Wednesday, June 17, 2009

THE ROLE AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE POLITICAL CLASS IN ENSURING CREDIBLE ELECTIONS IN NIGERIA

Being text of a paper presented at the first People Monthly Magazine National Dialogue on the theme 2011 Elections: Challenges and Prospects holding at the Transcorp Hilton Hotel, Abuja, Tuesday, May12, 2009

INTRODUCTION

The growth and development of nations, insstitutions and ideas are often said to depend on the sweat, blood and sacrifice of some key individuals and groups who provide the required leadership in different spheres of national existence. Such category of torch bearers usually referred to as elites lead the direction in the different dimensions of national growth and development. They are in all sectors. For instance, we often hear of the political class, the intellectual class, the military class, the business class and the bureaucratic class, among others. Each of the identified classes has a distinctively known area in which it serves the society. For instance, the business class serves the society through the provision of goods and services; the military class ensures the safety and security of the society while the political class provides the overall leadership and direction for the growth and development of the nation. The activities of the political class have profound impact on the overall development, security and prosperity, or the absence of them in the society. This is understandable considering the fact that politics affect everything and everybody because it deals with the subject of decision making and resource allocation across all boundaries in the society. For instance, it is the politician in office that determines the resources that go to the other sectors like the military, education, bureaucracy, etc.

Without doubt, the political class has remained a challenged class in the political history of the country. During the pre- independence period, the class led the struggle for the nation’s independence by confronting the colonial establishment and taking up the challenge of liberating the nation. Upon independence in 1960, the challenge for the class was on fast tracking the development of the nation to catch up with the rest of the world. When the military took over on the alleged failure of the political class in 1966, members of the class worked hand in hand with the military to stabilize the polity and continue with the process of governance.

In the last ten years since the return of the country to full democratic governance with the political class taking full charge of the country’s political space, there have been concerns expressed in many quarters on the performance, conduct and behaviour of the various members of the political class. Complaints are often heard that even though the political class is the immediate beneficiary of the current democratization process, regrettably, the behaviour of a large number of members of the class appear to be dangerously threatening to the entire democratic project in the nation. Many of such negative tendencies that manifest in the form of poor performance in office, corruption, electoral fraud, desperate and intolerant conduct and other such threatening behaviours heat up the polity, undermine public confidence and paint the political class as having failed to learn from history.

The political class remains the guiding torch for the development of the nation; and that connotes it should be properly organized on the basis of discipline, principle, vision and a sense of mission. A visionless and missionless political class will lead the country nowhere other than to retrogression, corruption and frustration. In the words of the great Indian leader, Mohandas Gandhi (1869-1948), there are eight monsters that can easily lead to decay and ruins of a nation. These are:

Wealth without work

Pleasure without conscience

Knowledge without character

Commerce without morality

Science without humanity

Worship without sacrifice

Politics without principle

Rights without responsibilities

Thus, this paper discusses some of the responsibilities of the members of the political class in the sustenance of the nation’s democracy with reference to their role in ensuring credible and acceptable elections in the country. Members of the class are the most visible actors in the electoral process. While the members of the general public have their responsibilities clearly and perhaps restrictively defined at each stage of the electoral process, the politicians’ interest and responsibility are more robust in the entire process. Equally, the conduct of the political class is likely to influence either negatively or positively the confidence of the public in the conduct and outcome of elections.

NIGERIA’S DEMOCRACY

Since 1960 when Nigeria gained its independence and embraced the democratic option of governance, much has been witnessed in the country’s tortuous road to full democratization. Over the years, the system had encountered turbulence characterized by controversies, military incursions, dashed hopes and leadership and systemic failures. On all occasions, the political class was at the receiving end. Members of the class have been variously accused of anti-democratic tendencies that tend to violate constitutionality, abuse citizens’ rights, promote non credible elections, and disrespect for the rule of law; others are poor delivery of services and the non advancement and protection of individual and collective freedoms. Incidentally, these elements form the fundamental pillars that differentiate democracy from other forms of governance.

Perhaps, because of the long military rule, the psyche of the political elite and the general population has been infected with the militarist and regimented culture of arbitrariness characterized by executive fiat, absence of accountability and wanton disregard for the will of the people. In addition, the general population tended to be subdued into silence, resignation and apathy, appearing disabled to query the unacceptable state of affairs within the system. Negative acts of political misbehaviours eloquently manifested in electoral malpractices, tyrannical attitudes, bad governance, disregard for the rule of law, massive stealing of public resources, increased deprivations, personal appropriation of state power, and gross ineptitude by elected officials seem to combine with debilitating poverty to overwhelm the general population.

