NIGERIA AT 55 : Democracy, Human Rights And Rule Of Law

By Farouk Ayorinsola Obisanya

While Nigeria celebrates her fifty-five years of independence without pomp and pageantry celebration – based on the outline of events – and the citizenry non-display of high intensity of feeling excited, there is need to reflect on national democracy, human rights and the rule of law.

Democracy is the most popular form of government in the world today. In Nigeria, neither is there any leader who does not wish to be seen as a democrat or a regime that does not seek to be described as full-fledged democratic. D.B. Heater in Political Ideas in the Modern World, 2nd Edition, suggested five basic elements of democracy: equality, sovereignty of the people, respect for human life, the rule of law and the liberty of the individual. It is fallacious to admit the actualization of these elements in Nigeria.

On attaining independence, Nigeria’s constitution was modeled after Britain. To this end,  the Nigeria model of democracy was and is still the ‘‘liberal or representative democracy’’. This model includes elected government; free and fair elections in which every citizen’s vote has an equal weight; a suffrage which embraces all citizens irrespective of distinctions of race, religion, class, sex and so on; freedom of conscience, information and expression on all public matters broadly defined; the right of all adults to oppose their government and stand for office; and association autonomy – the right to form independent associations including social movements, interest groups and political parties, according to David Held in Prospects for Democracy.

Applying this to the Nigeria terrain, democracy was some years ago in complete darkness as a result of military despotism and has yet to be fully realised presently. It has been difficult to sustain after the ordeals of creating it. Yet, the Nigeria at fifty-five seems to be struggling to attaining democracy in the real sense of it but nepotism, favouritism and corruption amidst other factors are hindrances.

In 2014, the World bank President, Jim Yong Kim, restated that Nigeria is one of the top five countries that has the largest number of poor – seven percent of world’s population. This is an indicator of a poor economy. One of the many ways resolve this is to pay adequate attention to the socio-economic rights. Unfortunately, these rights are unjusticiable. In Stanley Ibe’s Beyond justiciability: Realising the promise of socio-economic rights in Nigeria, ‘‘there are two parallel regimes of socio-economic rights existing in Africa. The first, represented by South Africa, is that which specifically makes socio-economic rights enforceable in the courts. Under this regime, individuals and organisations alleging that their rights have been violated may approach the courts to seek redress. The other regime aligns with most of the Western world in the claim that socioeconomic rights are ‘no more than pious wishes’. Accordingly, states have adopted the Indian-styled fundamental objectives and directive principles of state policy.’’ Nigeria belongs to the latter. This is stated clearly in the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. However, they are unenforceable in the courts unlike in Indian jurisprudence, which has established precedence for applying the integrative approach ensuring that violations of socio-economic rights can be remedied by reference to their relationship with civil and political rights.

This India-Nigeria distinction can be understood with the aid of decided legal matters. The court held in Mohini Sain v. State of Karnaketa Air (1992) SC 1858-1864, that right to life necessarily includes right to a means of livelihood as well as other rights that make enjoyment of rights to life meaningful In Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation (2007) CHR 236 where some slum dwellers approached the court to restrain government from evacuating them from their shelter without provision of alternative accommodation on the grounds that their eviction would deprive them of their right to life because their shelter were the only place that is close to their employment. The court held that the important face of right to life is the right to livelihood. The deprivation of livelihood would not only denude the life of its effective content and meaningfulness but would make life impossible to live.  In sharp contrast, the outcome of Nigeria events went otherwise. In Archbishop Anthony Okogie v A.G Lagos State (1981) 1 NCLR 218 HC, 2 NCLR 337, it was held that Section 13 of the Constitution makes it a duty and responsibility of the judiciary among other organs of government to conform to and apply the provisions of Chapter II, Section 6(6)(c) of the same Constitution make it clear that no court has jurisdiction to pronounce any decision as to whether any organ of government has acted or is acting in conformity with the Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy. Also, in A.G Ondo v. A.G Federation (2002) 9 NWLR 9 pt 772 at 222 , the courts cannot enforce any of the provisions of Chapter II of the Constitution until the National Assembly has enacted laws for their enforcement, as has been done in respect of Section 15(5) of the 1999 Constitution.

In Nigeria, economic and social rights deserve as much emphasis as political and civic rights. The struggle for basic human rights must seek to actualise not only the right to participate in the government process and basic fundamental human rights, but also, access to the basic necessities of rights.

As Professor Itse Sagay noted in Nigeria: Democracy and the Rule of Law, ‘‘there can be no democracy without rule of law and vice versa.’’ Rule of law is bound with the practice of democracy. Not that the doctrine of rule of law – the supremacy of the law including judicial decisions over all persons and authorities in state; the supremacy of the constitution; the independence of the judiciary; the right to personal liberty and; observance of democratic practices – is non-existent in Nigeria. But, the application is debatable. Whether the rule of law is detested or not, it must be recognized fully. In the past, it was a national gory.

Conclusively, there is need for Nigeria to attain the full realization of the tenets of democracy because it has the potential to accelerate the pace of development. There is hope for a better nation. We can make it happen.

Better Nigeria and Happy Independence Day.

Farouk Ayorinsola Obisanya

Twitter: @fabobisanya

obisanyahayor@gmail.com