How to win a Nigerian Election by GEJ & Co

This week SaharaReporters, in true Wikileaks fashion, leaked a copy of an internal document from the Jonathan/Sambo camp. Saharareporters described it as a manual for rigging the 2011 elections, they highlighted how the plan sought to use almost every tactic employable to win. Interestingly enough the document wasn’t leaked directly to SaharaReporters or in fact to any news agency; instead it turns out Atiku (or should I say Mr. Fox as he is referred to in the document) had a mole in the GEJ/Sambo camp who leaked it to him and he then released it to the media (and to western governments? As if they care?). So it’s out there, the question now is how damaging is this to Mr. President and his aspirations for 2011.

The most important thing is for anyone who cares to actually read the thing for themselves. It is freely available as provided by the good people of Saharareporters; and though it is a tad long, poorly written and repetitive in places it will surely find its place in the canon of modern Nigerian history as it provides a snapshot (albeit skewed) of the state of Nigerian politics in the run up to the 2011 elections.

The first thing to point out is that yes, it does allude to some illegal activity. It in some places advocates the abuse of the office of the President, the bribing of a vast range of people and the intimidation of political opponents. In fact it seems as though the person/people writing it have never heard of the word euphemism yet alone how to use it and it is this that adds some credence to the claim by its alleged author, Mr. Mike Omeri, that the document was doctored. But really who was surprised by these revelations. Who was surprised that the incumbent was going to use the security apparatus to his advantage? Who was surprised that he was going to try and influence INEC? Who was surprised that he would try and bribe party delegates? Who was surprised that he would offer people protection from prosecution? I think it’s safe to assume that most people anticipated these things, and it is probably safe to assume that Mr. President is not the only one who will be engaging in these tactics.

Assuming that the whole thing is real, there are a number of things that we may not have known that this document has revealed. Firstly it shows that the GEJ/Sambo ticket thinks that their priority is winning the PDP primaries. The whole document seems to be written on the basis that winning the PDP ticket is as good as winning the National election. This raises the immediate question: how can they be so sure? Two possibilities: One, the PDP, its history, its policies and its political ideology are so popular with the Nigerian electorate that it is inconceivable that they will lose. Or two, they are so confident in their ability to rig the hell out of the next elections that it doesn’t matter who gets the ticket, come May 29^th they will be popping champagne in Aso Villa.

Secondly the GEJ campaign team see only the Fantastic Mr. Fox (Atiku Abubakar to you and I) as the only credible competition for PDP ticket. The oddest thing about the whole thing is that the authors were very half-hearted in their attempts to mask the identity of ‘Mr Fox’, at more than one point they refer to Mr. Fox and his wife Jennifer Douglas Abubakar, I mean they might as well have gone to the effort of writing ‘Mrs Fox’ or ‘Vixen IV’ (as she is his 4^th wife) or better yet call him by his name. Naming issues aside, the document does a full SWOT analysis of the Atiku campaign, highlighting his strengths and the threat he may poses to Jonathan’s aspirations and outlining specifically how to exploit his weaknesses and highlighting opportunities to steal the march on him. The main strategy is to portray, the former Vice President as a criminal to wit the document produces some prototype campaign posters with such gems as:

‘Those of us who run intellectual business and academic schedule; the road ahead will be tortuous and challenging diplomatic situation as a result of the stigma of a convicted President and the damage to our national image. Please take his money if you are bribed but vote wisely and do the right things’

Encouraging the citizenry to take bribes from Atiku may seem questionable, but this fits in squarely with the strategy of the Jonathan campaign as it identified Atiku’s strengths as being ‘extremely wealthy’ so any way to run down his bank balance would be appreciated. The strategy also includes discrediting Mr. Abubakar as a ‘serial betrayer’ (having supposedly betrayed Obasanjo, Abiola, Yar’Adua and Tinubu) and a regional (as opposed to national) aspirant.