Arguably, in Nigeria of today, the military may not be regarded as immediate serious threats to the democratic process. Rather, the destruction of existing structural public institutions, abuse of procedures and regulations, undemocratic tendencies, massive stealing of public resources, insensitive, non-principled and desperate conduct of politicians, and the personalization of state power coupled with the rising level of public frustration are the poisonous arrows that are threatening our young democracy. Perhaps, unable to understand the Nigerian situation, a foreign journalist once observed that: “Nigeria is just like an unfortunate sick man. He refused to respond to treatment. But he also refused to die”! This is no doubt in reference to our behaviour of trial and error with unending excuses for not getting things including our elections right. Can we absolve the country’s political class in all of the above observations? I doubt so. Well, for the purpose of this paper, we shall simply restrict ourselves to the political class and the electoral process.

PERCEPTION OF POLITICIANS AND THE POLITICAL CLASS

What is the general image of the typical Nigerian politician and indeed the whole political class among average Nigerians? A simple reading of the country’s press over a period of one week may possibly lead one to some of the following contentious conclusions on the nature of the average politician and the concept of politics in contemporary Nigeria.

· Politicians are highly intolerant of one another

· Politics is for individuals who have no principles

· Politics is a profession that has no entry qualifications

· Politics is the easiest means of self enrichment

· Political recruitment does not necessarily depend on competence but godfathers

· Once in office, politicians listen to nobody but themselves

· Politicians are not to be believed/trusted

PERCEPTION OF ELECTIONS IN NIGERIA

Elections are means for building legitimacy, shaping public opinion and strengthening the capacity of the elites to exercise control over society. They provide a two way street for the government, the people and the political class with the opportunity to influence one another. However, in Nigeria the picture is slightly different considering the manner in which our elections are perceived. It has been variously argued that open, competitive and meaningful elections have remained elusive in the country due to some complex reasons that include ‘’deep rooted and interlocking historical, structural (economic), institutional and psycho-cultural factors’’ ( IDEA, 2001). Perhaps, because of the challenges, elections are differently and unfortunately, negatively perceived by individuals. Quite often, such perceptions are actively promoted by the behaviour of the political class. Some of the common perceptions are:

· For every election, the end justifies the means.

· Elections are equal to ‘wars’ with battles that must be won at all costs.

· In politics, there is no morality. Just secure the victory by whatever means and trick.

· Incumbents must win elections except if they are in the bad books of the central government

· Politics is business. Elections provide opportunity for interest groups, agencies and individuals to make big monies.

· Irrespective of a candidate’s moral, ethical and performance records, his money and connections are what can qualify him into a political office.

· All levels of governments and their agencies are liable to illegal behaviours during elections. It all depends on their levels of interest.

· The media serve the interest of those in power, their owners or those who can pay for their ways by whatever means.

· In elections, make sure that you don’t loose to go to court but win and be taken to court.

· Political offices are instruments for corrupt acquisition of wealth. Therefore, it must be paid for heavily by the seekers, who in any way, will recoup their electoral investments in office (excessive monetization).

· Staying in the opposition is the least of options. As some say, success has many fathers while failure is an orphan. The typical politician should be in office or relate “well” with successful ones (winner-takes –all mentality).

We arrived at the above conclusions based on observations of the conduct and behaviour of the typical Nigerian politician and the electoral process in the last ten years.

CREDIBLE ELECTIONS

Arguably, representation in modern politics is inextricably linked with elections. Though, elections may not be a sufficient condition for complete political representation, but have been found to be a necessary condition (Heywood, 2006). The organization, conduct and successful outcome of elections are functions of several factors that are systematically tied to one another. Equally, the integrity, credibility and legitimacy of the results of an election relate to a set of variables that run through the continuum of the electoral process. Inevitably, each variable is as strong or weak as the other.

Thus, the failure of one will definitely affect the success of the next stage. For instance, any unaddressed challenge in the compilation of the voters’ register will automatically affect the participation of some people in the actual process of voting. Similarly, any malpractice experienced on the day of voting may affect the outcome and legitimacy of the elections. In the same vein, questioning the outcome and supremacy of elections may lead to unnecessary wrangling, court cases and in the extremes, instability in the polity. Thus, a credible election is one that is adjudged to be transparently competitive, free and fair, openly participatory and conducted on the basis of the provisions of the electoral law. The absence or manipulation of any of these elements can easily undermine the credibility of an election and invalidate the exercise.

THE ELECTORAL PROCESS

To fully capture the enormity of the subject at hand, it will be proper to understand the scope and dimension of the electoral process in the Nigerian context. This includes:

· Registration of voters

· Registration of political parties \political party campaigns

· Preparations by the electoral body (procurement of electoral materials and recruitment of adhoc staff)

· Holding of the elections

· Post elections

In an ideal situation, these steps and arrangements should be clearly understood by the stakeholders and indeed the electorates for the credibility and legitimacy of the process. The quality of each of the steps has profound impact on the subsequent steps and quality of the outcome of the process. However, studies and observations have shown that members of the political class, in many cases, with the active connivance of their collaborators in the security agencies, electoral commission and other bodies commit numerous frauds at each stage of the electoral process. In simple terms, electoral fraud “involves all illegal acts of commission or omission adopted by a party in an election to distort the true choices of the citizens”. For example, the 2003 TMG Report had identified fraudulent practices at the various stages like the registration of voters, party primaries for nomination of candidates, and of course, the general elections. Some of these can be summarized thus:

