XENOPHOBIA IN SOUTH AFRICA AND THE NIGERIAN SITUATION

Brand Xenoph

by YEMI OLAKITAN

0

Many Nigerians, indeed decent folks world over were flabbergasted at the horrific images of black African immigrants being lynched on the Streets of South Africa that circulated on conventional and social media in recent weeks as the latest orgy of deadly xenophobic violence eclipsed the so-called Rainbow nation. Victims were burnt alive, knifed or stoned while fellow black albeit, South Africans stood aside and watched.  Heads were sliced open and shops were looted in broad day light. The whole world reacted in horror at the senseless killings, including Nigeria. What really is xenophobia? What are the causes of these attacks and how can Nigeria protects her citizens. Ag Head of Investigations, Yemi Olakitan examines the subject.

The dictionary definition of xenophobia describes the phenomenon as a “deep-rooted, irrational hatred towards foreigners” (Oxford English Dictionary), and an “unreasonable fear or hatred of the unfamiliar” (Webster’s). The word comes from the Greek word (xenos), meaning “strange”, “foreigner”, and, phobia, meaning “fear”.

Xenophobia can manifest itself in many ways involving the relations and perceptions of an in-group towards an out-group, including a fear of losing identity, suspicion of its activities, aggression, and desire to eliminate its presence to secure a presumed purity.

The first is a population group present within a society that is not considered part of that society. Often they are recent immigrants, but xenophobia may be directed against a group which has been present for centuries, or became part of this society through conquest and territorial expansion. This form of xenophobia can elicit or facilitate hostile and violent reactions, such as mass expulsion of immigrants or genocide.

Xenophobia is as old as mankind. It has been in existence since Biblical times. The exodus of the Israelites from the land of Egypt can be described as xenophobic, so also is the German systematic murder of more than five million Jews during World War II.

In the weeks of violence in South Africa, shops and homes owned by Somalis, Ethiopians, Malawians and other immigrants in Durban and surrounding townships have been targeted, forcing families to flee to camps protected by armed guards.

According to reports, aggression towards the immigrants in South Africa was reportedly triggered by King Goodwill Zwelithini who said that foreigners must pack up and leave the country.  Numerous African countries evacuated their nationals as a result. The main reason for the violence is believed to be rooted in the poor economic state and the high level youth unemployment in South Africa.

The government had vowed to crack down strongly on the unrest, with a decision to put soldiers on the streets after two nights of relative quiet in both cities.

The announcement was made in Alexandra, a Johannesburg township where a Zimbabwean couple survived a shooting. The man and woman were both shot in their necks and the woman suffered an additional shot in her leg, the minister said, Both Zimbabweans were treated and discharged from hospital.

In the same Alexandra area, a Mozambican man was stabbed to death by four South African men in full view of journalists. The four South African men appeared in court and remain in police custody. The National Prosecuting Authority spokesman Velekhaya Mgobhozi said, police have struggled to contain mobs that have been attacking foreigners from Zimbabwe, Malawi, Mozambique and other African countries in both the economic capital Johannesburg and in the port city of Durban.

The spate of attacks has revived memories of xenophobic bloodshed in 2008, when 62 people were killed in Johannesburg’s townships, shaking South Africa’s post-apartheid image as a “rainbow nation” of different ethnic groups.

In the wake of xenophobic attacks in South Africa, Ambassador Uche Ajulu-Okeke, the Nigerian Consul-General in South Africa said Nigerians living in South Africa have lost more than N21m since the attacks started.  “Nigerians have compiled damages to their property and it is totaling about 1.2 million Rand or N21 million, which will be sent to the Federal Government for further action.”

Okeke added that in Durban, two of the three Nigerians who were injured during attacks had been treated and discharged from the hospital. “The Nigerian mission in South Africa is on top of the situation. We are working hard to protect Nigerians in South Africa.  “Though, the task has not been easy, we are trying our best. In one of the hot spots at Jeppe, near Johannesburg, the mission assisted about 50 stranded Nigerians to re-settle. According to the ambassador, the Nigerian mission has been meeting with all Nigerian Union chapters in the nine provinces of South Africa to find approaches on how to stop the attacks.

“I am bringing all Nigerians together so that we work out a vigilance and alert mechanism; they will also tell me what their challenges and issues are,” she said.

Okeke said the mission and the Nigerian Union had been working effectively to meet the problems caused by the xenophobic attacks on Nigerians.

President of the Nigerian Union, Ikechukwu Anyene, said, 50 Nigerians were displaced at Jeppes town, near Johannesburg.   “We met about 300 Nigerians in Jeppes town, near Johannesburg, who fled for their safety and about 50 of them do not have any place to stay. We are making arrangements with the Nigerian mission in South Africa to get them a place to stay.  “The Nigerian union has also presented relief materials to those affected by the attacks and we are in touch with various branches of the union in the provinces on their safety and security,” he added.

Anyene said Nigerian shops and businesses in Durban and Johannesburg had been looted and some burnt. He said two shops belonging to Nigerians in Durban were looted and they lost goods worth 400,000 Rand.

Black immigrants from Mozambique, Zimbabwe, Namibia, Congo as well as Nigerians living in South Africa have been blamed for the high rate of unemployment, prostitution, crime rates in South Africa, if this is even true, the issues cannot be dealt with by mob attacks.  According to researchers, xenophobia is mostly based on false assumptions, which are not actually verified through practical research or data analysis.

In a reaction, the South African Minister of Home Affairs, Malusi Gigaba said, more than 300 people have been imprisoned in South Africa in connection with the wave of violence against immigrants. He released a warning to those responsible, saying that they would be subject to “the full might of the law”.  Soldiers have been deployed to volatile areas in Johannesburg and KwaZulu-Natal in a bid to quell anti-immigrant violence that has killed at least seven people in weeks of unrest.

Acting Nigerian high commissioner to South Africa Martins Cobham, had said, the removal of Nigerians from the country was not an option for now.

He said the situation was being checked on lower, middle and high threat levels and stressed the need for Nigerians in the country to avoid areas of high risk, abide by the laws of the host country and cooperate with local security officials.

Defense analyst Helmoed Heitman, based in Pretoria, said the decision to send troops to troubled spots showed that the government was concerned.  “While it has been terrible, it has not been a total disaster and I think the decision to deploy is an attempt to prevent a disaster from taking place.”

South Africa was criticised by foreign governments, including China, Nigeria, and Zimbabwe, for failing to protect foreigners as TV stations broadcast images around the world of armed mobs looting immigrant-owned shops.

President Jacob Zuma’s government was put under further pressure when images appeared in local media of men beating and stabbing Mozambican Emmanuel Sithole to death in broad daylight.  The Zulu monarch was widely blamed for the attacks. He was believed to have caused an incitement with his statement in which he compared “foreigners” in South Africa to ”amazeze” (lice or fleas) and exhorted them to pack up and go home. While many South Africans expressed shock and disgust at these utterances, with several making comparisons to hate speech during the Rwandan genocide in which Tutsis were routinely referred to as cockroaches, King Goodwill Zwelithini claimed that he was quoted out of context, and the South African government has taken no action against him.

