Article Sidebar
Downloads
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Ethno-religious voting pattern and governance in the post-2015 presidential election in Nigeria
Agbo, Joy Nkiru | Nnadi, Christian Ikechukwu,| Nnamani, Kelechi Elijah
Department of Political Science, Univeristy of Nigeria, Nsukka, Enugu State, 410001
Social Sciences Unit, School of General Studies, University of Nigeria, Nsukka
Department of Religion and Cultural Studies, University of Nigeria, Nsukka.
Correspondence*
- Department of Political Science, Univeristy of Nigeria, Nsukka, Enugu State, 410001
- Email:
- [email protected]
Abstract
This study examines the link between ethno-religious voting pattern in the 2015 presidential elections and governance in the post-election era in Nigeria. Relying on the Rational Choice theory and data generated from documentary sources as well as content analysis, this study argues that the electoral choices of voters during the 2015 presidential election in Nigeria were based on ethnic and religious considerations. As such, the ethno-religious voting pattern played vital role in determining the pace of governance and how the spoils of office were distributed among the competing ethnic nationalities in the post-election era. Unfair distribution of political appointments and infrastructural projects has deepened and sustained ethno-regional agitations across different geopolitical zones in southern Nigeria. This study concludes on the need for electorates to embrace party ideology and competence as against candidate’s ethno-religious affiliation.
Keywords
Ethno-religious voting pattern, governance, post-2015 presidential election, political appointments, electoral choices.
INTRODUCTION
Nigeria joined the league of democratic nations in 1999, having transited from military to civilian rule. Subsequently, it adopted the liberal variant of democracy which thrives on rule of law, competitive electoral process, multi-party system and, political and civil rights (Okolie et al., 2021). Election in Nigeria is characterized by ethno-religious sentiments and this has negatively shaped the voting pattern. According to Ezirim et al (2015), the divisive politics orchestrated by the colonial administrators against the nascent Nigerian state reinforced ethno-political consciousness among the competing ethnic groups. The aftermath of this development was the formation of political parties along ethnic and regional lines which implied that the British administration deliberately prevented the rise and success of Nigerian nationalism (Okolie et al., 2021). Instead, the colonial masters sowed seed of discord and acrimony among the competing ethnic groups and ensured that ethno-religious determined the voting behaviour of the electorates.
Voting behaviour is a form of political behaviour which explains how and why decisions are made by public decision-makers especially as it relates to why people vote as they do and how they arrive at decisions they make (Bratton, 2013). Voting decisions are product of circumstances and events which shapes the perception of electorates to choose a particular candidate over another (Satriadi et al., 2021). These decisions may be influenced by one or many factors ranging from ethnicity, class affiliation, belief system, geography, party ideology, personal character of the candidate, age, education and others too numerous to mention (Winchester, 2014; Küçük & Toklu, 2020). In this context, it is right to note that voting behaviour is relative. Underscoring the relativity of voting behaviour is the idea that there is no unified binocular or universal indicator which can be used to generalize voting pattern in any political clime. Rather, voting pattern may be contingent on one or number of factors depending on the nature and character of the state involved.
Thus, a perfect understanding of the voting pattern of Nigeria demands an inspection of the democratic credentials as well as an inquest into the nature and character of the state. It is no doubt that Nigeria is a product of colonialism which was bequeathed on the country by the British government in the early 1880s. Prior to this foreign conquest and rule, the geographical entity known today as Nigeria was a conglomeration of dispersed and varied ethnic nationalities distinct uniquely in social, political and economic terms (Okolie et al., 2021). For administrative conveniences, the colonial government through the amalgamation policy united these varied nationalities without the latter’s consent and imposed a system of rule that correspond to the economic interest of the former. This inordinate decision created animosity, strife, competition, mistrust, hatred and indifference among the ethnic nationalities (Ezirim et al., 2015). All these combined to ensure a disunited Nigeria.
