Good governance in a depressed economy with insecurity, by Attahiru Jega

“Bad Governance is being increasingly regarded as one of the root causes of all evil within our societies” — UNESCAP

Introduction

Governance is defined by UNESCAP as “the process of decision-making and the process by which decisions are implemented (or not implemented)”. Thus defined, governance is necessary for societal transformation, especially in the liberal democratic contexts of modern nation states, in which, theoretically and philosophically, the “state”, or narrowly “government”, led by elected representatives of the citizens, is assigned the key role of protecting lives and property, and advancing the welfare of citizens.

However, the nature and extent of societal transformation, positively or negatively, is conditional on whether a modern nation state is characterised by ‘good’ or ‘bad’ governance.

Good governance is driven by elected representatives / public officials/ public office holders who are selfless, visionary, and who are responsible and responsive to the needs and aspirations of those who elected them; those whom they represent. Such officeholders operate within the constitutional and legal framework, lead by example, and ensure that policies are planned, designed and implemented for the benefit of all, without discrimination, inequality and inequity. They harness societal resources to efficiently and effectively address the fundamental needs and aspirations of all citizens.

On the contrary, bad governance is occasioned by bad and reckless elected officeholders/ representatives; who are either in experienced and/or incompetent, but in any case self-serving and narrow-minded; who either personalise state treasury, or look the other way while others do so; and who pursue divisive and exclusionary policies, without regard to principles of equality of opportunity, equity, justice and the rule of law.

A nation, which has the misfortune of being bedevilled by bad governance, squanders its resources and opportunities for protecting and defending the human dignity and security of the overwhelming majority its citizens. Rather, such a nation only very narrowly, if at all, satisfies the idiosyncratic and greedy aspirations of a small clique of the ruling elite and their clients to the detriment of collective needs and aspirations of all its citizens. In such a nation state, socio-economic, and democratic development on the trajectory of liberal / representative democracy, is obstructed and subverted by reckless, insensitive and self-serving ruling cliques and their clients.

In such a situation, the prospects for socioeconomic and democratic development are only possible and realisable, if the imperatives of good governance are recognised, nurtured and entrenched, in spite of the senseless proclivities of the ruling / ‘governing classes.’

Philosophical and Theoretical Foundations of Representation Democracy

Liberal / representative democracy is premised on the theoretical and philosophical postulation that in modern nation-states, citizens should freely choose / elect their representatives into elective positions of leadership in the governance institutions, notably the executive, legislative and sometimes even judicial, branches of government. For the purpose of choosing representatives, modern nation-states are divided into electoral constituencies and citizens in each constituency elect one or more persons from among themselves to represent them in the governanceorgans and institutions of their country at all levels, national, state and local. Those elected are said to be granted a mandate to act on behalf of the other citizens, the electorate, while occupying the positions into which they have been elected. Representatives are elected for a defined tenure (for example 4-, 5-, or 7- year tenure), mostly renewable, and regularly validated through periodic elections or withdrawn through recall elections.

Similarly, in this theoretical and philosophical postulation, political parties play the role of interest aggregation and articulation, they organize citizens on the basis of the aggregated interests, and they select, recruit and field candidates for elections based on those aggregated and articulated interests, which are presented as political parties’ electoral platform/manifestoes. Once elected, representatives are expected to act in accordance with these articulated interests.

In addition, elections are perceived as necessary for choosing good representatives who help to nurture good democratic governance, in terms of efficient and effective delivery of public goods and services to the public, and especially with regards to protecting and advancing human dignity, as well as human security in all its ramifications. Similarly, it is perceived that electoral integrity gives rise to good quality choice of representatives, when those who prepare for, and conduct, elections are seen to be independent, impartial, non-partisan, professional, competent and efficient, and the conduct of the elections is perceived nationally and internationally to be credible. Other necessary requirements for electoral integrity are: strict adherence to the electoral legal framework by all those involved in the electoral process, from political parties, to candidates, election officials, voters and other stakeholders; efficient and adequate logistical preparations for elections; transparent and efficient conduct of all aspects of the election; and a well secured electoral environment, which eliminates fear that can immobilize or demobilize the electorate, with regards to harassment, violence and irregular disruption of the electoral/electioneering processes.