South Africa’s Equality Act allows for prosecution in cases of hate speech and incitement to violence, while Article 3 of the UN convention against Genocide also makes provisions for “direct and public incitement to commit genocide”.

Currently, several of South Africa’s urban settlements and urban business districts are awash with xenophobic sentiment and mob violence, with South Africans attacking, looting and killing nationals of other countries, most of them from other parts of Africa or South Asia.

With horrifying images and poignant victim testimony making international headlines, the Zuma administration, initially slow to react, finally spoke out against the savagery.

However, the statements by the president and others have actually done little to curb the madness.  In one statement, President Jacob Zuma urges “our people to treat those who are in our country legally with respect and Ubuntu”. The qualifier of “legally” implies that those who are here illegally need not be accorded the same respect. Similarly, on a Zulu-language news broadcast on the national broadcaster, Zuma’s address can be loosely translated as: “We realise that there are people living here who are illegal, we also know that there are people who take jobs from other people, however we need to fix this matter.” It seems as though President Zuma was supporting the popular belief that immigrants are stealing South African jobs.

However, the Gauteng City-Region Observatory – a collaborative project between Wits University, the University of Johannesburg and the provincial government – conducted a survey of the informal sector in Johannesburg. Dr Sally Peberdy, a senior researcher at the Observatory – says that the belief that international migrants dominate the informal sector is false. “We found that less than two out of 10 people who owned a business in the informal sector in Johannesburg were cross-border migrants.”  Peberdy argues that international migrants do play a positive role in South Africa.

“The evidence shows that they contribute to South Africa and South Africans by providing jobs, paying rent, paying VAT and providing affordable and convenient goods.”  The Observatory’s study found that 31 per cent of the 618 international migrant traders rented properties from South Africans. Collectively they also employed 1,223 people, of which 503 were South Africans.

While it is undoubtedly true that some of the frustrations that have fuelled xenophobic violence are rooted in socioeconomic inequality and the high unemployment levels among South Africans (between 40 and 65 per cent according to various statistics), the situation can hardly be the fault of immigrants. It seemed it is a fall out of the apartheid regime.  Investigations reveal that, there has been little attempt by officials to acknowledge that the abject living conditions of millions of poor South Africans and the lack of social services, is a contributing factor, particularly in a context of gross corruption and within government circles.

Many people outside the country are puzzled by this black-on-black violence, while others agreed that it has its roots in the past, when the apartheid government resourced one group of black South Africans to fight another in a horrifying proxy war that led to brutal and indiscriminate killings on both sides.

Certainly there is a sense among some South Africans that tend to solve problems through violence. The civil disobedience of the apartheid era, when freedom fighters vowed to make the country ungovernable, has carried over into the democratic era. Many believe that intimidation, looting and violence are still legitimate tools of political expression, while others are merely opportunistic when they join in the looting and attacks.

The tacit acceptance of such attitudes at high levels of government, and the desultory action by the police and criminal justice system, has resulted in an atmosphere of impunity, particularly when antipathy of immigrants is expressed.

Since the mid-2000s, the South African government has ignored analysts’ warnings of the potential for xenophobia, and has preferred instead to regard outbreaks of anti-immigrant violence as “criminality”.

There is also undoubted frustration that the promises of freedom, of “a better life for all” have not been realised, with the poorest of the poor actually becoming poorer while the richest appear to relish relatively indecent levels of wealth.

Add to this is a context where many “foreigners” start businesses in the poorest areas, and are seen to be earning better incomes and living better lives than those born in South Africa makes the anti-foreigner resentment becomes more entrenched, though not justified.

In the short to medium term, the Zuma administration needs to take concerted action to arrest and prosecute perpetrators of xenophobic violence, and to put into place measures to safeguard communities with large numbers of immigrant residents or workers.

Investigations reveal that of the 350 foreigners killed during the outbreak of xenophobic violence in 2008, only one has resulted in a murder conviction. This statistic continued a picture of impunity for perpetrators of such heinous attacks which will have many unanticipated repercussions for South Africa.

Already, South African entertainers and sportspeople are experiencing a backlash by having gigs and sporting events cancelled. South African professionals are being repatriated from countries such as Mozambique and Malawi, and a consumer boycott of South African exports to the rest of the continent is being organised.  It is to be hoped that these signals are being noted by Pretoria and that the government will, at long last, begin to deal with the scourge of xenophobia in a concerted, considered, and far-reaching manner.

This xenophobic resentment if not checked, will cripple South Africa herself. The unrest, which began in Durban spread to at least nine provinces, and reached Johannesburg.   Although President Jacob Zuma used his Freedom Day address to take a firm stance on xenophobic violence that has gripped the country, lashing out at governments who “criticise the South African government but their citizens are in our country”

Reverend Andrew Akinsuyi of the Salvation of God Mission, said, “It seems as though the South African President does not know that South Africans are also living peacefully in other Africa countries without attacks.’’ he said, such utterances by the president do little to help the matter. The president out to know that South Africans are also living in other African countries and going about their businesses without harassment. He was speaking as though all South Africans are living in their home country. This is far from the truth; many of them are living in Nigeria and running companies without unnecessary interference by Nigerians”, he said.

Speaking further Akinsuyi said, “Nigeria ought to take a very strong stand against the attitude of South Africa. They should know that we can do the same to their people here in Nigeria if we choose. The government of South Africa must show a very strong commitment to eradicating xenophobia by bringing the criminals to justice. I also believe that Nigeria must as a matter of urgency solve the problem of electricity. The only reason Nigerians go to a country like South Africa to do businesses is because of our epileptic power supply. If you remove that many Nigerians will come home including those in Europe and the United states. I don’t see what South Africa has that we do not have. We must fix our energy problems and then our people will no longer go to live in countries where they might be attacked and killed”, he said.

Nigeria in response to these attacks recalled his top diplomat. Acting High Commissioner to South Africa Martin Cobham, who said he was “invited” to Abuja to discuss the anti-immigrant attacks in South Africa, which have killed at least seven people.  Televised images of armed gangs attacking immigrants and looting foreign-owned stores in Johannesburg have sparked a backlash in Nigeria, where hundreds protested in front of shops owned by South African brands like MTN and Shoprite.

South Africa’s foreign ministry called Cobham’s recall an “unfortunate and regrettable step”, before taking a swipe at Abuja for its own record on protecting foreigners.

It will be recalled that last September, a church hostel collapsed in Lagos, killing 115 people, most of them South Africans. Nigeria was criticized for its slow response to the disaster and what some saw as a haphazard rescue effort. However, critics have said, this can hardly be compared to xenophobic attacks since it was an accident.

In a statement, Clayson Monyela, spokesperson for DIRCO, said the South African government was shocked that the Nigerian government would resort “to such an extraordinary diplomatic step to express outrage at actions or behaviour of another government”.

Monyela said, “We are not sure which actions or behaviour of the South African Government the Nigerian Government is protesting”.

“It is only Nigeria that has taken this unfortunate and regrettable step. If this action is based on the incidents of attacks on foreign nationals in some parts of our country, it would be curious for a sisterly country to want to exploit such a painful episode for whatever agenda.”

The South African authority said despite the recall, the country remained committed to a strong bond of friendship and bilateral relations with Nigeria despite the death of 84 South Africans at a collapsed guest house of Synagogue Church of All Nations on September 12, 2014.

