INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT AS A CHALLENGE TO DEMOCRATIC SUSTENANCE IN NIGERIA, FROM FOURTH REPUBLIC 1999 TO 2021
Need help with a related project topic or New topic? Send Us Your Topic
DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE PROJECT MATERIAL
INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT AS A CHALLENGE TO DEMOCRATIC SUSTENANCE IN NIGERIA, FROM FOURTH REPUBLIC 1999 TO 2021
Abstract
This research looked at institutional development as a threat to democratic survival in Nigeria from the fourth republic (1999-2021). Three objectives were proposed: examine the effect of democracy on institutional development in Nigeria’s fourth republic, verify the extent to which democracy exists in Nigeria’s fourth republic without institutional development,
and examine the relationship between democracy and institutional development in Nigeria’s fourth republic. From the recruited participants, a total of 77 responses were collected and authenticated, with all respondents coming from the national assembly. The Chi-Square statistical programme (SPSS) was used to test the hypothesis.
Chapter One
Introduction
1.1 Background of The Study
The issue of democracy and national development in Nigeria’s fourth republic will continue to dominate political discourse among both academics and non-academics because democracy in Nigeria is at a crossroads and national development has only materialised in the inscrutable imaginations of Nigeria’s national development planners (Okeke, 2014).
Since its inception, the country has been on the lookout for a functioning democracy. All peace-loving Nigerians should be concerned about what this entails. Democracy is a controversial concept; it is not taken for granted. Countries should figure out how to make it relevant to their specific circumstances.
The next step is to figure out how to adapt democracy to the country’s pluralism. This may necessitate the pursuit of some form of consociational framework that allows for power sharing among conflicting factions and political interests in the country.
According to Achebe (1984), political leadership has been one of the most significant barriers to African democracy and development. Political leadership in the post-independence period has been anything but productive.
They have been wasteful and corrupt in political and economic management, and their focus has been distributive rather than constructive. This argument is still persuasive today. Given the country’s leaders’ personalities,
it’s not surprising that there are dangers to human security. This is not linked to the divide among the political elite, who lack the hegemony and discipline required to foster socioeconomic and political stability (Igbodalo, 2012).
Despite all of the social and economic measures undertaken by succeeding administrations, Nigeria has remained a social, economic, and political backwater. As a result, Nigeria’s political economy has been characterised by political instability, abject poverty, acute youth unemployment, a heightened crime rate, poor health prospects, and widespread malnourishment.
The absence of democracy and sporadic military participation in politics has been cited as one of the key reasons for the failure of all development initiatives in Nigeria (Ogundiya, 2010). Since independence, flawed development plans have left the people impoverished and destroyed.
Furthermore, failure to follow the rules of the game of party politics pushes the country dangerously close to a state of nature. This is reflected in rising poverty, diseases, youth unemployment, inadequate medical treatment, inadequate housing,
a shortage of portable water, epileptic electricity supply, minority groups’ lack of access to power and resources, and their exclusion from policymaking (Egharevba & Chiazor, 2013).
Meanwhile, it is not an exaggeration to say that the country’s restoration to electoral democracy in 1999 had no meaningful impact on the people’s economic and social well-being.
However, as a philosophy that establishes some fundamental rules by which a healthy government, whatever its form, must be managed, democracy provides a good hope for attaining national growth in particularly heterogeneous society. The link between democracy and country development is generally recognised.
This is due to the fact that democracy plays a critical role in creating effective governance and fostering national growth. The emphasis on enhancing people’s socioeconomic well-being is a defining aspect of democratic governance, and it is identical with the concept of national development.
As a result, the individual and his quality of life must be at the core of national development thinking (Amucheazi, 1980; Gibert & Ubani, 2015). Democracy is prioritised all over the world because it is thought to have the magic wand to efficiently deal with inter and intra group problems that arise from the democratic system.
However, Nigeria’s experience with democracy has not been pleasant. Most people’s votes have refused to be counted. While ethno-religious conflict rages throughout the country, the economy remains in shambles,
with abject poverty a recurring pattern among the people. Popular expectations that democracy will alleviate all of these problems have generally been unfulfilled.
Statement of the problem
Years of economic exploitation, maldevelopment, and poor administration in Nigeria have fueled the country’s turmoil and conflicts. Nigeria has continued to follow the path of failing, weak, and childish states since attaining political independence.
Nigeria, a state that was touted to lead Africa out of the backwoods of underdevelopment and economic dependency upon independence, is still stuck in the league of very poor, corrupt, underdeveloped, infrastructural decaying, crises-ridden, morally bankrupt, and leadership-deficient southern countries.
Rather than becoming a model for transformational leadership, contemporary bureaucracy, national development, national integration, and innovation, Nigeria appears to be famed for all that is mediocre, corrupt, outrageously violent, and morally reprehensible (Imhonopi & Ugochukwu, 2013).
This backs up Okeke’s (2014) claim that democracy is at a crossroads in Nigeria and that national development has only materialised in the opaque imaginations of Nigeria’s national development planners.
According to Gilbert and Ubani (2015), the main barriers to democracy and national development in Nigeria are electoral malpractices and corruption.
The absence of democracy and democratic principles, such as the rule of law, transparency, accountability, participation, and responsiveness to the needs of the poor, marginalised, and underrepresented groups, has been one of the major explanations for the failure of all development programmes in Nigeria’s fourth republic.
Aim of the study
The study’s aims are as follows:
to investigate the impact of democracy on institutional development in Nigeria’s fourth republic to determine the extent to which democracy exists in Nigeria’s fourth republic to investigate the relationship between democracy and institutional development in Nigeria’s fourth republic
research Hypotheses
Following research hypotheses will be developed:
H0: Democracy has little effect on institutional growth in Nigeria’s fourth republic.
H1: Democracy has an impact on institutional development in Nigeria’s fourth republic.
In Nigeria’s fourth republic, there is no relationship between democracy and institutional growth.
H2: In Nigeria’s fourth republic, there is a link between democracy and institutional growth.
The significance of the research
The study will be extremely beneficial to both students and the federal republic of Nigeria. The study will provide a thorough understanding of institutional growth as a barrier to democratic sustenance in Nigeria from the fourth republic in 1999 to the twenty-first republic in 2021. The study will also be used as a resource for other researchers who will be working on a similar topic.
scope and limitations of The study
The study’s scope includes institutional development as a barrier to democratic sustenance in Nigeria from the fourth republic (1999 to 2021).
The researcher confronts various limits that limit the scope of the study, which are as follows:
The researcher’s research material is insufficient, restricting the scope of the investigation.
The study’s time span does not allow for broader coverage because the researcher must balance other academic pursuits and examinations with the investigation.
Inadequate funding tends to limit the researcher’s efficiency in locating relevant materials, literature, or information, as well as in the data collection method (internet, questionnaire, and interview).
1.8 Definition of Terms
Institutional development: Development associated with a medical or educational institution and accompanying uses on a site of at least five acres in size is referred to as institutional development. Institutional development entails increasing the University’s capabilities and image by initiating, mobilising, and managing resources.
Need help with a related project topic or New topic? Send Us Your Topic