At independence, the nascent Nigerian state was sharply divided along religious and ethnic lines by the foremost nationalists who saw politics as an avenue to appropriate the national resources to the advantage or benefit of their respective nations (Okolie et al., 2021). With this attitude, national election was principally perceived as an end in itself since the emergent leaders would use the state power to demonstrate loyalty and favour their ethnic group. As a result, ethnicity and religion has continually remained the potent tool for political mobilization in Nigeria.
While the post-independence Nigeria has witnessed several presidential elections in which ethnicity and religion key role in determining voters choices, the 2015 general elections turned out to be the most acrimonious, bitter and a hateful play of brinkmanship which nearly collapsed the democratic institution in the country (Ibrahim, 2015). Ahead of the elections, tension were rife between the north and south due to what the northerners perceived as their ‘lost opportunity’ to reclaim the presidency and reverse the continued economic marginalization of their region. According to Olayode (2015), sentiments were stirred up across the country to amass supports across ethnic and religious lines. The then incumbent president, Goodluck Ebele Jonathan, relied on ethno-regional supports of his minority kinsmen and the larger Igbos, while the APC Presidential candidate, General Muhammadu Buhari concentrated in the northern part of the country where the Muslim population is high (Oboh, 2017). Also, both candidates sought supports from various ethno-regional groups like OPC, Afenifere, Egbe Igbimo Agba Yoruba, among others. The former president equally paid several visits to many Christian organizations across the country to mobilize faithful voters to ‘identify with their Christian brother’ (Onapajo, 2016).
Also, dangerous provocative and unguided statements were released, which heightened the tension across the country. Some of the rehabilitated ex-warlords of the Niger-Delta threatened to ‘burn up the country’ and returned back ‘to the creeks to take up arms struggle’ against the state should their own son lose out of power (Eziukwu, 2015), while most northern power mongers pledged to make unleash cataclysm if Buhari failed to emerge as the President of Nigeria (Ezeife, 2012). Beyond using hate speeches to heat up the polity, cases of ethno-religious motivated violence were recorded in many parts of Nigeria prior to the election. For instance, on January 10 2015, youths in Jos, Plateau state burnt cars belonging to PDP Jonathan campaign organization, chanting Buhari slogans “Sai Buhari”, which in Hausa means “It has to be Buhari”, in reference to the presidential candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC) and Jonathan’s archrival (Ajijah, 2015).
In the same vein, Jonathan was attacked by a mob in Katsina on January 21, 2015, as he visited the family home of former president, late Umaru Yar'adua (Ameh, 2015). The mob who chanted "Sai Buhari" besieged the president's motorcade and, as the DSS raced to the airport, they were stoned. Two days later in Bauchi, the Jonathan campaign trail faced another trial in Bauchi state, when about 6 security aides were injured as they protected the president from the anger of the masses (Sani, 2015). The president was on his way to Bauchi airport, when broom-wielding youths chanting ‘Sai Buhari’ attacked the convoy with a hail of stones, some of which apparently caught some presidential bodyguards protecting him. Further, on January 24th 2015, alleged thugs belonging to the Peoples Democratic Party attacked the venue of the APC governorship rally in Okrika local Government Area of the state (Olaniyi, 2015). The Police Commissioner, Mr. Dan Bature said that the thugs had attacked by 4am with dynamite. No lives were lost, but the rally was stopped and public systems were destroyed (The Nations, 2015).
Although the 2015 presidential election in Nigeria which led to the defeat of an incumbent president had come and gone, the preponderant influence which ethnicity and religion played have continued to dominate scholarly inquiries and public discourses. Evidently, extant studies have copiously investigated the 2015 presidential election along the line of ethno-religious leaning (Olayode, 2015, Egobueze & Ojirika 2017, Obo, 2017, Nwaobashi & Itumo, 2017 and Sule, Sani & Mat, 2017). Fundamentally, these studies have found that ethnicity played a significant role in the determining the outcome of 2015 presidential election. Particularly, Egobueze & Ojirika (2017) affirmed that the results of the 2015 presidential elections clearly portrayed the dominance of ethno-religious sentiments as determinants of voting behaviour and political participations across the country. Though existing studies have interrogated the relationship between ethno-religious affiliations and voting behaviour, these literatures only concentrated on how these variables determined the outcome of the 2015 presidential elections in Nigeria. Specific effort has not been channeled to extend the frontier of scholarship in understanding how the ethno-religious voting behaviour and leaning during the 2015 presidential election has affected the actions and performance of Buhari’s administration.
