Site icon Premium Researchers

THE ELECTORAL PROCESS AND DEMOCRATIC DEVELOPMENT IN NIGERIA

THE ELECTORAL PROCESS AND DEMOCRATIC DEVELOPMENT IN NIGERIA

Need help with a related project topic or New topic? Send Us Your Topic 

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE PROJECT MATERIAL

THE ELECTORAL PROCESS AND DEMOCRATIC DEVELOPMENT IN NIGERIA

CHAPITRE ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

Elections in Nigeria are an important part of any democratic process because they allow citizens to determine fairly and freely who should lead them at every level of government on a regular basis and make decisions that affect their economic,

political, and social well-being; and if the elected leaders do not perform, citizens have the power to recall or vote them out in the next election through established electoral processes.

Election is a crucial mechanism for the recruitment of political leadership in democratic nations, according to Obakhedo (2011). The cornerstone to democratic involvement; and a method of granting consent to government (Dye, 2001); and enables the governed to choose and pass judgement on office holders who allegedly represent the governed (Dye, 2001). Obakhedo, M. (2011).

A democracy cannot exist in its strictest sense without elections. Huntington, on the other hand, is quick to point out that a political system is democratic ‘to the extent that its most powerful collective decision-makers are selected through fair,

honest, and periodic elections in which candidates freely compete for votes, and in which virtually all of the adult population is eligible to vote’ (Huntington, 1991).

Nwolise (2007) defines election as “the process of selecting the officers or representatives of an organisation or group by the vote of its qualified members.” Elections, according to Anifowose (2003), are the process of elite selection by the mass of the public in any particular political system, according to Bamgbose (2012).

Elections provide as a forum for various interest groups within the bourgeois nation state to stake and resolve their claims to power peacefully (Iyayi, 2005). Elections thus determine the proper method of ensuring that competent leaders assume the mantle of authority.

An election is a method in which the electorate, or a portion of it, selects those who hold public office and exercises some degree of influence over the elected individuals. It is the method by which people choose and control their representatives.

This implies that there can be no representative government without elections. This assumption is, to a considerable part, valid, because elections are arguably the most reliable means of holding the government and representatives accountable to the people who elect them.

Eya (2003), on the other hand, defines election as the selection of a person or persons for office via vote and the making of a choice amongst alternatives. Ozor (2009) provides a more encompassing and comprehensive definition of election when he states that the term refers to the procedure by which qualified adult voters elect their politically preferred representatives to a county’s legislature (or any other public positions) for the purpose of farming and running the country’s government.

Thus, Osumah (2002) elucidates the core goal of elections, which is to select official decision makers who are intended to represent the interests of citizens. Elections, he believes, increase and broaden people engagement in the political system.

However, elections in Nigeria have always been marked by violence and a heightened sense of national insecurity as a result of the countrymen’s ethnic and religious emotions.

Nigeria’s 2016 general elections, the fifth since 1999, were originally set for February 14th and 28th, but were later moved to March 28th and April 11th, respectively. All 36 states held presidential, federal legislature, and House of Assemblies (state legislature) elections. 29 states had gubernatorial elections.

Nigerian general elections have traditionally been tumultuous and violent occasions. Indeed, the 2007 election polls were universally denounced as the most violent, poorly organised,

and significantly corrupted in Nigerian electoral history. Even the presidential pool winner, a descendant of late President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, admitted to problems.

In comparison to the 2007 elections, which saw over 1,000 people died in post-election protests, some analysts and observers regarded the April 2011 elections to be the most trustworthy since the return to democracy.

Nigeria’s electoral history has been characterised by major anomalies and controversy, particularly in the conduct of the country’s electoral commission. This has resulted in the failure of democratic experiments in several situations, such as in 1966 and 1983.

The 2007 general elections in Nigeria gave an excellent opportunity to break with the past and revive popular trust in the country’s electoral and democratic processes.

However, this was not to be, as the elections turned out to be the worst in Nigeria’s political history, according to various local and foreign observers (European Union: 2007, Human Rights Watch: 2007, Transition Monitoring Group: 2007).

INEC, like its predecessors, has been accused of failing to instill public trust in the electoral process or to organise transparent and trustworthy elections. Unfortunately, this position has received little systematic support.

The March 28th and April 11th, 2016 elections heralded a new chapter in Nigeria’s democratic history, when registered voters went to the polls to pick the next set of officials to the posts of President and National Assembly.

The elections, held in the country’s thirty-six states and the Federal Capital Territory, saw the creation of the opposition party, the All Progressives Congress (APC), and its candidate. This was also the first time since Nigeria’s transition to civil rule in 1999 when an opposition party unseated the incumbent People Democratic Party (PDP).

1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

A free and fair election is the bedrock of competitive elections and democracy. The degree to which an election victory is credible and legitimate is decided by the degree to which the process is free and fair (Garuba, 2007; Bogaards, 2007).

A free and fair election serves to legitimise such government. In reality, election quality is one of the measures used to judge the extent of consolidation of emerging democracies.

Elections are thus regarded as essential for determining the democratic quality of a political system and safeguarding national security. When elections are not handled properly, they can lead to deeper ethnic and regional divisions,

a loss of legitimacy for elected officials, protest, violent contestation, social upheaval, and doubt about institutions, violence, and instability, and even threaten the entire democratisation process.

In fact, inadequate election management is a serious and widespread source of conflict, violence, insecurity, and instability (Hounkpe&Gueye, 2010).Some factors may have contributed to the low attendance in 2016 compared to 2011. For starters, it could indicate that previous election results were overstated.

Second, there was a heightened sense of insecurity among Nigerians as a result of factors such as the Boko Haram insurgency in the north, the likelihood of the incumbent refusing to accept the conclusion of the election if it was not in its favour, and the implications of the election postponement.

Furthermore, there is a widespread belief that ‘votes do not count’ and that the outcomes are predetermined by an elite few. However, this study compares the 2011 and 2016 general elections to examine the electoral process and national security.

1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The following are the study’s objectives:

To investigate the relationship between the electoral process and Nigeria’s democratic growth.

To investigate the characteristics that enhance democratic progress in a voting process.

To assess Nigeria’s electoral processes and level of democratic development.

Determine INEC’s role in advancing election processes in Nigeria.

To make recommendations for enhancing Nigeria’s electoral process and democratic growth.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS
What is the relationship between Nigeria’s electoral process and democratic development?

What variables support democratic progress throughout an electoral process?

What are Nigeria’s elections methods and level of democratic development?

What is INEC’s role in promoting Nigerian electoral processes?

1.5 HYPOTHESIS

In Nigeria, there is no significant association between the electoral process and democratic growth.

In Nigeria, there is a strong link between the electoral process and democratic growth.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
The study would be extremely valuable to the Nigerian government at all levels, INEC, politicians, and political stakeholders, as it would expose the electoral process and the country’s level of democratic growth. The study would also be beneficial to students, researchers, and scholars who are interested in conducting additional research on the issue.

1.7 SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

This study will explore the topics of electoral process and democratic growth with concentration on INEC.

STUDY LIMITATIONS

Financial constraint- A lack of funds tends to restrict the researcher’s efficiency in locating relevant materials, literature, or information, as well as in the data collection procedure (internet, questionnaire, and interview).

Time constraint- The researcher will conduct this investigation alongside other academic activities. As a result, the amount of time spent on research will be reduced.

Need help with a related project topic or New topic? Send Us Your Topic 

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE PROJECT MATERIAL

Exit mobile version