The country took a jab at the outgoing administration of President Goodluck Jonathan saying it would raise its concerns through diplomatic channels with the incoming Muhammadu Buhari administration and referencing the failure of the current administration to rescue the kidnapped chibok girls and also end Boko Haram insurgency.

“We shall also continue to support and not blame the Nigerian Government as it battles to deal with Boko Haram that continues to kill many innocent civilians,” the statement said. “We hope that the more than 200 girls kidnapped by Boko Haram will someday be reunited with their families.”

South Africa and Nigeria have had a tense relationship since the former seized millions of dollars in cash illegally brought into its territory by Nigerian authorities.

Zuma said a frank conversation on illegal immigrants needed to take place within the Southern African Development Community as well as the African Union.

Zuma mentioned the murder of Mozambican citizen Manuel Jossias—first identified as Emmanuel Sithole—in the Alexandra Township.

“He used a false name to avoid detection by authorities as he was an illegal immigrant,” he said.

Zuma paid tribute to the three South Africans who were killed in the attacks in Durban: Ayanda Dlamini, Msawenkosi Dlamini and Thabo Mzobe, who was 14 years old.

He said South Africans were angry, adding; “We need to be cured, we are sick”.

“The latest outbreak of violence necessitates more comprehensive action from all of us to ensure that there is no recurrence. We have to address the underlying causes of the violence and tensions, which is the legacy of poverty, unemployment and inequality in our country and our continent and the competition for limited resources,” Zuma said.

He also spoke at length of how violent South African communities are, adding that “we need a psychological cure”.

“Apartheid was a violent system and it produced violent countermeasures to it. So people still believe that to fight authority you must fight government, even now, when it is your own government. We need to be helped as a society,” he said.

“They get excited. They burn the tyres; they block the roads; they destroy property; exercising their rights but interfering with the rights of many.”

Zuma then lashed out at the Economic Freedom Fighters and their trademark militancy in Parliament.

“Look at the institution that is said to be the apex of democracy, Parliament. Look at the politicians whom you have voted for, how angry they are. How defiant they are, even in Parliament,” he said to thunderous applause.

Zuma said Parliament and the office of the Speaker should be respected.

He was taking exception to the behaviour of EFF Members of Parliament who often disobey the orders of the Speaker in the national assembly.

“If the Speaker says ‘Out of my house’, you must get out. But what do some of the members of Parliament do when the Speaker says ‘Sit down’; they say ‘Speaker, I want to address you’. They will continue addressing the speaker. If the speaker says ‘Withdraw’ they say ‘I won’t withdraw’. If the speaker says ‘Out’ they say ‘I won’t go out’,”

He said this was a glaring example of what he called the “violent culture of apartheid”.

“Imagine if politicians are so angry then who will rule the country.”

South African President Jacob Zuma deployed troops last week to quell the violence in Johannesburg and the port city of Durban, which forced thousands of people from their homes over the past few weeks.

Minsiter of State for Foreign Affairs,  Musiliu Obanikoro, who summoned South Africa’s High Commissioner in Abuja to demand Pretoria take “concrete steps to quell the unrest has also demanded compensation for the victims of the attacks.

Hundreds of Zimbabweans, Malawians and Mozambicans have been repatriated by their governments over the unrest, which has drawn fierce criticism of South Africans from Africans in other parts of the continent.

The South African Department of International Relations and Cooperation, has described the recall of Nigeria’s High Commissioner as an “unfortunate and regrettable” diplomatic step.

In a chat with Pa Theophilus Ajibola, an educationist, he said, “While Americans continually pride their country as “a nation of immigrants” and talks about how immigrants have helped the prosperity of the United States. South Africans are using the same reason as an excuse for the mass unemployment, abject poverty and inequality experienced in their country by native South Africans. America is said to be the nation with the highest number of immigrants in the world and yet the greatest nation. South Africa on the other hand, when faced with the same situation considered it the reason for her poverty.

“Something must be wrong with black Africans. This is a country who when they were in trouble under the heavy weight of apartheid all African nations supported and helped them especially Nigeria. It is a shame that this same people have become xenophobic to their fellow African brothers and start attacking them, setting people on fire on the streets. It is completely unacceptable. Nelson Mandela must be angry in his grave,’’ he said.

President Barack Obama in a heartfelt televised address to the United States, explain his decision to enact sweeping immigration reforms that will shield from deportation almost five million people currently living in the country illegally. In an emotional broadcast from the White House, the president unveiled controversial executive action that will make millions of undocumented migrants eligible to live and work in what he described as “a nation of immigrants”.  He urged America to show compassion to newcomers who entered the country illegally but have worked hard and put down roots yet still “see little option but to remain in the shadows or risk their families being torn apart”.

Since Obama made these announcements, no xenophobic attacks have been reported in the United States of America.

The Zulu king spewed hate and parts of South Africa went aflame. South Africans have been noted to exhibit exceptionalism, a shared self perception as non Africans. And many have tried to find the reasons for such a ‘superiority complex’ or sense of otherness. Their struggle against apartheid may have conditioned them and foisted on them a sense of uniqueness sufficient to justify the conception of brother Africans as “others”.

But nothing can explain a penchant for naked hate filled violence by black South Africans against black Africans of other nationalities. The current spate of attacks is preceded by other such events. According to reports, everyday street interaction reveals a population seething with hate for black immigrants in many parts of South Africa

Many South Africans allude to the fact that many of the foreign African nationals in their country engage in nefarious activities and help to worsen the deteriorating crime situation in the country. A particular charge is laid against Nigerian nationals for example is drug peddling, advance fee fraud and armed robbery. It is true that years of apartheid have left many black South African youths and families impoverished and educationally backward. These black communities suffer many social dislocations and deprivations and all of these have contributed in raising family and social tensions. Such communities can ill afford aggravation of broken situations by immigrants. But rather than employ mob justice and barbaric methods, why wouldn’t such an aggrieved society use the criminal justice structures and immigration processes to stem any such foreign criminal proliferation.  All these seem to be the aftermath of apartheid South Africa, blacks live in squalor. Yet down trodden indigenous black Africans transfer murderous aggression to fellow sympathetic black Africans. South Africa has deep seated problems of social inequality.

Many African nations sacrificed so much in the fight against apartheid and the inexplicable lukewarm attitude of South African leaders in the wake of the attacks has baffled many. A group of hitherto shackled people who, in their dark days, lived off the benevolence and charity of others in the spirit of African brotherhood, and whose freedom was purchased by the contributions of sweat and blood by many African nations

What lessons can Nigeria learn from these horrendous killings? The pictures coming from South Africa are gory. Conspicuous free flow of moral outrage is good and hopefully will be effective deterrent, but emotional outpourings are not enough.  Women and children have been decapitated severally following religious riots in northern Nigeria. Thousands have died in Plateau state in many ethnic religious confrontations between indigenes and “settlers”. Instigators and perpetrators have always walked away and victims have never been rehabilitated. So we can make demands on South Africa but we must set same standards for ourselves. Punish offenders; soothe victims, re-adjust the society.