MALPRACTICES IN THE PARTY NOMINATIONS PROCESS

· Supremacy of political party executives, power brokers and factions within the parties. Party membership has no say on who emerges as the candidate

· Guidelines for party primaries are skewed. And most parties block the court process

· Widespread bribery to influence delegates

· Foisting of unpopular candidates

· Monopolization of the nomination process by few members

MALPRACTICES AT THE LEVEL OF VOTER REGISTRATION AND ELECTIONS

· Multiple and underage voters’ registration

· Improper constituency delineation

· Denial of opportunity for registration to opponents and their loyalists

· Corrupt inducement of voters, electoral officials, traditional rulers and religious leaders in order that they coerce or manipulate their followers

· Manipulation of ethnic and religious sentiments

· Electoral violence during voters registration, voting, transportation of materials to condition centres and collection and announcement of results

· Abuse of office by the party in government using public resources to campaign, intimidate the opposition, monopolize state media, etc

· Depriving the electorate of voting opportunities through inadequate supplies of materials

· Stuffing of ballot boxes

· Falsification of election results

· Corrupt inducement of Tribunal members to validate fraudulent results

(TMG Report, 2003).

THE POLITICAL CLASS AND CONDUCT OF CREDIBLE ELECTIONS

Unarguably, the relevance and survival of a viable democratic culture rests heavily on the behaviour and conduct of the political class in its struggle to capture and maintain political power. To this end, the class needs to wake up to some realities to properly re-brand itself to recover the confidence and trust of the majority of Nigerians. In fact, as one contributor in one of the Newspapers put it, the Nigerian politician needs the current re-branding spirit more than any other Nigerian. Members of the political class should re-examine their behaviours, conduct and performance in and out of office.

I believe that credible and rancour free elections are practicable in our present circumstances if the members of the political class decide to be less desperate in their bid for power; and play the game by globally and nationally acknowledged ethical codes and laws. The class needs to increasingly prove its competence in being able to superintend the democratic process by demonstrating transparent conduct in the activities of their individual political parties. In specific terms, the political class can perform the following roles and responsibilities in ensuring credible elections in the country. These include:

· Lead in providing general political education based on correct values

· Promote and encourage mass participation at all levels

· Participate as contestants in the various elective offices

· Promote the legitimacy and integrity of elections and election results

· Provide the right leadership and atmosphere for the conduct of elections

· Promote discipline in form, spirit and implementation of the electoral process

As it is, the political parties that serve as the platform for capturing power do not engender confidence among many Nigerians. In the words of a one time Chairman of INEC, Dr Abel Guobadia, ‘’Nigerian political parties behave like war machines cocked almost permanently to go into combat with perceived opponents, both existing and potential. More often than not, the enemy is not just the opposition party but also the electorates who refuse to toe party line. Once in power, the parties want to remain there forever by hook or by crook, intolerant to challenges either from within or from without…(there is) lack of cohesion within each of the parties, which generates intra-party wrangling and endless crisis. Such crisis degenerates into intra-party factions (that) spill over into elections…’’

To avoid such threatening behaviours that may affect the credibility of the 2011 elections in the country, politicians and their parties must demonstrate their belief and competence in the democratic process by ensuring internal democracy and tolerant conduct in their political parties. The logic is simple, can Nigerians trust politicians who can not organize acceptable internal party primaries to organize or even participate in credible national elections? How can we trust that they may not carry over the same mentality of illegality and fraud into the national electoral space? In other words, the degree to which the people will perceive our politicians as skilled, reliable, experienced and qualified individuals to offer them leadership in the electoral process will be a function of their competence as demonstrated in their party organization and conduct. Therefore, the challenge is for the politicians to demonstrate responsibility by putting their acts in order.

Closely related to the issue of competence is that of trustworthiness. From our submission on the perception of the average politician by Nigerians, it is clear that the political class needs to work harder to earn the trust of the people. Trustworthiness emphasizes honesty, fairness, sincerity, honour and kindness. These perceptions are earned over time. Now, what is the rating of the political class on all these counts in Nigeria? Your answer is as good as mine.

Our conviction on the class being able to contribute positively to credible elections will be a function of our trust of individual and collective members of the political class based on their past behaviours. For us to expect any positive contribution from the class particularly in the electoral process, it needs to re-brand its character to earn the trust of the citizens. The challenge now is on politicians to proof that they can be trusted to facilitate acceptable elections after some shocking experiences of Nigerians in the past few years.