Another issue that was raised by this leaked memo, and was duly picked up on by the article on SaharaReporters, was the complacency of the mainstream Nigerian media in the execution of the strategies. The document name drops some of the top journalists, working at some of the most influential news agencies in Nigeria. However, the SR article doesn’t go far enough in showing how people from all walks of life are being bought off by politicians, the document lists musicians, Comedians, Dance troupes, ex-footballers, TV personalities, Churches, Mosques, NGO’s, Students and Intellectuals as well as of course politicians of all levels ranging from Local Government all the way to the Legislative Houses at Federal level. The BBC recently ran an article on the role of musicians in the elections in which the likes of D’banj and TwoShotz are given a tongue-wagging by Seun Kuti for selling out, in the light of the leaked memo these musicians should really question themselves as representatives of the youth.

One of the more interesting issues raised by the document is the role that Obasanjo is playing in the GEJ campaign. It is not made clear in the plan how much of the direction of the policy (legal or illegal), how much of the funding or how many decisions come directly from the former President, but what is clear is how important his political clout will be for Jonathan in this election campaign. The plan entrusts OBJ with winning over a number of difficult delegates, particularly in the South-West, in regards to Osun state the plan ominously says ‘OBJ is in charge’. How is it that a man who has no official role of importance in government or indeed in his party can be so influential? Is GEJ wise to entrust his political fortune to Obasanjo? And perhaps more importantly, what does it mean for our democracy when a man who was refused a third term still appears to be pulling the strings behind closed doors.

Lastly, the saddest thing about this whole saga is what it says about Nigeria. The plan isn’t all political intrigue, there is a section (albeit small) focussed on policies, fairly concrete policies on issues like power, education, transport, the Niger-Delta, agriculture, industry and poverty. It also in part takes on Atiku in the issue of the economy and does so without resorting to mud-slinging or smear tactics but rather by using publically available information. It says to Nigerians and a new generation of voters that elections are not fought on issues and are not won on policy, they are won by the power of money and as such it is no surprise that Nigeria is not moving forward. It is important to reiterate that because we have seen such a document from the GEJ camp, doesn’t mean that the same isn’t been done by other aspirants. The document shows that a great deal of work has gone into its production and an even greater deal of work will need to go into the execution of the strategies it suggests. If only the same amount of work was put into developing the policies that would improve Nigeria and the same amount of energy put into executing these policies then maybe Nigerian will improve for everybody. Attaining the office of the presidency has become an end in itself, everybody seems to have forgotten that it is meant to just be means to implementing your policies. In order for Nigeria to change, we as the people of Nigeria cannot be idle; we have to make sure our votes count and we have to make sure that we are voting for policies and not for personalities.

Enyinnaya Emmanuel Chukwueke

The Green Label Project, Changing Nigeria Together.

What's the big deal about zoning?

There is  a feeling amongst the people that zoning as the PDP practices is an inherently evil and outdated practice. Something that reflects a harmful focus on ethnicity/region/religion as the focus of political life in Nigeria and something that must really be done away with in order for any sort of advancement to be made.

I must admit that this was my instinctive view, until yesterday when I was recording the second installment of the Green Label Podcast, in which zoning was the issue of discussion and I had to play devil's advocate and support it. While doing my research, I stumbled upon a very extensive dissertation written by one Nwachukwu Orji. It was more broadly about political power-sharing but touched on the concept of zoning as a means of distributing top office. It was epic (230 pages long), but it raised the question: Why do we need power-sharing in Nigeria?

Power-sharing is the sort of political arrangement that is brought in at the end of a war, or on the dissolution of an empire where the political groups are aligned along apparent ethnic or religious lines and so the only way to prevent destructive competition between the elite is for them to share power. The fact that Nigeria is not a homogeneous people isn't news to anyone, in fact it seems that the number of ethnics group in the country seems to go up every time someone is asked (340 as of yesterday). So in reality what it comes down to is whether or not ethnicity (or tribe in cruder terms) is the basis for politics in Nigeria.