Gale of defections pushes Nigeria towards one party state

I

YEMI OLAKITAN 

In view of the windstorm of defections that has trailed the presidential elections and the overwhelming victory of APC, stakeholders have continued to warn that the trend will lead to the emergence of a one party state. There have also been warnings that such portends great threats for the nation’s democracy, without a strong opposition that may keep the ruling party in check. Ag Head of Investigations, Yemi Olakitan examines the threats and possibility of a one party state in Nigeria’s democratic expansion.

The Fourth Republic was initiated through the 1999 Constitution. During its first elections, the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, recognised only three political parties – the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, the All Peoples Party, APP,  and the Action for Democracy, AD. Following a Supreme Court judgment on the case Balarabe Musa v INEC, conditions for registration of political parties were liberalised.

The Supreme Court ruled that INEC acted illegally by imposing conditions that were not known to the constitution for party registration and declared their action illegal. Subsequently, Nigeria’s political space witnessed an unprecedented opening with the emergence of 63 registered political parties by April 2011. Prominent among the new parties are the Action Congress of Nigeria, ACN, the Congress for Political Change, CPC, and the People’s Progressive Alliance, PPA).

In addition, many small parties took advantage of the liberalisation of the political space to register parties that have proven to be largely unviable. It appears that some of them were established to access INEC’s funding support or as a fall back mechanism for politician who lose out in power struggles within their parties.

The National Assembly intervened in the matter through Section 78(6) of the 2010 Electoral Act, which provided INEC with the power to de-register any political parties that failed to win any executive and legislative seats in elections. Only ten parties won seats in the 2011 elections. On 18thAugust 2011, INEC de-registered seven parties that did not contest for any election office in the 2011 elections. Two more de-registration exercises were carried out reducing the number of parties from 63 to 25.

Since 1999, Nigeria has operated as a one party dominant political system in which the PDP held sway and controlled enormous resources compared to the other parties. The President of the country has emerged as the leader of the dominant party although a party chairman exists and state governors are the leaders of their party at that level. The dominant party has therefore evolved to be an expression of executive power. The dominant party and indeed most other parties are mainly controlled by godfathers and barons rather than party members. These parties have networks that are used by the party barons to “deliver” crowds for rallies and party congresses. Indeed, parties tend to treat their members with disdain and utter disrespect. Consequently, the political relationship within the parties is essentially one between patrons and clients and the clients are mobilised on financial religious, ethnic or regional basis.

Traditionally, competition in Nigeria’s party system is very intense within the ruling party and less so between the political parties. This is due to the fact that since 1979, Nigeria has developed the tradition of major blocs of the political elite coalescing into a single political party conceived as a hegemonic party. In elections that are relatively free and fair, namely, the 1959, 1979 and 1999 editions, the parties that had the highest votes, the Northern Peoples’ Congress, the National Party of Nigeria and the Peoples’ Democratic Party respectively failed in their desire to be hegemonic or dominant through the polls.

In the subsequent elections of 1964, 1983 and 2003 respectively, they all abused their incumbency powers to transform themselves into dominant parties. In essence, they used electoral fraud to boost their control of the political process and weaken opposition parties. This has been the reason why competitive party politics has been weak. The ruling parties have too often controlled the electoral game while the parties in opposition had too narrow a political base and insufficient resources to effectively compete for power.

It is in this context that the emergence of the APC was perceived a potential game changer in the Nigerian party system. This means the cream of the political elite have an alternative platform to realise their ambitions. However, the collapse of PDP means that the nation may be going back to square one.  The same problem that led to the formation of APC is now confronting Nigeria with Hurricane APC, particularly, the mass defections of PDP members all over the country. It was thought initially that with the APC, it will now be possible to evolve towards a two party dominant system, a new paradigm that will make alternation of power possible. The United States, which is regarded by many as the global standard for democracy or the most advanced democracy in the word operates a dominant two party arrangement, although other parties exists power is alternated between the democrats and the Republican. This is because the two parties are formidable and politicians do not defect because they lost elections instead they go to the drawing board and prepare for the next elections.

Analysts have criticised the situation. According to reports, in a single-party state only the ruling political party has the right to form the government; all other parties are either outlawed or allowed to take only a limited and controlled participation in elections. Sometimes the term de facto single-party state is used to describe a dominant-party system that, unlike the single-party state, allows (at least nominally) democratic multiparty elections, but the existing practices or balance of political power effectively prevent the opposition from winning the elections.

Single-party states justify themselves through various methods. Most often, proponents of a single-party state argue that the existence of separate parties runs counter to national unity. Others argue that the single party is the vanguard of the people, and therefore its right to rule cannot be legitimately questioned.

Some single party states only outlaw opposition parties, while allowing subordinate allied parties to exist as part of a permanent coalition such as a popular front. Examples of this are the People’s Republic of China under the United Front, or the National Front in former East Germany.

Investigations reveal that one-party systems often arise from decolonisation because one party has had an overwhelmingly dominant role in liberation or in independence struggles.  Single-party states are often, considered to be authoritarian or totalitarian. However, not all authoritarian or totalitarian states operate based on single-party rule. Some, especially absolute monarchies and certain military dictatorships, have made all political parties illegal.

One peculiar example is Cuba, where the role of the Communist Party is enshrined in the constitution, and no party is permitted to campaign or run candidates for election, including the Communist party. Candidates are elected on an individual referendum basis without formal party involvement, though elected assemblies predominantly consist of members of the dominant party alongside non-affiliated candidates.

The True Whig Party of Liberia is considered the founder of the first single-party state in the world, as despite opposition parties never being outlawed, it completely dominated Liberian politics from 1878 until 1980. The party was conceived by the original Black American settlers and their descendants who referred to themselves as Americo-Liberians. Initially, its ideology was heavily influenced by that of the Whig Party in the United States. Over time it developed into a powerful Masonic Order that ruled every aspect of Liberian society for well over a century until it was overthrown in 1980.

In a chat with Nurudeen Adio, a member of the APC based in Lagos, he said, “A one party or dominant party state is not good for Nigeria as it will lead to corruption and abuse of power.’’ According to him, ‘‘Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. It is not the fault of APC that it wins a landslide election; it is a problem that the former ruling party is not adequately engineered to perform the role of a formidable opposition party that will help the nation’s democratic development. I hope that PDP will put his acts together and do what is expected.” he said.

Further investigations by Sunday Mirror reveals a wide range of parties that have been cited as being dominant at one time or another, some of them include the Kuomintang in the Republic of China, the African National Congress (ANC) in South Africa, the Liberal Democratic Party in Japan and Bangladesh Awami League in Bangladesh. These parties have held sway even when the opposition parties have ideas or more competent candidates for political parties as elections are often won on party loyalties, racial or ethnic affiliations.

According to reports, dominant party system is in opposition to the true meaning of democracy. It is assumed that only a particular conception of representative democracy (in which different parties alternate frequently in power) is valid. The dominant party ‘system’ is restricted to one form of democracy, electoral politics and hostile to popular politics. The assumption in this approach is that other forms of organisation and opposition are of limited importance or a separate matter from the consolidation of their version of democracy.