Another important point that will elicit hope in the ability of the political class to play a positive role in the preparation and holding of credible elections in the country is its dynamism in terms of boldness, energy, empathy and strength of character. A class that does not demonstrate these elements in their conduct during non election periods can hardly reflect same during tense moments of elections. Nigeria needs bold and courageous politicians who empathize with the citizens at all times. A political class that lacks principles and strength of character can hardly provide an enabling environment for credible elections to hold. The tendency is for it to always try to cut corners and operate on crass opportunism as was uniformly manifested in the local government elections across the states. Is the Nigerian political class ready to re-brand its present image to that of an empathic and selfless class guided by strength of character? I am afraid that no amount of reform of INEC can fulfil our hope of credible elections in the country if our politicians maintain the image of a ‘’people who use machetes, people who snatch ballot boxes and…people who carry axes, using offensive languages against their opponents who are not necessarily their enemies…’’( Iwu, 2009).

Can we talk of the political class contributing to credible elections when there is no appropriate connection between the generality of the people and many members of the class? To what extent do our politicians share same values, beliefs, attitudes, fears, aspirations and interests with their communities? Can one expect any honest conduct where there are clear gaps and conflicts between the people and their politicians during tense moments of electioneering? In a situation where there is a connection, the people may stand by the politician and not only facilitate credible elections but stand firm in guarding the votes to protect the legitimacy of the process. The reverse may also occur in form of apathy, subversion and connivance on the part of the people where there is a disconnect between them and the politicians. Instead, the people simply dismiss the exercise as an intra class fight for access to resources among the big fishes. The people turn themselves into amused observers in the Nigerian election theatre, sometimes cheering whoever that is able to outwit his politician colleague. After all, they are all seen as birds of the same feathers. Thus, observing the nature of the connection between the various politicians and their communities can inform us on what to expect in subsequent elections.

SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS

To effectively fulfil its expected roles and responsibilities in ensuring credible elections and by extension sustainable democracy in the country, the political class is advised to:

· Change its general attitude, disposition towards political power and behaviour towards elections

· Commit itself to providing credible leadership for the various stakeholders engaged in the electoral process

· Support the sustenance of enabling environment for the preparation, conduct and acceptance of elections

· Reduce the level of desperation usually seen among politicians particularly during election periods

· Liaise with the right agencies to strengthen institutions like security agencies, civil society, the media, judiciary and the electoral body for them to effectively command the respect and confidence of the general public

· Condemn and punish all acts of electoral misbehaviours

· Avoid personalization of issues. Campaigns should be issue based and people centred

· Check the intolerant behaviour of incumbents who appropriate public resources for their party activities

· Institute and reflect fairness and transparency in all party activities particularly in internal party primary elections

· Discourage the negative influence of factors like money, godfathers and ethnicity in elections

· Serve the people right to command their support all times

CONCLUSION

Without doubt, the organization and holding of credible elections in the country will largely depend on the behaviour of the political class, the performance of the electoral body and the disposition of the Nigerian people. Of these, the commitment of the political class seems to be uppermost. I believe that if our politicians, individually and collectively, resolve to be principled and play the game from the level of the party through general elections based on the provisions of the law, we shall have credible elections. In such a situation, even the other stakeholders like the electoral body, security agencies, the civil society and the media, among others, may have no options than to reflect the new spirit in their works. But where the politician seeks for easy and fraudulent advantage over his opponents, then we shall continue to remain prisoners of fraudulent elections with all their attendant consequences.

I am optimistic that change is on its way to Nigeria. Our prayer is that the political class will realize the challenges confronting its members in terms of image and the expectations on them to imbibe contemporary global standards of good governance, ethical conduct and respect for the will of the people as manifested in elections. Once, we are able to re-brand the desperate behaviour of the Nigerian politician, defeat corruption, sanitize the performance of agencies involved in elections and eliminate apathy among the people, Nigeria will record credible elections and be a shining example of good people in a great nation with trustworthy politicians.

Finally, Mr Chairman, permit me to, once again, thank the organizers for inviting me to this distinguished forum. I am grateful for the opportunity. Most importantly, I wish to thank you all for being a wonderful and receptive audience. I appreciate your attention.

Thank you

REFERENCES

Guobadia, Abel (2003). Quoted in Kurfi, Ahmadu. Improving Management of Nigeria’s Electoral Process: Problems and Prospects. Int. HRLG

Heywood, Andrew (2006). Politics. New York: Palgrane Foundation

IDEA (2001).Democracy in Nigeria. Stockholm: IIDEA

Iwu, Maurice(2009). Interview with The Guardian Newspaper, May 9.

TMG (2003). Do the Votes Count? Final Report of the 2003 General Elections in Nigeria. Abuja.: TMG

Pate Umaru (2009). ‘’Imperatives of Electoral Reform in Nigeria: The Media Dimension’’. In Oso, Lai et al (eds). Media, Gove

THE BROADCAST MEDIA AND SUSTAINABLE DEMOCRACY IN NIGERIA: ISSUES AND CHALLENGES

Being a text of a paper presented at the Forum on the “Broadcast Media and Electioneering Campaigns in Nigeria” Organized by the Nigerian Television Authority Holding at Kaduna, Ibadan and Enugu, March 12 -22, 2007

Introduction

It has been established that there is a very strong relationship between media performance and the conduct and vibrancy of politics and political activities in democracies. It is often said that in democracies, “the media have a complex relationship with sources of power and the political system” (McQuail, 2005). Both politics and the media have the singular aim of promoting the individual and collective interests of the general society.

