In this concluding part of this essay I start by pointing out the centrality of a healthy judiciary in checking our scandalous culture of impunity and institutional atrophy that are responsible for the situation where an incident as weighty as discovery of dead bodies on a river would be left to pass seemingly with no committed effort to unravel the root. An efficient and upright judiciary is supremely foundational to our quest for an equitable and sane society where accountability drives progress. The courts are the enforcer of our common norms and before whom all of us should tremble irrespective of status – they’re the pivot on which equality before the law rests. However, our judiciary is far from having these vital qualities so much so that it has become an object of ridicule.
When there is no judiciary to promptly and suitably dispense justice, the law becomes redundant and impunity takes over. Our judiciary is so much burdened by corruption and operational inefficiencies to satisfactorily fulfil this role. Too much delay in concluding trials seriously reduces the impact of that institution. The unfortunate and costly implication is that hardly do lawbreakers fear the prospect of being taken to court.
A particular state governor who left office since 2007 had his trial linger up to 2021. Many corruption trials have been in court for several years with no end sight. Citizens who have their rights abused have been forced to sit through a slow and unending judicial process. It took PUNCH newspaper 25 years (1996 – 2021) of a long judicial walk from the Federal High Court to the Supreme Court to finally secure a verdict that censured the DSS and ordered it to pay the sum of 25 million naira as damages to the newspaper for invading her office, destroying her working tools and arresting her editor on that sad day in 1996.
In the face of continued unbearable delay in serving justice and the uncertainty over the integrity of the courts, many citizens lack the faith and disposition to approach any court in search of judicial redress, even though abuse of their rights occurs unceasingly every now and then. The implication is that there is little in the system to deter rights abuse and indeed the recurrence of the “Ezu River phenomenon” where, to borrow Soyinka’s words, “the man died, the dog died, it is forgotten.” This is also true of corruption, as public officials have little to fear when they sabotage our common wellbeing through misappropriation of funds and other ills that hamper progress.
As has been stated earlier, the major problem with Nigeria is that our public space is such that encourages anybody to do anything irrespective of law and morality. People who handle public responsibilities – starting from the elite in the Aso Rock Villa to the least officers in the civil service – do not feel the obligation to be accountable simply because the system does not call people to account for their deeds. Virtually all institutions that check official misdeeds are practically redundant. And without such strict regulation of conduct, the development we all dream of will ever elude us.
Surprisingly people talk less of this pivotal element in our nation building while talking more of infrastructure and economic growth which are mere natural outcome of our strict and sincere regulation of conduct. In other words, we tend to focus more on the product of good governance than on good governance itself; we tend to focus on the fruit that we are to reap than on the labour we must put in before reaping the fruit.
This pattern became very manifest in the election of 2023 where discussion and debate focused almost exclusively on good roads, steady power supply, food security, job creation and control of inflation among other fruits of good governance. There was little focus on good governance itself, especially as rooted in regulating official conduct so as to remove the perennial obstacles that have remorselessly impeded our development.
The presidential candidates that asked for our votes did not tell us in clear terms how they intended to strengthen the judiciary through far-reaching reforms in order to sanitise it of corruption and drastically quicken the wheel of justice. This is despite that this has been an old burden requiring urgent and radical actions (such as suggested recently by a senior lawyer who is the of the view that each state would require hundreds of courtrooms and hundreds of judges – with a state like Lagos needing at least 1, 000 – as a way of addressing the current situation where a judge is burdened with over 500 cases every year even though he/she cannot conclude up to 50 within a year). Our presidential candidates in the last election did not seem to have possessed this depth of vision required for overhauling the engine of justice that is so critical for establishing a progressive nation they were promising us.
It does not stop at the judiciary; the candidates also failed to tell us what they intended to do with the complementary institutions – the police that will arrest, the EFCC and the ICPC that will investigate and prosecute, and the Attorney General’s office that ultimately superintends over the entire process of prosecution. I had expected, for instance, a debate on the Sheriff and Civil Process Act, a law that obnoxiously subjects the implementation of court order for payment of damages by offending government institutions to the approval of the Attorney General. Notable legal minds have many times pointed out that this singular legal provision has continued to inhibit justice in regard to judgments obtained against government bodies over the years.
In the same way, the presidential candidates did not tell us in clear terms how they wanted to reform the bureaucracy to enthrone accountability in ministries, departments and agencies in order to ensure that whatever development policies and plans they had will not be sabotaged by the usual obstacle, which is poor accountability. None of the candidates appeared to think it wise to bring to the discussion table the question of the unimplemented Oputa Panel report, one of Nigeria’s boldest attempt so far to address the culture of impunity. None found the unanswered questions about the Ezu River phenomenon worth mentioning. The candidates did not speak in explicit terms about how they intended to end the festering corruption in the police force, the primary institution with which they hoped to enforce the law; none spoke of the many unresolved issues that led to the #EndSARS protests as well as the unimplemented reports of the various panels set up in the aftermath. Even the daylight murder of Deborah Samuel by a religious mob in Sokoto and the apparent reluctance of the relevant institutions to pursue justice in that regard was not seen as a crucial issue of nation building by these candidates; this is notwithstanding that this extrajudicial killing took place in the build-up to the election.