In a single-party system other parties are banned, but in dominant-party systems other political parties are tolerated, and (in democratic dominant-party systems) operate without overt legal impediment, but do not have a realistic chance of winning; the dominant party genuinely wins the votes of the vast majority of voters every time (or, in authoritarian systems, claims to). Under authoritarian dominant-party systems, which may be referred to as “electoralism” or “soft authoritarianism”, opposition parties are legally allowed to operate, but are too weak or ineffective to seriously challenge power, perhaps through various forms of corruption, constitutional quirks that intentionally undermine the ability for an effective opposition to thrive, institutional and/or organisational conventions that support the status quo, or inherent cultural values averse to change.

In some states, opposition parties are subject to varying degrees of official harassment and lawsuits against the opposition, rules or electoral systems (such as gerrymandering of electoral districts) designed to put them at a disadvantage. In some cases outright electoral fraud keeps the opposition from power. On the other hand, some dominant-party systems occur, at least temporarily, in countries that are widely seen, both by their citizens and outside observers, to be textbook examples of democracy.

In states with ethnic issues, one party may be seen as being the party for an ethnicity or race with the party for the majority ethnic, racial or religious group dominating, such as  the African National Congress in South Africa (governing since 1994) has strong support amongst Black South Africans, the Party governed Northern Ireland from its creation in 1921 until 1972 with the support of the Protestant majority.

In the Nigerian case, analysts are worried at the vexation with which the ruling People’s Democratic Party, PDP, was voted out and as an absolute control of power at the centre by the All Progressives Congress, APC, may lead the country to a one party state which they say the nation is not prepared for.

Even before the general election, executive and floor members of the PDP defected en masse to the APC across the states of the federation. Even former President Olusegun Obasanjo, who ruled the country from 1999 to 2007, under the platform of the PDP, publicly tore his party membership card.

And since the emergence of General Muhammadu Buhari as President-elect, there has been exodus of both the high and the low from the PDP to the APC

In Kaduna State alone, days after the PDP lost the presidential election, it was reported that Vice President-elect, Yemi Osinbajo, received over 5,000 members of the PDP said to have defected to APC ahead of the gubernatorial and House of Assembly elections.

In Gombe State, where PDP has held court, Majority Leader of the state House of Assembly, Mamman Alkali, the army of personal assistants and special assistants to Governor Ibrahim Hassan Dankwambo and sundry members of PDP, before the gubernatorial election, surged into the APC.

According to Alhaji Ibrahim Zamfara, a member of the PDP Elders Committee in the state, the crossover became compelling because the state would not be in opposition following the victory of General Buhari.

In Jigawa, former Governor Saminu Turaki, the incumbent deputy governor, Alhaji Ahmed Mahmud Gumel, as well as Senator Muhammad Baban Beta, who represented Jigawa North-West senatorial district from 1999 to 2003 and Senator Muhammad Dudu, who represented the state’s North-East senatorial district from 1999- 2007, all switched camp from PDP to APC.

In Kebbi State, House of Representatives member representing Yauri/Shanga/ Ngaski federal constituency, Garba Uba Bullet, and Shuaibu Mungadi, representing Kalgo/Bunza/Birnin Kebbi federal constituency and seven ward chairmen in Yauri Local Government Area all moved from PDP to the APC. Not left out in the defection train was, also the state’s Commissioner of Commerce, Sani Yusuf. Alhaji Hussaini Adamu and Alhaji Zubairu Wazirin Dabai, both gubernatorial aspirants on PDP platform, also dumped the party

In Kwara State, Senator Gbemi Saraki and former Edo State governor, on the platform of the PDP, Prof. Oserheimen Osunbor, also all defected to the APC.

Senator Saraki, a two time senator on PDP platform on her part revealed that she has found in APC a platform that mirrors the ideals of the Saraki political family, both in content and context, while Osunbor on his part said he discovered that his former party did not have the interest of his Edo people at heart, hence his migration to the APC.

Major-General Charles Airhiavbere, PDP’s gubernatorial candidate in the 2012 election in Edo State, and national coordinator of Goodluck to Goodluck Support Group, in this year’s presidential election, waited only eight days after President Jonathan lost the election to switch camp to the rival APC.

Airhiavbere revealed that he spent his personal resources on Jonathan’s campaign and did not receive any financial lifeline for all that he did with his support group. He further disclosed that his decision to defect was as a result of the benefits that would accrue to his state if it remained in the APC that would control power at the centre.

As Airhiavbere left and fused his President Jonathan’s campaign outfit into Edo APC, so also did Castro Ezama of Rebuild Nigeria Initiative, RNI, which campaigned for Jonathan in Cross River State. Ezama said: “Cross River State cannot afford to be in opposition because of the economic challenges facing the state.”

The gale of mass defection rocking the ruling PDP, is now an issue of great concerns to many political analysts in the country. This careless manner of defection has warranted some political pundits to caution that Nigeria may become a one party state if nothing is done to nip the mindless switch in the board.

In a chat with veteran journalist, Chief Bayode Ogunmupe, he said, ‘‘most political parties are organised from the top down, so they tend to reinforce the power of those who already have power at the expense of those they don’t. A one-party system does not easily allow for dissent from outside the party, and the structure of the party is such that it does not allow for dissent either. So, a one-party system is basically undemocratic, although it may be efficient as a ruling party. It is not good for Nigeria because of our diverse ethnic affiliations. A one party system might be oppressive, to say the least.”

Speaking further, he said, “what PDP members need to do is to come up with creative strategies that will beat APC in the next elections instead of decamping so that Nigeria will not become a one party state.’’

Political scientist and sociologist, Kayode Odumefun, said, “A one party system does not give room for fresh ideas. It is does not give room for change and ensured that the situation remained the same. A one party state gives no room for competition and does not put the ruling party on its toes because it is the dominant or only party. It cannot accommodate diverse ideas and or diverse interests in a country such as Nigeria. It is antidemocratic and therefore, not good for a nation like ours where the rich get richer and the poor get poorer and those in power do not always want to live to give those outside an opportunity.”

Governor Muazu Babangida Aliyu of Niger State, worried about the gale of defections to the APC, warned against a one-party system in the country, pointing out that it will not augur well for the political development of the country. “We don’t want a one-party state in the country; we want credible and healthy competition at least between the two major political parties. We must do everything possible to sustain the PDP, so that democracy will be entrenched properly”, Aliyu stated.

“If you recall when the All Progressives Congress came together, I was the first person to say that, that was good for Nigerian democracy because it will put PDP on its feet and the federal sector, not only putting it to its feet but will be reorganised”.

The national chairman of APC, Chief John Oyegun has also denounced the current trend of mass defections, explaining, that it was not good for Nigeria’s political development.  Oyegun advised those defecting to the winning party to rather form a formidable opposition to enrich the nation’s democracy. “Many opposition party members have defected to APC just because they lost out, that is not good for political development.

“One would have advised that opposition members should stay where they are, and form a formidable opposition”, Oyegun said.

PDP National Auditor, Alhaji Adewole Adeyanju, also warned the All Progressives Congress against turning Nigeria to a one party state.

Adeyanju, in a statement in Abuja ahead of the second phase of the elections, pointed out that a one party state was dangerous for the nation’s nascent democracy.