Put simply it is: Nigeria has no real class system, other than the separation of rich and poor. The issues that really should be the foundation of political discourse: health, education, electricity, water etc. affect everyone almost equally. There is no ideology in our politics: there is no left, right or centre, no doves or hawks, no moderates or hard-liners. Lets face it the only way that politicians can carve the populace into any sort of support base, is on the 'natural' ones of ethnicity, religion and geography. This would not be a bad thing in itself if it had some sort of logic to it. If the beliefs of a Yoruba person was so different from that of an Efik person, if the worries of an Igbo person were so different from that of a Kanuri, if the ambitions of a Hausa person were so different from that of a Calabar person; then there would be some legitimacy in ethnic politics, but is that really the case? 

Has the alleged Northern domination of politics made life for a northerner better than that of a southerner? Has the 8 years of southern rule under OBJ made life better for southerners, or in fact for his own Yoruba people? Has any of the last 50 years of ethnic politics made life better for anyone? The truth is that the prebendal politics that exist in Nigeria only benefit the elite, it only persists because they have nothing else to offer us. Ethnicity is as important to your fortunes in Nigeria as what football team you support. As I think Yaradua was a Manchester United supporter so it is surely time for an Arsenal supporter to be president with that said I opt to put forward Kanu Nwankwo as a 2011 candidate.

Jokes aside, If we want an end to ethnic politics, we have to move politics on to the issues: how do you as a candidate from where-ever-the-hell-you-are-from plan to deal with the concerns of we the Nigerians? Until we the people demand that from our leaders we cannot just carry on complaining about the system of zoning. As long as people see ethnicity (or region or religion) as their primary political identity some sort of zoning will be required because people will go to further extremes in the name of these things than they will probably go to in the name of ideology or even in the name of the mighty Arsenal. 

The question now is what is your primary political identity.

The Green Label Project wants to illuminate these issues and show what politicians are saying (or not saying) about the things that really matter. So get involved, by joining the facebook group, liking the facebook page, looking out for the website that should be up in a matter of days and of course listening to the Podcast and maybe we can change Nigeria together.

Inequality in Nigeria

Inequality in Nigeria is a thoroughly contentious problem. The difference between the ‘haves’ and the ‘have-nots’ can be seen all too clearly, with the lavish lifestyles of a few juxtaposed amongst the squalor of the many. Inequality is closely related to the issue of poverty but the two issues should be looked at separately because ultimately the issue of inequality is not limited by poverty, inequality still exists in countries with low levels of absolute poverty. In fact the world economy as a whole shows high level of inequalities: low income countries account for 62% of the world’s population but only 6% of the world’s income. Inequality in Nigeria has three inter-related but distinct aspects, inequality of wealth, inequality of income and inequality of opportunity. It also takes at least three distinct dimensions: inequalities between urban and rural populations, between rich and poor, and between the genders. The gender issue is a serious and complex problem in itself and is part of a social phenomenon. Because it deserves a discussion in its own right so it will not be discussed here

Scope of Income Inequalities

Inequality is a very difficult concept to measure as it exists in many forms. The inequalities between the groups are further complicated by the inequalities within the groups and trying to treat the groups as homogenous masks the scale.

Data on wealth distribution in Nigeria is difficult to come by. This is partly because wealth and the sources of wealth raise deep political (and perhaps legal) questions. However, the fact that the self-professed richest black person on the planet is from the same nation where 54% of the population are living below the national poverty line, would suggest that there is a severely unequal distribution of wealth.

The Gini coefficient is a statistical measure of inequality which has been applied to national income distributions to measure income inequality in countries. It gives a 0 to a perfectly equal distribution and 1 to a perfectly unequal distribution. According to the CIA, Nigeria gets 43.7 (0.437) in 2003 on this scale, making it more unequal than Ghana, Senegal, Tanzania and Egypt to name but a few. This statistic while offering a snapshot of the situation in regards to income, doesn’t tell the whole story. There is also inequality of opportunity; while this is difficult to measure it exists in all facets of life. There is unequal access to education, to healthcare, to justice, to security, to capital and even to political representation. Some are able to live as full citizens while the majority are offered little by the state and are left to fend for themselves.