Thus, while politics serves as a route and means of uplifting the society through good governance, protection and advancement of people’s rights, and the creation of an enabling environment for democracy to thrive; the media on their part operate within the prevailing environment to engage in the public sphere thereby expanding the frontiers of freedom and enabling the citizens to have access to quality information that will influence their judgments and decisions for sustainable democracy. Stated differently, the media in a democratic context “distribute entitlements to speak and to be heard”, even if unevenly (Keane, 1993).

From the foregoing, it is clear that the existence of a vibrant media system is quite fundamental to the enthronement and sustenance of a credible democratic process in a setting like Nigeria. As one scholar had argued:

A responsible nationwide democratic system requires a media system which is coterminous with it and which can generate discussion of issues of public concern in a way which does not favour partisan interests; whether these be the interests of particular political parties, the interests of media bosses or media professionals (Boyd Barrett, 2001).

In Nigeria, the performance of the mass media in the democratic process at various phases of our history has been well documented (Omu, 1978; Ogbondah, 1994; Yusuf, 2001 and Nwosu, 2003). Arguably, the mass media have remained in the forefront in the struggle to promote the rights of our people through a credible democratization process. After all, the media too find it quite difficult to operate in a non democratic environment. However, this is not to suggest that the media have been perfect in all circumstances. They have been severely criticized for complicity in truncating and subverting the democratic process at various times. For instance, Enahoro once observed that “whoever and whatever ruined the first republic did so with the active connivance and collaboration of the greater part of the Nigerian press”. Similarly, James (1984) had decried the high degree of professional rascality exhibited by the media during the second republic as manifested through “character assassination, false accusations, blackmail and misrepresentation of facts ….. to the extent that facts were muzzled and whole media organs became megaphones and machineries of propaganda to political parties and vested interests to the extent that the unity of this country was shaken to its very foundation”. Several other writers and scholars have expressed similar opinions (Pate, 2003; and Akinfeleye, 2004).

However, irrespective of such hard assessments, the basis of our argument is that the media are part as well as facilitators of the public sphere described as the “distinctive discursive space within which individuals combine to assume the role of a politically powerful force “(Ernst, 1998). It is our contention in this paper that the Nigerian media, particularly the broadcasting channels with their advantages of reach, cost, timeliness, and acceptability have played and will continue to perform critical functions in the promotion of a sustainable democratic system in the country. Thus, in this presentation, we shall examine the issues involved, some of the challenges and the way forward in the relationship between the broadcast media and the strengthening of a viable democracy in Nigeria.

OUR DEMOCRACY

Democracy as a system of government thrives on constitutionality, citizens’ participation, respect for the rule of law, delivery of services and the advancement and protection of individual and collective freedom. These elements are the fundamental pillars that differentiate democracy from other forms of governance. Indeed, the “essence of democracy is that citizens must be able to ventilate their views through unrestrained debates and that there should be active citizens’ participation in governance as well as unrestricted communication between the government and the governed” (IDEA, 2001).

Here in Nigeria, we have embraced the democratic option for the greater development of our people and nation. With it came the enthronement of the democratic process characterized by the existence of the three arms of government, regular elections, increased citizen’s participation in public affairs, founding of democratic structures like political parties and an active civil society sector, among others. However, this is not to suggest that the present democratic experimentation is totally healthy. Many of us believe that the system can do better in terms of enlarging citizen’s participation in governance and the respect for individual and collective rights through service delivery, free and fair elections, accountability and respect for due process.

Perhaps, the deficits experienced in our young democratic system can be attributed to two separate but inextricably linked factors. These are the prolonged militarization of the polity and the poor and low level of the people’s political education and consciousness.

For the period Nigerians lived under military rule, the psyche of the political elite and the general population has been infected with the militarist and regimented culture of arbitrariness characterized by executive fiat, absence of accountability and wanton disregard for the will of the people. Equally, the general population tended to be subdued into silence, resignation and apathy, appearing disabled to query the unacceptable state of affairs in some quarters within the system. Negative acts of political misbehaviors eloquently manifested in electoral malpractices, tyrannical attitudes, bad governance, disregard for the rule of law, massive stealing of public resources, increased deprivations, personal appropriation of state power, and gross ineptitude by elected officials seem to combine with debilitating poverty to overwhelm the general population that they can do nothing other than to raise their hands in supplication to the Almighty Allah for solution. Indeed, the democratic space is increasingly being demonized by its immediate beneficiaries, the politicians.

In the present situation, what should be the role of the broadcast media to ensure that the democratic ship sails through the rough seas successfully?

THE BROADCAST MEDIA IN OUR DEMOCRACY

The driving force of the democratic engine is vibrant politicking based on principles, plurality of ideas, electoral discipline, diversity of audiences and respect for law and order. Thus, one can safely say that politics is the heartbeat of democracy. Simply put, politics is about power--the struggle to possess, use and retain same. It affects everyone and everything in the society.

