John Campbell

Africa in Transition

Campbell tracks political and security developments across sub-Saharan Africa.

Print Print Cite Cite
Style: MLA APA Chicago Close


Nigeria’s 2011 Elections: A Last Word?

by John Campbell
September 23, 2011

Nigeria's President Goodluck Jonathan waits to address the 66th United Nations General Assembly at the U.N. headquarters in New York, September 21, 2011. (Jessica Rinaldi/Courtesy Reuters)

The highly respected International Crisis Group (ICG) has issued a Policy Briefing, “Lessons from Nigeria’s 2011 Elections.” It concludes that Nigeria may have started to reverse the downward spiral of its elections, but that it has a long way to go. And the details and nuance in the report suggest that there is, indeed, a lot of work to do.

The report notes some positive changes in the status quo—seventy-two of one hundred and nine senators lost their seats; two hundred and sixty members in the three hundred and sixty seat House of Representatives are new; and the ruling People’s Democratic Party lost its two-third majority in the Senate and now holds the governorship in twenty-three of the thirty-six states, down from twenty-seven. Nevertheless, the ICG’s policy suggestions imply little short of remaking Nigeria’s political culture, calling on the Abuja government to construct “a system of disincentives to deter political and electoral malfeasance” through political and economic reforms that make the state “relevant to most Nigerians,” and calling for industrial development and job creation, especially for youth and unemployed graduates.

As has been common among analysts and observers, the ICG deemed the 2011 elections an improvement because they were better than the 2007 elections (a low bar). The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) under Attahiru Jega certainly performed better than its predecessor. However, the report documents every kind of electoral abuse, and thereby raises questions about how free and fair the elections were.

These elections were also the bloodiest in Nigeria’s recent history. The authors ascribe the post-electoral violence, which they are estimating took one thousand lives and affected a third of the states, to ethnic and religious divisions, exploited by politicians, and widespread socio-economic malaise and marginalization. While I think this is an accurate portrayal, I disagree with the statement that “few, however, predicted the violence that erupted in some Northern states.” Numerous analysts and Nigerians alike, including former president Olusegun Obasanjo (and myself), publicly commented on the potential for violence along sectarian lines with the end of zoning. The ICG even wrote in a February 2011 brief, “Flawed polls, especially if politicians stoke ethnic or religious divides, may ignite already straining fault lines, as losers protest results,” which is what ultimately happened.

Despite the use of the 2007 election as the bar to beat, implicit in the report – if nowhere clearly stated—is an indictment of a political culture that is fundamentally antithetical to democracy, and a call for fundamental reform of the relationship between the Nigerian government and its citizens. And that would require exceptional political skill and will on the part of President Jonathan and those who rule Nigeria.

Post a Comment 3 Comments

  • Posted by Sulayman Dauda

    Nigerias 2011 General Election remain the worst and most fraudulent Election evar and is full of deception considering it cost, deceptive confidence by the electoral body and the violence that follows. I also argued to be the worst because none of the political parties meet the basic standard of presenting the various candidates for elective post specifically the Governatorial and the legislative position. Was more the self acclaimed wining party lack the basic moral to claim a Democractic Nigeria simply because it practice no element of Democracy in it doings.

  • Posted by Maduka

    The report is merely a compendium of facts well known to most educated Nigerians.

    We have spent 50 years poring over detailed reports describing why we are a sub-par nation.

    We want to know how we can become a successful modern nation and when this event will occur. The Nigerian state will not be a successful entity until Oil ceases to be the major source of revenue for the Nigerian Government.

    Until that happens, there will be little or no motivation for Government to increase its revenue base, encourage industrial development, boost employment and invest in human resources.

    In the meantime, Nigerian politicians will pretend to adopt policies designed by the World Bank / NGO /Donor Agency community. The Nigerian Government will pretend to build institutional capacity and refuse to take job creation seriously.

    As long as Oil continues to flow, restive youth will be bought off and those who cannot be bought off will be eliminated using weapons purchased with Oil money. Multinational companies will continue to reap massive profits from Nigeria’s resources until Nigeria is sucked dry.

    When the Oil wells dry or when the pressures of Nigeria’s rapidly expanding population make it virtually impossible for Nigeria to be a viable resource based economy – Nigeria will either disintegrate violently or finally wake up to the challenges of the 21st Century.

    There is no point talking to Nigerian politicians, they are the basest of men, blinded by greed and impervious to reason. They only understand two languages – the language of money and the language of brutality.

  • Posted by Dr. H C Crockett

    Enjoyed your timely analysis of Nigerian elections. Understanding party and sectarian politics is essential to understanding West Africa.

Post a Comment

CFR seeks to foster civil and informed discussion of foreign policy issues. Opinions expressed on CFR blogs are solely those of the author or commenter, not of CFR, which takes no institutional positions. All comments must abide by CFR's guidelines and will be moderated prior to posting.

* Required