METHODOLOGY
The Rational Choice Theory best explains the age long voting behavioural patterns in Nigeria. Just like during the independence era, ethno-religious affiliations continue to reflect in voting behaviour of Nigerians because most of the electorate see the acquisition of state power not only as a means to an end, but an end in itself. Rational choice theory sees the individuals as actors in the society who behave and act always as rational beings, self-calculating, self-interested and self-maximizing, these individual social actions are the ultimate source of larger social outcomes (Abell, 2000).
The dominance of power in their ethnic nationality and even religious cycle is seen as a strategic route to wealth, and must be achieved task. This played out prominently in the 2015 Presidential election as reflected in the election results. While President Buhari, a Moslem from the North won in almost all the Northern States, the then incumbent President and his closest rival won majorly in South – South and South – East States which are his ethnic stock and dominated by Christians. The voting pattern in the South West and North Central and parts of the country was drummed around ethnic sentiments and religious cleavages.
It is significant to note therefore that the patterns of selecting political actors in the political system in Nigeria in form of political recruitment, the nature of political socialization, as well as the free flow of communication that exist between political office holders and other state actors in the political system are currently determined by interest, motivated by materialism. Politics which ab initio is expected to be service driven is determined by economic interest which eventually shapes voting behavior as reflected in 2015 Presidential elections in Nigeria.
On the other hand, the study used documentary method of data collection due to the availability of already documents which could be used to test the validity of the stated hypotheses. The study adopted content analysis as its analytical tool. Logically deriving from the foregoing, we deployed the content analysis to investigate how the ethno-religious voting pattern altered the political development of Nigeria in the post-2015 election era. Again, we interrogated the existing texts to make inference on how breach of federal character of Nigeria as reflected in the northernization of political appointment has triggered ethno-regional agitations in Nigeria. Therefore, the utilization of content method of analysis is informed by the simplicity with which it can summarize, expose and interpret relationships implicit in a given data by giving a textual analysis of the variables under study.
Ethno-religious voting pattern in the 2015 presidential election and political development in Nigeria
The 2015 presidential election in Nigeria which was the 5th quadrennial election to be held since the end of military rule in 1999 afforded the electorates the opportunity to choose who pilots the machinery of governance at the national level. Although the election was earlier billed to take place on 14th February 2015, insufficient logistics and worsening security crisis in the north east Nigeria compelled the Election Management Body (INEC) under Prof. Attahiru Jega to postpone it by six weeks. However, on March 28, 2015, the presidential election held, in which 14 candidates and political parties contested. However, the three frontline parties were the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and the then ruling party, the All Progressives Congress (APC) the main opposition, and African People’s Alliance (APA). At the end of the election, the candidate of the APC, Muhammadu Buhari was declared the winner of the election with 15,424,921 votes which represented 53.95% of the votes cast, while President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan, the candidate of PDP and the incumbent president had 12,853,162 votes, representing 44.96% of the votes cast while Adebaye Ayeni, the candidate of APA had only 53,537 votes (INEC, 2015).
A break-down of the election result as announced by the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission, Professor Attahiru Jega is presented in the table below:
TABLE 1Showing the Summary Voters Turn – Out in the Presidential Election
Figure 1.TABLE 1 Showing the Summary Voters Turn – Out in the Presidential Election
Source: INEC, 2015
According to the information generated from the INEC database presented in the foregoing table, the total number of valid votes in the presidential election is 28,587,564 out of 33,746,490 accredited voters. While the APC candidate, Muhammadu Buhari won in 20 states and Abuja, Goodluck Jonathan won in 16 states. The States won by each of the two major candidates and parties are as reflected in the map of Nigeria, highlighted as figure 1 below
Figure 2.