On the other hand, the broadcast media are the channels of mass communication like radio and television that are actively engaged in the gathering, analyzing and disseminating issues of and about politics. Politics is very important in the lives of the people and the democratic process. Because of this centrality, the media justifiably focus their attention, in fact accord high priority on the government and those in it. In the process, the media are partly expected to expose and criticize bureaucratic incompetence, dictatorial tendencies and abuse of power among officials. In the words of Curran and Seaton (1994), the media become an agency through which citizens reconstitute themselves to exercise informal supervision over the state.

In fact, the 1999 Nigerian Constitution is clear on its assigned role to the media in the polity. In section 22, it says that “the press radio, television and other agencies of the mass media shall at all times be free to uphold the fundamental objectives contained in this chapter and uphold the responsibility and accountability of the government to the people”. Thus, the Constitution has legitimated the functions of the media and imposed on them the role of monitoring and evaluating the performance of our leaders at all levels. The extent to which the broadcast media actualize this Constitutional provision in their functions is another issue.

As indicated earlier, the broadcast media are generally engaged in active political reporting. I believe that political reporting is necessary for the sustenance of democracy where the system of checks and balances is required for good governance and democratic sustainability. It affords the media the opportunity to provide an open forum for “legitimated interest groups” to participate in public affairs. Indeed, as Nimmo and Combs (1992) put it, “historically, the mass media were heralded as the ultimate instruments of democracy … (They) were destined to unite, educate, and as a result, improve the actions and decisions of the polity”.

Furthermore, if we operationally consider the functions of the broadcast media in the country, we may realize that they are very important in conveying the messages of politicians and political office holders in their bid to capture and retain power particularly during electioneering periods. In the words of the one time Director General of the FRCN and later NTA, Mohammed Ibrahim, “the objective of politics on radio and television is essentially to sensitize the public to the significant nature of their decision, so that they can make the right choice in giving the country the government it desires”. In a simplified form, the media supply the electorate with the right information for sound political judgment.

Equally, the broadcast media, depending on how they use their powers, can “order and structure political reality, allotting events greater or lesser significance according to their presence or absence on the media agenda (McNair, 2000). This is where the issue of opinion polling or vox populi comes in. For instance, recently, the LEADERSHIP Newspaper (Feb.27, 2007) reported the result of an opinion poll it commissioned on “What Issue Will Most Likely Influence Who You Vote for in the April Polls”. The result showed that Nigerians are likely to vote on the basis of: Anti Corruption 40.38%, Security 21.79%, Unemployment 10.90%, Economy 14.10%, Education 8.97%, and Health care 3.85%. Through such mechanisms, the broadcast media too can play significant role in determining the agenda for elections and other policy issues. To an extent, we can say that broadcast channels in the nation are fairly doing that,

even if at a low and unorganized manner.

PUBLIC PERCEPTION OF BROADCASTING

The acceptance of messages that emanate from the broadcast media largely depend on their perception by the general audience.

Currently, one can easily summarize the general perceptions into four categories. First, broadcast media stations particularly sate government owned are hardly objective in matters that involve their states and their ruling political parties.

Secondly, foreign broadcast stations are seen as more reliable in providing credible information about events and personalities in the country. Thirdly, the resource poor, the rural majority and the female gender are peripherally involved in broadcasting. They are treated merely as receivers than partners in the entire process.

And, fourthly the current commercialization of society has deeply eaten into the broadcast media thereby severely restricting access by the public and subverting the ideals of news, killing the spirit of investigative journalism, and devaluing the content of programmes and news on radio and television stations. These four observations, contentious as they may sound, have implications on the ability of the broadcast media to meaningfully influence the democratic agenda in the nation.

Based on the above premises, one can then conclude that our broadcast media houses have a long way to go for them to be positively perceived as involving all segments of society, based on the principles of inclusivity, diversity, transparency, autonomy and accountability in their desire to build a broad based national democratic process.

CHALLENGES

While the media in Nigeria may want to play their constructive role in instituting democratic values and strengthening the democratic process, we must also acknowledge some of the major challenges confronting them both individually and collectively. Some of the weaknesses are internally generated while others are beyond their borders.

The greatest challenge to the effective performance of the broadcast media and indeed Nigeria in its bid to strengthen the democratic process is the political behaviour of politicians especially those in government, particularly at state levels irrespective of political party affiliation. The non tolerant behaviour of politicians to alternative views or options in the present dispensation is frightening and threatening to broadcasting and democratic values. In fact, one can argue that while we have happily embraced democracy, our politicians have shown that they are unwilling or incapable of imbibing the tenets of democratization, two of which are tolerance and allowance of freedom to dissent.