Adeyanju said rather than dumping PDP for the APC because of its brilliant performance in the last elections, “members should go back to the drawing board, put on their thinking caps and plan ahead for future elections, that are what is expected of a good politician, who really wants to serve his or her community”.

According to him, “Our nascent democracy needs strong opposition, which will spur any ruling party to work hard for good governance. Rushing to the APC by PDP members, especially the so-called bigwigs, is not the answer to the current predicament of the PDP and it is dangerous to our nascent democracy. Rather we should come together to review our poor outing and look for a way forward.”

He expressed optimism that if PDP leaders could come together and put their acts together in a proper perspective once again, the party would surely bounce back having being in power for almost 16 years and based on its achievements.

Reports coming from Plateau State, Ondo, Abia, Adamawa, Kwara, Edo states revealed that the party leadership has fallen into disaray.  It seems that PDP is not prepared to play its part as an opposition party. Totalitarianism seems to imminent in Nigeria. Analysts say this can only be prevented if PDP rise to the occasion by building a formidable strong opposition from the grassroots.

However, the trend is not new. When Nigeria returned to civil rule in 1999, the PDP did not only emerge victorious at the centre but also won more states across the federation. By the next election in 2003, many politicians from other political parties have defected to the PDP, making it easier for it to emerge yet again as Nigeria ruling party, this time winning more seats in all political position across the federation.

The party continued its dominance even up to the 2011 general elections. Though the opposition parties, this time made some remarkable results, it was not until internal crisis rocking the party got to a crescendo in 2013, which saw five PDP governors, several of its National Assembly members, abandoning the party that the onetime ‘almighty’ party, began to experience cracks that would eventually lead to its fall.

The merger of the defunct Action Congress of Nigeria, ACN, Congress for Progressive Change, CPC, All Nigeria Peoples Party, ANPP and a faction of All Progressives Grand Alliance, APGA, was the magic wand the opposition needed to dismantle the most populous political party in Africa.

While PDP held onto Nigeria political power, many of its leaders, members and supporters, never imagined losing grip of political power, at least, not in the next 60 years.

One time PDP National Chairman, Prince Vincent Ogbulafor, once boasted that the PDP will rule the nation for at least 60 years. His position was given more emphasis when First Lady, Patience Jonathan, during electioneering campaign for the reelection of her husband, declared that the PDP will continue to rule Nigeria for the next 60 years.

All that boasting is now history. Like many political analysts are saying, the change mantra of the opposition party and its broom, which many thought could hardly kill cockroaches, had dismantled the political elephant of Nigeria and the largest political party in Africa.

With the tables now turned, APC now controls the centre and 21 states, leaving PDP with 11 and APGA one.

To checkmate this trend, PDP National Auditor, Alhaji Adewole Adeyanju, not long ago in a statement made available to journalists in Abuja, warned APC against turning Nigeria to a one party state, arguing that a one party state was dangerous for the nation’s nascent democracy.

Adeyanju said rather than dumping PDP for the APC because of its brilliant performance in the last elections, “members should go back to the drawing board, put on their thinking caps and plan ahead of future elections, that is what is expected of a good politician, who really wants to serve his or her community”. He added that Nigeria’s nascent democracy needs strong opposition, which will spur any ruling party to work hard for good governance.

He said: “Rushing to the APC by PDP members, especially the so-called bigwigs, is not the answer to the current predicament of the PDP and it is dangerous to our nascent democracy. Rather we should come together to review our poor outing and look for a way forward.”

He expressed optimism that if PDP leaders could come together and put their acts together in a proper perspective once again, the party would surely bounce back having being in power for almost 16 years and based on its achievements.

While it is natural for political parties to seek power and win as many elections as possible, many political analysts believe that a country is often ill-served by the concentration of political power in one party’s hands, regardless of which party holds it.

It is in recognition of this fact that many nations of the world adopt multi-party system of government, or at least a two-party system. It is also in a bid to limit the danger of one-party system that there are checks and balances in governance.

But as many analysts argue, even with obstacles in place, political leaders frequently run amok when power is concentrated in the hands of one party.

Nigeria political history is abounding with instances. One of the instances was the defunct National Party of Nigeria, NPN, whose complete federal dominance between October 1, 1979 and December 31, 1983 led to massive corruption among political office holders.

It was on the excuse of NPN being mash with corruption, that on December 31, 1983, the military overthrew the Second Republic and present President-elect, General Buhari, became the military leader of the new government, placing President Shagari under house arrest, jailing several of his cabinet members and exiling others.

When democratic rule returned to the country in 1999, we again experienced the consequences of unchecked one-party dominance. From 1999-2014, PDP controlled National Assembly and Aso Rock, the seat of the Federal Government. At the height of its power, following the 2003 elections, PDP had a 76-seat Senate majority out of the 109 senators and above 221-seat House majority out of 360. Some party leaders got carried away and pursued policies that grew their own power at the expense of Nigerian poor masses.

Their unlimited power led to runaway spending, an explosion in obscenely wasteful and parochial earmarks, a lack of transparency, and once again corruption continued unabated.

Good numbers of political analysts argue that in the absence of a viable option, APC which sought political power so they could implement change they claim to stand for, since they will now control Senate, House of Representative and the presidency, may just like PDP abuse power.

In the just concluded election, voters understandably upset with PDP excesses, gave the APC the presidency along with complete and expanded control of National Assembly.  Analysts say, unchecked power pushes parties to excess regardless of which party is in power. It is an inherent part of both human nature and the nature of government.

The danger is that with complete one-party dominance, much damage will be done before the next electoral self-correction.

But PDP National Publicity Secretary, Olisa Metu, bemoaning the membership hemorrhage that has hit the party since President Jonathan took a beating from Buhari in the March 28 presidential election, disclosed that the defection typhoon, sweeping through the PDP is not just an expression of the inclination in the average Nigerian politician to align with any side where his bread would be buttered, but a fall out of an orchestrated headhunt of PDP members by the victorious APC.

He said: “Reports reaching the PDP leadership from across the country show that the APC has been desperately seeking ways to destabilise our ranks and weaken our formations by approaching some senior members of our National Executive Committee, NEC, with phantom promises and threats, ostensibly to use them to inject crisis in our fold and pave way for our elected members to cross over to APC.”

Though Metu believes that the continuous loss of its members is as result of systematic wooing from the APC, good number of political analysts feel that survivalist’s politics elicited the exodus, arguing that what PDP members are better accustomed to since 1999, is being part of power management at the centre and its accruals, and not opposition politics.

Apart from the PDP, the Labour Party, LP, has expressed dismay over the exodus of PDP members to the victorious APC. In a statement released by its National Publicity Secretary, Kayode Ajulo, LP cautioned PDP members to temper their attraction to the APC with moderation or end up leaving the country at the mercy of the ills of one party state.

It wondered why APC, which prided itself as party of progressives threw its gates open to the same politicians it has all along denounced as the locusts of the Nigerian state.  Aside the dominance of the APC in the next National Assembly, the on-going defection of PDP members to the APC, will ensure that the APC ends up having lame opposition to contend with. And this, like many analysts say, will be unhealthy for the country’s nascent democracy.

Goodluck Jonathan: Hero or not? by Yemi Olakitan

Goodluck Jonathan: Hero or not?