Without doubts, each of these past incidents constitute an unfinished historic task which any leader determined to change for good the course of this country must set out to complete in order to put the nation on a true path to that sustainable development that has since eluded her. These are tasks pivotal to ending impunity and exorcising the “I can do whatever I like and nothing will happen” spirit that has for years held us hostage.
In a nutshell, these 2023 presidential candidates did not address the key issues that touch on strengthening accountability. They appeared not to have plans or did not tell us their plans for returning honour to our institutions, such that government officials would feel obligated to obey the law rather than think they’re above it; civil servants fear the hierarchy that enforces norms of public service; police officers act in ways that suggest the regimentational structure that oversees conduct in the force is still active and healthy; and citizens, both low and mighty, view the court with awe and dread being dragged before it for any reason.
Promising us Paradise on earth without telling us in convincing details how they wished to remove all the hurdles that have historically impeded our march to that dream land is what I found quite unconvincing about all the presidential candidates. There was no exception. Thus, I could not help not taking seriously all the promises of good roads, steady power supply, job creation, food security, and access to essential amenities coming from these candidates given my conviction that none of these will happen if we do not first address the issue of governance.
Now 2027 is our next bus stop. We must begin to foreground the above mentioned issues of public accountability as the major agenda for our electoral conversation. The candidates and their political parties should lead the discourse. I would rather vote for that candidate who presents a convincing strategy for enthroning accountability than one who presents a convincing programme for building infrastructure and giving us the economy of our dream – but then no such programme will be convincing enough if it is not grounded in a vigorous reform of the value system to enthrone accountability. Pointedly, any President who does not start by changing the value system that prevented his predecessors from succeeding with their development actions will definitely struggle like these predecessors to make any impact.
It is true that we all have a role to play in changing our value system, but then the government has to lead the way. It possesses a much stronger power of changing collective culture by deploying the institutional resources of the state, including the coercive apparatuses such as the security agencies, the judiciary, the prisons and even the gallows to whip everyone into the line. However, we the citizens still have a complementary duty here including as it relates to calling the attention of leaders to the need to enthrone accountability.
Unfortunately, the 2023 elections seem to suggest that we are not yet ready to fully embrace this role. There was so much excitement in the build-up as many people seemed poised to make a statement through the ballot. The cliché “youths want to take back their country” became popular. Nonetheless, I felt strongly that the excitement was not ideologically grounded in terms of details of what is expected of any leader that will accomplish this task and of the citizens who will cooperate with him on the task. Thus, I understood fully when Femi Falana, SAN, was labouring in a television interview shortly before the elections to make the point that apart from the seemingly unprecedented public interest and excitement accompanying the 2023 elections, nothing essentially different was happening in terms of the quality of discourse vis-à-vis all previous elections.
Around that time, I was speaking with some students and asked about what they thought should be done exactly by whoever became the next President. Their answers were, in a nutshell, a rehash of the familiar lines like create jobs, provide electricity, provide roads etc. Even though some of them mentioned ending corruption but then they appeared not to possess any in-depth understanding as to what doing this entails in its full spectrum and dimensions. This became more obvious when I asked them to tell me in all honesty whether they were ready to lose whatever privilege they may enjoy now or in future by way of having an influential uncle that will influence their NYSC posting to a favourable state and place of primary assignment or an aunt that will give them job at the CBN or NNPC upon graduation, and whether they would be ready to insist on honesty and refuse any invitation from their most trusted friend to look into a leaked examination question paper were such opportunity to come. Lo, the students were not sure they were ready to do any of these. At that point, I told them that if they could not answer categorical YES to the questions, then they are really part of the problem and not part of the solution, they are part of those holding the nation to hostage and not part of those wanting to “take it back”. At best they are cooperating with the hostage takers rather than wanting to do away with them. You cannot want your nation to change without being morally involved. This reinforces my conviction that when eventually our much-sought-after political messiah will come, we may not recognise him – nay we may stone him for speaking in a language foreign to our ears.
Our youths require some leadership in their political involvement. They need to be properly oriented on what it means to be an agent of change. It is not all about dreaming, but importantly they need to become ideologically and morally involved in realising the dream. This is a challenge to all mentors of the youth, all civil society groups involved in civic education, and indeed all of us as we contemplate the agenda for the next round of general elections come 2027.
CONCLUDED
Henry Chigozie Duru, PhD, teaches journalism and mass communication at Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka, Nigeria.