The causes of inequality

Inequality in Nigeria has multiple causes, it is undoubtedly possible to trace inequalities to pre-colonial societies: in the forms of social divisions, cast systems and domestic slavery, but the modern phenomenon has its roots in the colonial era. The urban –rural divide really became accentuated in this period as the extractive model of the colonial forces didn’t require them to thoroughly penetrate the hinterland. Commerce was centred round commercial and coastal areas and only the bare minimum of investment was made outside these areas. The system of indirect rule and the utilisation of local middlemen concentrated wealth (and ultimately power) in the hands of a few and thus entrenched the inequalities between rich and poor. The extractive economic model continued into the post-colonial era and was accelerated with the discovery of oil and the propagation of the oil sector. The concentration of amenities in urban areas continues. The structure of the economy is now such that most people (about 70%) are employed in the relatively unproductive agricultural sector, which accounts for only a third of national income.

There has also been a failure thus far on the part of government to institute redistributive policies. Part of the role of government is to ensure a level of equality in society. The most widely used systems of wealth redistribution are taxation, welfare and nationalization. The saga of state owned enterprises in Nigeria is a sad one; corruption and mismanagement have meant that nationalised industries instead of being redistributive have furthered society’s inequalities. The problem in Nigeria’s case has not been nationalization itself, but the way in which it has been done. When it comes to welfare in Nigeria there has been a mish-mash of government initiatives coupled with the work of religious, community and non-government organisations, however there remains no comprehensive welfare policy.

The Nigerian polity has consistently failed to develop a sustainable tax base within the nation. The government is over-reliant on oil revenue, with oil exports accounting for over 80% of Government revenue. Though there is an increasing awareness amongst State Governors of the importance of internally generated revenue (IGR), the failure to tax the average citizen and everyday businesses has countless ramifications both historically and for the future, but it is importance in the context of inequality. Revenue raised from taxation should be spent on providing the public goods and services such as education, healthcare etc that reduce the inequalities of opportunity that plague Nigeria. In addition to this a progressive tax system that tax higher earners more could also aid to balance inequality in all its forms. It is not enough to tax the population; the funds must then be used to improve the lot of the disadvantaged.

There are also more debateable things that may be at the root of the disparity in Nigeria. There is an argument to be made about the link between levels of democracy and levels of inequality, this makes intuitive sense and fits in with the facts as according to Freedom House’s ‘Freedom in the World Report 2010’, Nigeria is rated as ‘Partly Free’. There is also an increasingly popular argument that ethnic heterogeneity is causally related to inequality, again while the argument is contentious it does fit the facts of Nigeria which has over 250 distinct ethnic groups.

Finally, Inequalities of wealth and income perpetuate themselves and deepen inequalities of opportunity. The better off have better access to healthcare and education (both at home and abroad), they enjoy better job opportunities, easier access to financial markets, higher levels of justice and security, and more political access and participation. Through the process of wealth condensation, newly created wealth tends to concentrate in the possession of those who have the means to invest (the already wealthy). So without outside intervention, the market in an unequal society tends to worsen the problem of inequality.

The implications of Inequality

Firstly, inequality is undesirable in itself. Attached to the concept of true democracy is an egalitarian ideal and one of the duties of a democracy is to work towards this ideal. However, there are implications of high levels of inequality that pertain to the economic, political and social aspects of society.

The economic consequences are not entirely clear. There is a body of work that suggests that societal inequalities inspire greater innovation and ingenuity in the economy. On the other hand, the World institute for Development Economic Research argue that highly unequal societies (a Gini coefficient of 0.40 or greater) for a range of reasons s detrimental to economic growth. In a global context inequality amongst nations causes growth in better off countries at the expense of poorer countries.

From a political standpoint, the inequality of access to power is an important one. Politics in Nigeria is a rich man’s game, the system excludes representation of the less advantaged in the institutions of state. Less advantaged people also contribute less to political discourse and have little influence on political policy at all levels of government and even parties. The actual workings of power are the domain of an elite few who have the means to participate, this is at the root of bad governance and the demise of true democracy. The disparity of wealth means that the political class is able to manipulate the political process through legal and illegal means.