While President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan’s meteoric rise to power still confounds many, his failure to get re-elected in the March 28 poll was not that surprising. Widely criticised for corruption, weak governance, failure to end epileptic power supply, dwindling currency, insecurity among others, Jonathan crumbled in the face of a strong opposition led by Gen Muhammadu Buhari. However, since he conceded defeat to the President-elect, accolades have poured in from different quarters both local and international including members of the opposition party who joined the bandwagon of praise singers. YEMI OLAKITAN takes a look at Jonathan’s administration from both sides of the divide.

Until November 2009, Goodluck Jonathan was just vice president to the late former president, Umar Musa Yar’dua. He however overcame political wrangling and was accepted as Acting President in February 2010 when the ailing president was too ill to rule. When President Yar’Adua died in office, Mr. Jonathan was sworn in as the new president and commander-in-chief of the armed forces.

President Jonathan defied the governing People’s Democratic Party’s, PDP, tradition of alternating presidential power between North and South after two terms of office by winning the party’s primaries. In 2011, claiming he wore no shoes while growing up, he won his first election for the presidency while opposition claims fraud. His election to the seat of power was symbolic, representing a major shift from the norm as he was the first president from the Niger Delta or the south-south.

Many of the critics have said President Jonathan achieved little or nothing during his administration and cannot be described as a hero.

A classic example is Chief Kola Ogunmola, APC chieftain based in Lekki, Lagos, who spoke withSunday Mirror. “The president may have done some things but he did not do the ones that are most dear to Nigerians, chief of which is electricity. Despite the huge investments in the sector, Nigerians still rely on their generators for power supply. In the area of insecurity, the Chibok girls are still missing till today. This is one of the major reasons why President Jonathan lost the election. His failure to bring back our girls. Nigerian mothers cannot vote for such a president a second time. You can be sure of that, no matter who he is. Look at all the wailings and the international outcry and yet the girls were not found. No one who has children will want Jonathan as the next president. This is a major setback for the president even if he had achieved in other areas”, he said.

Similarly, Babatunde Adisa, CEO of Bamanja Entertainment, Lagos, believes the president failed in the area of employment generation. “There is high level unemployment in this country. He may have achieved in other areas but the level of unemployment in this country is alarming and he did not even scratch the surface with all the programmes established under his administration.”

He however said the president is hero and his name will shine in the history of Nigeria because of the fact he did what Ibrahim Babangida could not do for M.K.O. Abiola in June 12, (1993). “He prevented violence and bloodshed for that he may go down in history as hero but I don’t think that Nigerians are satisfied with his achievements”.

President Goodluck Jonathan’s achievements

According to reports, one of the president’s major achievements was in agriculture, with the intervention in rice production, which resulted in the creation of more than two million new jobs among rural dwellers.  Cocoa exports reached the highest level thereby creating a new set of millionaires during his administration. At least, $900m worth of cocoa was reportedly exported for the first time in decades. He put an end to the fertiliser and tractor scam used to be the order of the day. The president also undertook massive rehabilitation of roads throughout the country via Subsidy Reinvestment Programme SURE-P.  Roads such as the Abuja-Abaji-Lokoja road, Benin-Ore-Sagamu dual carriageway, Onitsha-Enugu-Port Harcourt dual carriageway, Kaduna-Maiduguri dual carriageway, East-West Road.  500 Primary Health Centers were reportedly built across the 36 states and FCT of the Federation, in the health sector.

Before the elections, Special Adviser to the President on Media and Publicity, Dr. Reuben Abati had said, “One can never have an objective comment from the opposition parties because of their political interests. When President Jonathan took over, the electricity supply situation in the country was in a very bad shape. This government introduced the power sector roadmap, reactivated what it met on the ground and as at this moment and improved electricity generation and distribution in the country.

“Before the President took over, the rail sector was completely comatose. Under this President, the sector has been re-energised. Nigerians can now travel from Lagos to Kano, from one part of the country to the other. The few complaints we have heard is that people are saying that it can be further modernised. The truth is that the railway sector that used to be one of the poster agencies for the abandonment of government responsibilities has come back to life. There was a time when the aviation sector was a major centre of scams. The Jonathan administration has taken the bold step to revitalise that sector both in terms of infrastructure and the basic provision of facilities across the country. It is also this administration that allowed Nigerians to have the Freedom of Information. Nigerians have never been freer to express their views on any issues, without intimidation”, he said.

Defending Jonathan’s anti corruption record, Adekola Iyiola, a PDP chieftain in Etiosa Local government of Lagos, said, “Corruption in Nigeria is not new to President Jonathan. It is an inherited problem. It is a problem that has been with us since independence, so for people to be talking as if Jonathan imported Corruption to Nigeria is a partisan opinion. The problem is also not limited to Nigeria. The countries and individuals, who shout most about corruption, are also facing the challenge”.

Speaking in the same vein, veteran journalist, Tajudeen Olumo said, “The subsidy scam is the biggest scam in Nigeria and I praise President Jonathan for having the courage to face it.  People will collect allocation to bring in fuel, they will not own any vessel, they will not import any fuel and they will still collect government money. Over the years, previous governments have created system of legalised corruption through subsidy and Jonathan said this is economic sabotage and it must stop. The oil cabal set up propaganda machineries since they are the beneficiaries and insisted it must continue. If Nigeria is serious, we must remove subsidy for the economy to grow. True oil prices will increase but it will go reduce in the end”, he said.

Another supporter, Chief Bayode Ogunmupe said, “If I must talk about Jonathan’s achievements, I will say, free and fair elections.  The 2011 general elections were acclaimed to be free and fair. Every subsequent elections conducted under this President’s having been free and fair and so adjudged by both local and international observers. In Adamawa, Kogi, Sokoto, Edo and Ondo, there were no problems when elections were conducted in those states. Another major achievement is that he conceded defeat to the president elect. This is good because it shows that he is not desperate for power and he put the interests of this nation above personal and parochial selfish interests.”

An educator, Mrs. Gloria Ofunoye who spoke with Sunday Mirror on the achievements of President Goodluck Jonathan, said, “The promotion and practice of true democracy by creating an enabling environment where people from diverse backgrounds and with divergent views and opinions can be accommodated is one of his achievements. She noted that under the watch of the Jonathan administration, the APC was registered by INEC as a mega opposition party big enough to challenge the PDP at both state and national levels. This would have been unthinkable some years back under the administration of former president Olusegun Obasanjo. Unlike in other administrations, the Goodluck Jonathan administration has given a free hand to the country’s electoral umpire, INEC, to perform its statutory duties.  He also does not interfere with electoral and judicial matters. This is evident in the number of governorship elections that have been won both at the polls and in the court by opposition parties in Anambra, Imo, Osun states, among others.”

On whether, the president was corrupt, Ofunoye said, “the truth of the matter is that Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, made it clear that last year it secured over 200 convictions. Those who say Jonathan is not fighting corruption are not speaking on the basis of facts. The only point I want to make is that during Nuhu Ribadu, there used to be a lot of media publicity on EFCC activities even when they make ordinary arrests but under this administration much attention is not given to publicising these things because they used to be headlines in those days but under Jonathan, he did not push these activities on corruption”.