It is the expectation that, ideally, a country that evolves within this liberal democratic tradition, would have responsible and responsive elected, representative officeholders, who would nurture, entrench, and institutionalise values, beliefs and practice of good governance, for their societal progress and development.

In reality, however, the ideal is hardly ever attained. Political culture is differentiated, character and disposition of human agency impact on historical experiences, and the quality of governance becomes differentiated. Thus, while some countries over long periods, through practice, have refined and strengthened their political culture strengthened their governance institutions, deepened their democratic development towards sustainability, in other countries, due to certain historical experiences and circumstances, have remained fragile, unstable, characterised by bad governance, and constantly threatened by the possibility of authoritarian reversal. Countries, such as Nigeria belong to this category.

Nigeria: Background and context

Nigeria in its present form is no doubt a modern-nation state, albeit of complex diversity, manufactured by the British colonialists, and it has been epileptically pursuing a ‘democratic development’ trajectory, of the liberal democratic tradition. This commenced with precolonial and post-colonial governance institutions and processes, until 1966 when the military took over power from elected civilians. After prolonged authoritarian rule, the military returned the country on the same liberal democratic development trajectory, with slight modification, i.e., from the British type parliamentary system of government (1946 – 1966), to the American type presidential system of government (from 1979 – 83), and indeed for the past 23/24 years, since 1999.

During this period, neither desirable democratic development nor good governance have been institutionalised and entrenched, except perhaps, arguably, in the short period 1960 – 1966. In particular, in the period since return to civil rule in 1999, the quality of Nigeria’s governance and democratic development seems to have deteriorated. While Nigeria seems to have evaded a total slide back into authoritarian rule in the past 24 years, it has merely been muddling through socio-economic development engulfed in bad governance.

Whatever global comparative indices / measures one uses, there is no doubting that bad governance is, in general being, recklessly, ‘institutionalised’, if not entrenched. The country is, literally, being run aground, as illustrated by the worrisome data of high incidences of poverty, high statistics of unemployment especially among the youthful population, high rates of inflation, heightened and generalised insecurity, and acute threats to human security generally. As Table 1 illustrates, Nigeria ranks lowly on many of these comparative ranking variables. Similarly, even in comparison to other countries in the ECOWAS, West African sub-region, as Tables 2 and 3 illustrate, Nigeria’s comparative ranking, with regards to democracy, and perception of electoral integrity, is not at all impressive.

Table 1: Nigeria’s Ranking and Scores in Global Indices of Democracy, Governance, Freedom, Corruption, Human Development, Electoral Integrity, Quality of Life, Security, Etc.

Sources/References

1. UNDP and Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative (OPHI). The 2020 Global Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI)

2. Global Initiative Against Organized Crime. Organized Crime Index. Africa2019.

3. 2020 World Press Freedom Index.

4. Freedom House. Freedom in the World 2020.

5. World Bank. Doing Business 2020.

6. Transparency International. The Corruption Perception Index.

7. World Economic Forum. Global Gender Gap Report 2020.

8. Mo Ibrahim Foundation. 2019 African Governance Report.

9. Electoral Integrity Project. 2019. Electoral Integrity Worldwide 2012 – 2018.

10. UNDP. 2019. Human Development Report.

10. Foundation for the Advancement of Liberty. World Index of Moral Freedom.

11. Fund for Peace. Fragile States Index 2020.

12. Quality of Life Index by Country.

13. Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU). Democracy Index 2020

14. 2022 Global Peace Index.