The greatest impact of inequality is on the social level. Inequality has its major effect on social cohesion. In unequal societies people are less likely to trust each other. This is a serious problem in a relative young country which has lived through a civil war, it means that economic problems are easily framed as regional, religious or ethnic problems. The term social capital is one often brandished around but is somewhat difficult to define; broadly speaking it is the value of the social networks of society. This value is evident in participation in public and communal organizations, engagement with public officials, adherence to legal and social duties and other forms of social participation. Inequality reduces social capital and as such has negative effects on everything from the effectiveness of education to the development of civil societies.

Inequality is also a cause of crime and this is of particular importance in Nigeria, with the problems of theft, armed robbery, internet scams and the plague of ‘area boys’ amongst others a constant concern amongst the citizenry. Inequality also opens the door for white collar crime. Those with the means are able to take advantage of those without as is evident in the continuing banking sector scandals. The low pay of many relative to a few fuels low level corruption, this manifests itself in a corrupt and inept civil service and security force which in turn results in poor delivery of public services. Such levels of corruption, for which Nigeria is famous worldwide, affect the country the economic performance of the country and the credibility of the political structure.

Inequality is a difficult topic to discuss, let alone to solve. The people in a position to talk about it and act on it are predominantly those that benefit most from the status quo. There therefore has to be a general national consensus that attacking the problem of inequality is fundamental to improving the current condition and the future prospects of Nigeria as a whole.

Unemployment

UNEMPLOYMENT

Like many of the problems we face in Nigeria, unemployment is a social, political and economic issue. While it is possible to look at it from any of these angles, it is easiest to examine it from an economic standpoint as it is this way that the social and political ramifications become evident.

The scope of unemployment in Nigeria

Simply speaking the rate of unemployment is the percentage of the work force that is without a job. The official statistics for unemployment measure the percentage of the population of working age (16-64) that are not in work but are looking. Surprisingly, in 2007 this rate was 4.9% which automatically seems inconsistent with the actual work situation in the nation. The low rate exposes a problem with this measurement which ignores forms of hidden unemployment and underemployment. It tends to ignore full time housewives who would be economically active; it ignores people outside the official working age (especially those under the age of 15); it ignores the unpaid family and domestic workers; it ignores the underemployment in the agricultural sector and in the taxi/ ‘okada’ industry. The list goes on and in Nigeria, where woman and young people are at a disadvantage when it comes to finding formal employment, the future appears perilous because as the young population increases and the difference between levels of male and female employment reduces, the number of unemployed will swell.

Consistent with this, the Federal Government in 2009 admitted that the true unemployment rate was as much as 28% with as many as 40 million people unemployed in Nigeria. This is not to suggest that the government is deliberately misinforming people, but it is evident that the current system of measuring unemployment is not fit for purpose in the Nigerian context. Nigerians would certainly find it hard to believe that only 1 in 20 people is unemployed.

The causes of unemployment in Nigeria

Unemployment may seem an emotive and complex subject, but in basic terms, the number of unemployed is simply the difference between the number of people willing to work and the number of jobs available. In supply and demand terms, this translates to the difference between the SUPPLY OF LABOUR and DEMAND FOR LABOUR. The underlying problem of unemployment is that the supply of labour is greater than the demand for labour. The question to be addressed therefore is simply why is the supply for labour so high and the demand for labour so low?

The high supply for labour

There are two factors which are positively correlated to the supply of labour:

I. The size of the working age population.

The present population of Nigeria is roughly 150 million people (with 40% of the population under the age of 15). Compared with 100 million in 1990, the current annual population growth rate is 2-3% and this will undoubtedly increase in the future. By 2050, the population is expected to be between 250 and 290 million. This massive population growth has already and will continue to increase the size of the labour force. Longer life expectancy and greater female involvement in the labour force will also increase the supply of labour.

II. The willingness of the working age population to participate in the labour market.

Poverty greatly affects willingness to work. The absence of a welfare system or social safety net and low levels of development mean that many people work on a subsistence level. At the extremes of poverty, no choice exists regarding whether to work or not; it is a necessity for survival. At such poverty levels, the options are either work, beg or die.

