could fracture an already consolidated political base, reduce its bargaining power, and ultimately produce outcomes that do not reflect its true strength. The North has never historically rejected a dominant figure like Atiku in favor of a subordinate position, nor has it embraced a configuration where its most established candidate is sidelined. The idea that the region would choose Kwankwaso as a deputy while overlooking Atiku as a president is not just improbable, it runs contrary to established Northern political behavior.

What is at stake goes beyond individual ambition. The North is fully conscious of the stakes and increasingly resolute in its direction. There is a growing determination to stand firmly behind its own Atiku Abubakar, to protect its collective political strength, and to resist any arrangement that appears designed to divide it. The signals are clear, the North has decided, and it will not fall into what many perceive as calculated traps, whether from Kwankwaso or from forces seen as working against its cohesion and democratic leverage….

Dr. Sani Sa’idu Baba writes from Kano, and can be reached via drssbaba@yahoo.com

Continue Reading

Trending