15. Global Hunger Index 2022

TABLE 2: ECOWAS COUNTRIES RANKING IN EIU DEMOCRACY INDEX 2020

Source: Economist Intelligence Unit, Democracy Index 2020. Wikipedia.webarchive

TABLE 3: ECOWAS COUNTRIES RANKING ON PERCEPTION OF ELECTORAL INTEGRITY INDEX2018 – 2019

Source: Norris, P. and Max Gromping. Electoral Integrity Worldwide. PEI 7.0 May 2019, page 6.

Nigerian Economic Crisis: Recession, Depression, Etc.

While economists may bicker as to whether the Nigerian economy is in recession or depression, what is clear is that the Nigerian economy is engulfed in a multi-dimensional crisis, characterised by slow GDP growth rate (3.10 in 2022 compared to 3.40 in 2021); high unemployment rate (37.7% in 2022 compared to 33.3% in 2021; indeed KPMG project this to rise to 41% in 2023); humongous debt profile of N46.25 trillion in 2022, according to DMO; and high inflation rate of 22.22% in 2023, according to NBS. Other dimensions of the Nigerian economic crisis include declining productivity in the manufacturing sector, excessive reliance on imported manufactured goods in the context of rising exchange rate of the dollar and the pound against the naira; and continued dependence on revenues from the export of crude oil, which in 2022 represented 80% of national revenue.

The crisis is essentially attributable to bad governance, represented by lack of visionary planning, prioritisation and programming, lack of efficiency and effectiveness in the management of resources, an ineffective and/or inefficient regulatory framework.

Pervasive National Security Challenges

Many of the prevailing national security challenges in Nigeria are on account of poor management of complex diversity and poor governance, complicated by heightened mobilization of ethno-religious identities, especially political and electoral contestations. Thus, communal, ethno-religious, and even farmer-herder conflicts belong to this category of conflicts. Weak institutional framework for policing and general security provisioning, as well as pervasive corruption in the judiciary have all combined to heighten these security challenges. Since 2009, however, relatively newer challenges have emerged with more damaging consequences on peaceful coexistence in the country, such as the Boko Haram insurgency, militancy in the Niger Delta, IPOB irredentism in the Southeast, and cattle rustling, kidnapping for ransom in virtually all parts of the country, and banditry in the Northwest geopolitical zone. The number of recorded deaths from Boko Haram insurgency and kidnappings alone, rose from 4,633 in 2017, to 6565 in 2018, to 8340 in 2019, and 9,694 in 2020 (EONS Intelligence). While the Buhari government has claimed to have degraded Boko Haram, the inability to totally defeat their insurgency, as well as sufficiently contain the other dimensions of insecurity, which have emerged and flourished, further highlighted the crisis of governance, the collapse of the national security architecture, and the increasing failure of the state to discharge one of its main constitutional responsibility, of protecting lives and property and securing the citizens.

In the present circumstances, after 7 electoral cycles since return to civil rule in 1999, the challenges posed by bad governance are pervasive and all-encompassing. They have bequeathed on Nigeria a relatively dysfunctional system of government, which is increasingly becoming incapable of effectively and efficiently addressing the fundamental needs and aspirations of citizens, with regards to human dignity and security.

Imperatives of Good Governance

At this stage of our national democratic development, given the nature and character of the Nigerian state (as manifested at all levels, federal, state and local), bedevilled as it has been by a ‘depressed’ economy and systemic security challenges, and the disposition of its ruling elite, who have basically generally preoccupied themselves with the pursuit of their self-serving objectives, it is indeed necessary to discuss how best to reposition the political economy towards democratic development predicated on good, democratic governance.

Citizens of a country that is globally recognised and acknowledged to be essentially characterised by bad governance, need to understand the imperatives of good governance, and work towards bringing it about. This is the situation in which Nigeria currently finds itself.