Unfortunately, what we see today is the crude emasculation and physical strangulation of the alternative voice by ruling politicians. There are hardly any exceptions. Elsewhere, I had once observed that:

The unwritten rule nowadays is that the Oga and his team members are always right, their achievements, no matter how mean, unsurpassable and the state will collapse without them. Any view outside this framework is abominable, condemnable, punishable and not to be broadcast. Woe betides whoever that holds or dares to express contrary opinion. Such a fellow is berated, political hustlers are sponsored to reply him in the most uncouth of languages, and media managers are rattled and in worst cases dethroned. Thus, in such a climate, members of the general public maintain sealed lips and broadcast houses become exceptionally selective on who to feature on their airwaves. Sycophantic elements rule the airwaves, honest citizens recoil into their shells and democratic ebullience takes flight. A culture of resignation, despondency and fear predominates. Democratic values decline and society degenerates.

Equally, corruption and corrupt activities of officials and business groups have remained cogs in the wheel of the nation’s democratization progress. Ideally, the broadcast media through investigative journalism should be able to expose some of the scams. Unfortunately, a combination of factors has rendered them largely ineffective in this direction.

Arguably, in Nigeria today, the military may not be regarded as immediate serious threats to the democratic process in the country. Rather, the destruction of existing structural public institutions, abuse of procedures and regulations, undemocratic tendencies, massive stealing of public resources, insensitive, non-principled and desperate conduct of politicians, and the personalization of state power coupled with the rising level of public frustration are the poisonous arrows that may cripple our young democracy. For instance, the EFFC Chairman had revealed recently on the NTA ‘One—on—One” Programme (Feb.23, 2007) that the Commission had in the last two to three years confiscated over N90 Billion (USD 700 Million) of stolen monies from government functionaries who are mostly elected officials.

Equally, the Commission had reported the misuse or diversion of over N1.6 Trillion meant for the local governments in six states since 1999. There are many more sickening reports of this nature.

But, how have the broadcast media been performing in opening up some of these cans of worms? The scorecard may not read well compared to the public expectations

It is in this regard that one must encourage the broadcast stations to be bold enough to investigate some of the claims made by officials as their achievements. Stations should not simply collect money and broadcast dubious claims that have been perfected as conduits for the siphoning of public resources; they must find out the validity, costs and relevance of the claims.

The extent to which our broadcast stations scrutinize the quality of intending contestants, their manifestoes and their fulfilled promises is also weak. Our stations need to develop mechanisms that could gather the manifestoes of office seekers and evaluate the extent to which such manifestoes have been implemented .This is one way by the public can be assisted to differentiate the performing from non performing leaders who should be rejected or booted out of office.

But for all this to happen, individual media houses themselves must be seen to be well informed on the meaning and essence of the on-going democratization reform. To this end, democratic values should be seen to be reflected in their public relations, programme content and professional conduct. Credible feedback mechanisms and standard public opinion monitoring systems should be institutionalized to properly inform and guide programming pattern and content. After all, they cannot offer what they do not understand or practice. Otherwise, many of the stations may be reformed out of business. A media house is a change institution whose management requires dynamic in-flow of innovation, creativity, drive and energy to keep pace with contemporary democratic challenges in the society.

Another critical factor that undermines the function of the broadcasting media is the blanket implementation of the commercialization policy which automatically disables the majority of the people from any form of involvement in the airwaves. The high charges demanded by the various stations for almost everything disqualifies most people and sectors from any kind of meaningful engagement with the media. As a result, the airwaves are exclusively appropriated by governments, their organizations, money bags, business groups and big social institutions. They remain the only actors that have easy access to the expensive airwaves thus further widening the existing unequal balance of power relations in the society. In fact, even editorial judgment is subordinated to economic determinants. Perhaps, this is why many people are questioning the fate of investigative journalism and the concept of public interest in the new order. This has also raised further questions on the credibility and integrity of the status of state owned broadcast media stations as public broadcast service organizations that are positioned to provide independent social services for democratic sustenance.

The usual defence of managers is that their stations are dangerously and grossly under funded that they need to devise alternative sources of survival. I agree with them. In fact, the penury and poverty in some of the stations are glaringly reflected in the quality and quantity of their services and the intolerable conduct of some of their staff. Today, we have broadcast outfits that ably qualify as epilepsy patients whose standard hours of daily operation/seizure are unknown. They simply operate on the mercy of the PHCN or the availability of a gallon of diesel. I wonder how such weak institutions can command any serious respect among the general population.

Closely related to the funding anemia in these organizations is weak capacity building mechanisms on democratic values through continuous staff development initiatives. The effects of this deficiency are manifested in the conduct and output of the staff at all levels. Unfortunately, broadcasting is one place where hiding one’s intellectual and creative deficiencies may be difficult. The consequences are very glaring to the audiences.

It may also be partially correct to say that many of our media houses are far removed from the global trend. They are poorly equipped to be able to discharge their expected functions of effective coverage, reporting and disseminating value added information for the democratic journey. Their equipment is still largely analogue except for some like the NTA, the new FRCN FM stations and the private outfits.