Some commentators also point out that President Jonathan has been credited with the liberalisation of the press and guaranteeing the freedom of speech in a country where the stifling of the press and suppression of the citizens’ right to freedom of speech used to be the norm, a legacy of over 30 years of military rule. The existence of vocal anti-government media houses and critics would have culminated in some high-profile assassinations some years back, but today citizens are free to air their views whenever and wherever they like just like any other sane country.

The President has also been credited with opening up Nigeria to the global business community and making the nation Africa’s number one destination of foreign investors. Statistics show that in the first six months of 2014, a total of $9.70bn or N1.51 trillion was reported to have flowed into the national economy as foreign direct investments, FDI.  Also last year, Nigeria rebased it’s GDP for the first time in over a decade to become the largest economy in Africa, overtaking South Africa and Egypt in the process.

Proceeds from Nigeria’s non-oil exports rose to $2.97bn by the end of 2013, up from $2.3bn in 2010.

The Jonathan administration has also spearheaded the revival of the dead automotive industry in Nigeria. Global auto giants like Peugeot, Nissan and Hyundai now either assemble or wholly manufacture small cars, sports utility vehicles, trucks and buses at various locations in Nigeria.

Under President Jonathan, the Ebola outbreak was arrested. The outbreak of the deadly and highly contagious Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) was nabbed in the bud in record time, though it unfortunately claimed some lives at the onset,”

In the area of agriculture, Nigeria has reduced its food imports by over 40 per cent, moving the country closer to self sufficiency in agriculture. Nigeria is the world’s largest producer of cassava with an output of over 45 million metric tones in 2014 according to the Food and Agricultural Organisation of the United Nations (FAO).

Under the outgoing government, Internet penetration in Nigeria increased from about 45 million in 2011 to 63 million in 2014, overtaking countries such as the United Kingdom and France in the process. As of the second quarter of 2014, the number of registered active telephone lines in Nigeria stood at 130 million out of a total of over 170 million telephone lines.

The president also introduced the Nigerian electronic identity card (e-ID card), one of the most secure in the world and the largest in Africa. The e-ID card serves as both an international identification module and an electronic payment solution.  In the banking sector, there is the introduction of the cashless system which aims to encourage the use of e-payment systems in the country and reduce the volume of physical cash in circulation.

In the power sector, the president unbundled the dysfunctional Power Holding Company of Nigeria (PHCN) into about 18 profit-driven successor companies.

In the area of sports, Nigeria won the African Cup of Nations for the first time in 19 years in South Africa in February, 2013.  Nigeria ended up with 11 gold , 11 silver and 14 bronze medals at the recently concluded 2014 Commonwealth Games in Glasgow, finishing 8th in the overall ranking. Abuja Stadium Rehabilitated, Kano International Airport Remodeled. One of 9 airports remodeled across the nation.

Women were given more prominent roles in his administration. A large number of the federal appointees of the Goodluck Jonathan administration are women. They include, , Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala; Miriam Aloma Mukhtar, Nigeria’s first female Chief Justice; Diezani Alison-Madueke; ex-aviation minister Stella Oduah, Joy Ogwu, Nigeria’s representatives at the United Nations; Sarah Jibril; and Viola Onwuliri.

The president also launched the NigComSat-1Rsatellite, which will help expand Internet Bandwidth, monitor the weather and provide early warning to prevent natural disasters like floods, crop monitoring and urban planning. It has the attendant benefit of reducing the over $1 billion spent in purchasing Internet Bandwidth from abroad.

Nigeria’s banking industry was rescued and stabilised by the establishment of the Asset Management Company of Nigeria. (AMCON)

What the critics say said about President Jonathan

For many critics, Jonathan’s government was nothing short of a disaster.

One of the most strident,  the All Progressives Congress, APC, described President Goodluck Jonathan’s admdidntration as having recorded as a “scorecard of failure”. The APC National Publicity Secretary, Lai Mohammed, in the run up to the elections had said the president failed to get the usual bounce from his recent declaration for a second term because Nigerians were not the least impressed by his achievements, which have not positively impacted on the lives of the citizens.

“Mr. President, Nigerians have asked themselves a simple question: Are we better off today than we were before President Jonathan assumed office, and they have unanimously answered in the negative. This is why your declaration failed to resonate, despite the hired crowds you ferried to Abuja,” he said.

The party said the areas of insecurity and job creation, which are intertwined, represent the biggest failure of the Jonathan Administration, irrespective of its claims to the contrary.

“Today, after the Jonathan Administration has spent $32bn (N6.4trn) on security and defense, Nigeria is not any safer, with thousands of deaths,”

APC said while the government claimed to have created 1.9 million jobs in all of five years, the truth is that this is a mere tokenism.

”Even if the jobs they said they have created are not phantom, which we know they are, the situation on the ground is grim: 1.8 million Nigerians enter the job market every year, 5.3 million youth are unemployed and overall 20 million Nigerians are in the job market, and these are very conservative figures. Therefore, creating 1.9 million jobs over several years cannot amount to any achievement,” the party said.

”Mr. President, under your watch, Nigeria’s rating by the global anti-corruption watchdog Transparency International has fallen. In 2009, Nigeria was rated 133 out of 180 countries, while in 2013, the country was rated 144 out of 177 countries.  On electricity, the party said the statement by President Jonathan that his administration’s “bold move” in the sector has put the country “on the road to guaranteed regular power supply in the months ahead” is nothing but sheer deceit.

“Under the Jonathan Administration, Nigerians should not be in a hurry to throw away their generators. The facts on the ground show this to be true: While the FG has spent N533bn on power, at best Nigerians enjoy less than six hours of electricity per day, where they enjoy it at all, while spending over N800bn annually to fuel their generators.  Also, the 4,000MW of electricity being generated by Nigeria cannot guarantee stable power for 170 million people or propel the country towards industrialisation. By comparison, South Africa, with less than a third of Nigeria’s population, generates over 44,000MW of electricity. There is therefore no way that Nigeria can enjoy a stable power supply with a meagre 4,000MW in power generation,” it said.

The party said, with 51 per cent of Nigerians, representing 90 million people, being illiterates, the establishment of 150 Almajiri schools has not even scratched the surface of the problem.

A member of APC, Abiodun Amisu, who spoke on the president’s achievements however said, ‘‘it is laughable and a misplaced achievement to say building Almajiri schools is an achievement. The president merely built additional public schools. Almajirin are human beings, with right to education, to mix with other children in public schools. There is no need to build different schools for them and give it a new name.  Right education policy is the answer. Look at the electricity under President Goodluck Jonathan; everybody knows that it is a failure. Nigerians still groan under the weight of epileptic power supply. On the supremacy of the rule of law and respect for the constitution, Mr. President is still lacking. The Rivers State Government crisis is notable. It’s not acceptable for a commissioner of police to impede, obstruct the way and passage of a sitting sovernor. His duty is to advice and protects the governor and if necessary escort him to wherever the governor may want to go within Rivers State.”

However, after the presidential elections which saw the APC presidential candidate General Buhari wining the elections, APC sang a different tune with President Jonathan conceding victory. Lai Mohamed described him Jonathan as a hero and a statesman.