Drawing from the extensive literature on the subject matter of governance, the essentials of good governance, which Nigeria’s elected leaders / representatives, in particular, and Nigerian patriots/democrats in general, need to appropriately recognise, and take into consideration, in the striving to replace endemic bad governance with good, democratic governance, are as follows:

1. Providing good quality leadership: predicated on knowledge, experience, competence, integrity, vision, and selflessness
2. Transparency and accountability in policies and decision-making processes. This would go a long way to engender trust for government among citizens, which is essential during times of crises.
3. Respect for and compliance with Rule of Law. This is required to mitigate excessive impunity and executive lawlessness, which is all pervasive at all levels of governance.
4. Efficiency and effectiveness in the management of public resources can go a long way to free resources for prioritisation of citizens welfare and social justice to address the needs and aspirations of the most vulnerable members of society, especially in times of crises.
5. Participation of citizens in discussing what affects them, based on deliberate inclusivity, is necessary to ender trust, and generate additional ideas and perspectives, and citizens buy-in for addressing collective concerns
6. Project/programme deliverability, based on a rational, knowledge based deliberative processes should be engendered and sustained.
7. Careful, even visionary planning is a requirement, and should also be broadly participatory, utilizing a bottom-up approach.
8. Harnessing resources to address the fundamental needs and aspirations of the citizens with respect to human dignity and security
9. Equity, equality of opportunity, justice and fair-play, are requirements to ensure that citizens have equal rights and obligations and are treated without fear or favour.

It is noteworthy that, a ‘developing’ if not ‘underdeveloped’ nation-state, such as Nigeria, requires for its sustainable progress and development, not just “good governance”, which is just merely about efficiency and delivery of public goods and services to the citizens, as popularized by the World Bank and IMF since the 1990s, as they strove to mitigate the failure of Structural Adjustment Programmes (SAP). What is most especially required is what I define as Good Democratic Governance, which is a fundamentally inclusive and participatory form of governance in which citizens, as sovereigns, are truly masters of their own destiny in determining who governs them, how they are governed and how governance addresses their fundamental needs and aspirations (see Jega 2021b). For, mere “good governance”, devoid of substantive democratic content, is something that can be found even in brutal authoritarian regimes, via the avenues of “benevolent dictatorship” or “military vanguardism”. However, as the experience of many countries globally has shown, especially those of the so-called “Asian Tigers” fame, mere “good governance” as conceived and promoted by the Bretton Woods institutions is, in the long term, unsustainable and must necessarily be infused with substantive democratic content.

After 21years of ‘transition to democracy’ with increasingly waning, if any, positive beneficial results to overwhelming majority of its citizens, Nigeria needs to reposition its democratic development away from the notion of mere “good governance”, towards the more substantive and desirable notion of good democratic governance. The protection, defence and promotion of citizenship rights and citizens’ human dignity and human security, should be the main purpose of governance, and the overriding activity of government, presided over or led by representatives carefully chosen and mandated by the citizens, through their active participation in elections that have credibility and integrity; elected representatives who are responsible and responsive to the needs and aspirations of those who elected them.

Conclusion

Nigeria has suffered from the grip of bad governance, especially since 1999 under civil ‘democratic’ rule, with serious consequences for unity, stability and sustainable socio-economic and democratic development. All hands need to be on deck to bring into effect sustainable good, democratic governance., as a panacea for socio-economic and democratic development. In essence, good governance, especially what I refer to as good, democratic governance, is necessary for would engender stability, guarantee human dignity and human security, as well as catalyse socio-economic and sustainable democratic development.

All elected officeholders need to study, understand, be able to explain, and put to good use, in practice, the essentials of good democratic governance, namely: leadership by example, transparency and accountability, engendering citizens participation in governance, selflessness, consensus-building, and responsiveness to the needs and aspirations of the citizens. Efficient and effective utilization of collective, public resources, is absolutely necessary, devoid of wastages, and personal aggrandisement. We must develop the competence and capacity to hold public office and provide the required leadership for focused planning, decision-making and policy implementation for societal progress and development.

A Keynote Address by Professor Attahiru Jega at the Inaugural Lecture, Organized in Honour of Rt. Hon. Umaru Bago Mohammed, the Governor-Elect, Niger State, May 25, 2023, at the Justice Idris Legbo Kutigi International Conference Centre, Minna, Niger State.