Many have no internet connectivity, and staff offices are decrepit. Visit some of the newsrooms; they are anything but newsrooms with bare furniture, noisy ceiling fans, possibly worn out dictionaries and old rickety typewriters. The newsrooms hardly portray that they are avenues for serious intellectual endeavors equipped for professionals who are set to expand the frontiers of democracy in Nigeria of the 21st century. In other words, we have digitalized transmission equipment managed and operated by analogue managers and personnel who are still grappling with antiquated gadgets and absence of basic tools; vehicles for movement are in short supply, the alternative power generators are on and off due to overuse, and visible anger and frustration could be read on the faces of the staff each time one comes across them. I wonder how prepared could such media personnel be in addressing the numerous challenges confronting our democratization process.

CONSEQUENCES

The effects of all of these on the contributions of the broadcast media in strengthening the democracy are indeed clear to us. Apart from excluding the generality of the people who are the subjects of the democratization process, they seem to confirm the four perceptions on the broadcast media in the country.

Some of the effects are:

· The general population can loose confidence and trust in the credibility of the broadcast media system to act as watchdogs and platforms for the promotion of democratic values.

· Our people may continue to rely on international broadcast stations for crucial information that affect their lives and nation. Thus, the external media may be determining the local and national agenda instead of the reverse. This could lead to serious consequences for the nation.

· New forms of information disseminations techniques like the Internet and GSM will render non-reforming media outfits obsolete and non reliable, thus irrelevant in the democratization process.

· The potential strength and centrality of the broadcast media are severely undermined by the visible absence of diversity, accessibility, courage and relevance in promoting the democratic process.

THE WAY FORWARD

Broadcasting is too critical to be ignored in the democratization process. In fact, it is often argued that the quality and freedom in our broadcasting speak volumes about the quality of our democratic status. For instance, the seriousness and tolerance level in the system can be measured by the behaviour of its broadcasting media.

To this end, I wish to suggest the following for the positive consideration of our broadcast media stations.

· Be guided by the principle of social responsibility, i.e inclusivity, fairness and balance in the handling of political coverages.

· Build the knowledge of all staff to know the Constitution, the Electoral Law, NBC Code on Broadcasting, the Professional Code of Ethics, etc.

· Promote the principles of public involvement in programme planning and production.

· Emphasize and promote public interests, issue based programming, and institutional strengthening instead of personalities and personal activities.

· Stations need to develop Strategic Plans on promoting democratic values through behaviour change oriented programmes targeted at the different segments of the population.

· Strengthen individual media organizations’ capacity in investigative journalism within a democratic context.

· We need to encourage the emergence of strong civil society/pressure groups that will monitor the performance of the various media outlets.

· Stations should work towards changing the mindsets of our politicians and the general population on negative attitudes like money politics, political vandalism and rascality, etc.

· We urge the FGN to urgently release the policy on community broadcasting to further deregulate and liberalize the broadcast industry. This will facilitate the growth of cheaper and people oriented community radio stations all over the country.

· Let media houses temper their commercialization regimes with mercy. It has remained a big disqualifier for the majority of people to partake in the airwaves.

· We appeal to all governments and private media owners to promote enabling working environment through the guaranteeing of operational freedom and provision of adequate resources for optimal operations.


REFERENCES

Akinfeleye, Ralph (2006). Inaugural Lecture. University of Lagos.

Boyd-Barrett, Oliver (2001). Conceptualizing the Public Sphere”. In Boyd-Barett, Q.et.al (eds). Approaches to Media. London: Arnold.

Curran, James and Seaton, J. (1988). Power Without Responsibility. London: Fontana.

Curran, James et.al (eds) (1991). Mass Media and Society. London: Edward Arnold.

James, U. A.. (1984). Decree 4 and Responsible Journalism”. In Nigerian Journalist. Vol.2, No.2 Legos NUJ.

Keane, John (1993). Media in Transition: From Totalitarianism to Democracy. London: Kyiv Abris.

Mc Quail, Denis (2005). McQuail’s Mass Communication Theory. London: Sage Publications.

Murdoch, Graham (1992). Citizens, Consumers and public Culture. In Schroder, Kim et.al (eds) Media Cultures London: Routledge.

Ogbondah, Chris (1994) Military Regimes and the Press in Nigeria, 1966-1993; Human Rights and National Development. Lanham: University Press America.

Onu, Fred (1978) Press and Politics in Nigeria. Ibadan: Longman.

Pate, U. (2003). “Media Ethics in Political Reporting on the Broadcast Media in Nigeria”. In Nwosu, I (eds). POLIMEDIA: Media and Politics in Nigeria. Enugu: ACCE.

Pate, U. (2006). “Challenges of Public Participation in Broadcasting: “The Case of North East Nigeria. In BRTV Newswatch Vol.1, No.3 Maiduguri.

Yusuf, B. (2001). “Mass Media in a Constitutional Democracy: The Nigerian Experience”. In Alemika, E. O. et. Al (eds) Constitutional Federalism and Democracy in Nigeria. Kaduna: HRM.