Also increasing the willingness to work is the increase in the number of formally educated individuals. Education itself and its cost means that educated are likely to demonstrate a willingness to work. Despite failings in the education sector, the enrolment and graduation rates in Nigeria are on the rise.

The relative improvements of transport, information and communication systems have improved the flexibility of the labour force which in turn increases the supply of labour.

The low demand for labour

It does seem like an absurd criticism to make, that the supply of labour is too great. One would expect that in such a vibrant economy, growth of the labour force would be welcomed and put to strategic use as we have seen with relative success in India and China. The problem cannot be viewed as the abundance of labour; rather, the problem is the low demand for labour. This seems intuitive as public consensus is that there are too few jobs available. So why after a decade of reasonably high economic growth has there been no real improvement in employment. This question of low job creation in Nigeria is multifaceted and very often contentious. As with most things though, it is a result of a number of factors.

One possible reason is that GDP growth in the last decade wasn’t strong enough. The average growth fell below the 7% threshold which the UN argues is necessary to reduce poverty and improve living conditions. However, this is simply a guideline and Nigeria averaged 5.5% GDP growth for the period and as such, was not far off the threshold.

Perhaps more important is the nature of the growth that Nigeria experienced. The large growth in 2004-2007 was largely based on rising commodity prices, particularly that of oil, and didn’t necessarily translate into job creation. This is symptomatic of the Nigerian economy and helps to explain the low demand for labour. The major growth industries are commodity based and/or very capital intensive (i.e. they require heavy investment in machines and technology and not on labour) so the economy can continue to ‘grow’ without any real increases in the number of people employed.

On a different note, perhaps the labour being supplied is inadequate in kind or quality for employers. Many employers do not trust local education institutions for various reasons and presently school leavers may not be gaining the qualifications required by the economy. The labour market isn’t absorbing university graduates as evidenced by poor the placement and retention record of the NYSC programme. This issue constitutes a bigger problem with education in Nigeria and should be left for a separate discussion.

The trend in international politics is in favour of austerity, there is a movement towards a smaller state, both in size (the amount the government is doing/spending) and in scope (the range of activities that government takes on). In this respect, Nigeria has not been an exception. This directly results in fewer public sector jobs, with little or no plans having been made for those who were ‘retrenched’. The reduction of government spending also reduces demand in the economy which in turn has a negative effect on employment.

The manufacturing sector in the developing world is an under-utilized avenue of job creation. Through labour-intensive processes, local operators can satisfy much local demand for value products and demand for labour. Low investment and a poor business environment however, hinder the development of this sector. Erratic electricity supply represents a major cost to a manufacturer and could be the difference between profit and loss or the difference between taking on an employee or not. However, this is not the only problem, access to finance, the technology gap, poor research and development, scarcity of reliable data, poor transport systems, competition from cheap imports also hinder this sector. These are all issues in their own right but their current state compounds the problem of employment. The agricultural sector is also in need of reform as it currently employs 70% of the population but only yields 33% of GDP. But like manufacturing it is a complex topic that requires its own analysis.

The Implications of unemployment

The most direct result of unemployment is on the economy as a whole. People out of work do not contribute much to the economy, and as such, the economy performs below its optimal level. The result is slowed rates of economic growth and ultimately less development.

Unemployment also reduces the tax base of the society. This is often an underestimated problem but it manifests in two ways. Firstly, the reduced tax base means that government has fewer funds available for state projects. This results in fewer public services and lower public investment. The second problem is more subtle but no less serious: taxation is an important element of state building; people need to take a vested interest in the state so they have legitimacy and the incentive to hold their leaders to account. This is of particular pertinence to Nigeria where accountability is a big issue.

There are also wide social implications of unemployment. Some are more obvious problems and warrant their own discussion, such as crime, militancy, the black market and human capital flight (the brain drain). The effects of these problems are known by Nigerians and are felt in very real ways in day to day life. There are also social implications that we cannot yet know the full extent of. As Nigeria’s population explodes and multiplies, the real danger is for the second generation born into a society with a culture of unemployment.