Politics over governance

NIGERIA is already in another election season. Party primaries were concluded across the country last week amid controversies, allegations of irregularities, disputes over candidate selection, and familiar complaints about internal party democracy. Politicians are positioning themselves for the next round of contests, while parties mobilise supporters and resources. Of course, politics is an essential component of democracy. Elections require competition, organization, and accountability. The concern, however, is that politics increasingly appears to have displaced governance.

For many Nigerians, the country has spent the better part of the last three years in a permanent campaign season. Hardly had the last general election ended when preparations for the next began. Political actors moved seamlessly from governing to succession planning and electoral calculations. Governance has increasingly become subordinate to politics. More troubling is the absence of serious intra-party and inter-party debate about the country’s challenges and future direction. Political conversations are centered on power rotation, succession calculations, and electoral permutations, while policy discussions remain largely absent.  Nigeria remains confronted by severe economic and security challenges. Millions of citizens continue to struggle with inflation, unemployment, rising energy prices, high transportation costs, and declining purchasing power. Families are making difficult choices between necessities that should ordinarily be within reach. Even more alarming is the persistence of insecurity. Communities across the country continue to grapple with terrorism, banditry, kidnapping, and violent crime. Schoolchildren and their teachers have been abducted, ransomed, and in some cases murdered. Farmers have been displaced from their farmlands. Rural communities increasingly live under fear and uncertainty. Nigerians are increasingly asking a more troubling question: who truly governs large parts of Nigeria—the state or the bandits, kidnappers and terrorists who increasingly challenge state authority?

Today, many citizens no longer judge the government by policy pronouncements or official statistics. They judge it by whether they can travel safely, farm safely, conduct business safely, and send their children to school without fear. Ordinarily, these realities should command the undivided attention of political leaders and unite the nation against common threats. Instead, most of the political class appears increasingly consumed by electoral calculations, partisan maneuvering and transactional politics. Public attention is often diverted toward future contests while today’s challenges continue to demand urgent responses. This raises an important question: Does Nigeria’s constitutional arrangement inadvertently encourage endless politics?

ALSO READ: How Security agents thwarted plot to bomb Ondo govt house — Aiyedatiwa

The presidential system creates powerful incentives for perpetual political mobilisation. Presidents and governors begin thinking about second terms or succession almost immediately after assuming office. Legislators focus on re-election. Political parties remain in campaign mode years before formal campaigns begin. Every appointment, policy announcement, and public appearance is viewed through the prism of electoral advantage. By contrast, the parliamentary system tends to concentrate political competition within legislative institutions. Political debates and disagreements may be intense, and governments may face relentless criticism. Yet the contest largely remains within the parliament, where power is challenged through institutional processes rather than continuous nationwide political mobilisation.

Nigeria’s political history provides an important lesson. During the constitutional debates of the 1990s, there were discussions about returning to the parliamentary system that operated during the First Republic. Ultimately, the presidential model that emerged in the Second Republic was retained and subsequently inherited by the Fourth Republic. More than a quarter century later, it is legitimate to ask whether the incentives created by the current arrangement are serving the nation as effectively as intended. In mature democracies, political actors understand that there is a time for campaigning and a time for governing. Elections may be periodic, but governance must be continuous. Unfortunately, many of Nigeria’s political actors appear unable or unwilling to make that distinction. The consequence is that political competition often overshadows public administration. This is particularly unfortunate because many of the challenges confronting Nigeria require collective leadership rather than partisan rivalry. When insecurity threatens the entire country, citizens expect leaders to speak with one voice. When communities are attacked, schoolchildren abducted, citizens displaced, or teachers murdered, Nigerians expect coordinated action rather than political point-scoring. Security challenges and economic hardship do not distinguish between ruling and opposition parties.

When major security incidents occur, citizens should see regional and national leaders responding collectively and decisively. The public should hear less about partisan differences and more about shared solutions. The safety of citizens should transcend party affiliations and political calculations. Democracy derives its legitimacy not merely from periodic elections but from effective governance between elections. Citizens do not surrender their sovereignty to governments merely to watch endless politicking. They do so in expectation of governance. Political actors must remember that the ultimate measure of leadership is not the office they occupy, but the quality of governance they deliver.

Nigeria faces serious challenges that demand serious leadership. The country needs governments focused on improving security, strengthening institutions, growing the economy, expanding opportunities for young people, and restoring public confidence in governance. Opposition parties also have a responsibility to articulate credible alternatives, challenge government policies where necessary, and present evidence-based solutions on behalf of the people.  Democracy was never intended to be an endless campaign. Elections are meant to produce governments. Governments are meant to govern. When politics becomes permanent and governance becomes occasional, citizens pay the price. Nigeria does not suffer from a shortage of politicians, rallies, defections, or electoral calculations. What it increasingly suffers from is a shortage of governance. Until governance once again takes precedence over politics, the challenges confronting ordinary Nigerians will remain far more urgent than the ambitions of those seeking office.