FIGURE 1 Map of Nigeria showing the states won by the two contending presidential candidates in the 2015Presidential Election in Nigeria
Red: States won by APC; Green: States won by PDP.
In the above diagram, Muhammadu Buhari, the candidate of APC won in 20 states against 16 states won by the then incumbent president and the federal capital territory. A further analysis of the map indicates that most of the states won by the APC are in the North West, North East, major parts of North Central, the region where Buhari hails from. Also, the APC won in all six states in the south west zone except Ekiti because the Vice Presidential candidate of the party comes from there. Meanwhile, Goodluck Jonathan of the PDP won mainly in the south south region where he comes from and southeast region, a zone that has primordial affinity with the south-south.
Meanwhile, the results of the elections as collated along the six geopolitical zones are presented below:
TABLE 2 Result of the 2015 Presidential Election in South - South Region
Figure 3.TABLE 2 Result of the 2015 Presidential Election in South - South Region
Source: INEC, 2015
Evidence from the foregoing tables reveals that the results of the 2015 presidential election were based on factors of ethnicity and religion. For instance, the south south region where the PDP candidate, Goodluck Ebele Jonathan hails from, recorded the highest voters’ turnout. Rivers state recorded up to 71% of voters, the highest in the Federation, followed by Delta 66% and Akwa Ibom, Bayelsa and 64% respectively. Jigawa equals Akwa Ibom and Bayelsa states (Isiaq et al., 2015). Further to the foregoing is the issue of religion; the PDP’s Goodluck Jonathan won in all the core Christian states, even in North - East Taraba as well as North Central Plateau and Nassarawa, while there were stiff competition in Lagos, Benue, Kogi and all the other South West States.
This revealed the commitment of the south south as well as southeast people to supporting one of their own. On the other hand, the APC candidate, General Muhammadu Buhari who also is a Muslim from Katsina state in the North-West Geo-political zone won a comfortable majority in 15 northern states except the three mentioned earlier (Isiaq et al., 2015). It is also clear from the result that apart from Ekiti State, General Buhari won all the five Yoruba states of the South-West Geo-political zone of Nigeria. The reason for this outing lies in the fact that the Yorubas who inhabit the southwest geopolitical zone voted massively for the APC due to their kinsman who was the party’s vice presidential candidate (Olayode, 2015). The above confirms the assertion that voters’ behaviour was largely influenced by ethnicity and religion.
Although the ethno-religious voting pattern in the 2015 presidential election contributed immensely to the historic defeat of an incumbent president which was seen as a welcome development to the democratic deepening of Nigeria, events unfolding in the aftermath of the poll suggest that the winning government has been pursuing exclusionary instead of inclusive policies. For instance, the Buhari administration has been indicted for its lopsidedness in the appointment of top government officials. A report from the International Society for Civil Liberties & the Rule of Law revealed that Buhari administration appointed 18 northerners as the heads of security organizations of which 17 belongs to Islamic religion while a meager of two were from southwest, one from south south and none from southeast zone of Nigeria (Intersociety, 2018). Also, several political appointments made by the government have been skewed in favour of the north and Muslims. A review by Punch (2016) shows that out of 30 appointments made by Buhari between May 29, 2015 and August 2015, only seven of them came from the southern part of the country and the rest from the North. In the same vein, Akhigbe (2017) reported that from May 2015 to October 2017, Buhari had appointed 81 persons of northern extraction out of 100 appointments made within the period. Meanwhile, recent appointments made by the President into the NNPC Board indicate that out of the 15 new directors 10 (67 percent) came from the mostly Hausa- Fulani north, three are Yoruba, two come from the south-south and none from the southeast (Ejere, 2020).
Justifying the lopsided appointments, Buhari attributed his action to the voting pattern that produced him as the president of Nigeria. In his word recorded during his visit to the United States Institute for Peace in 2015, Buhari remarked: “I hope you have a copy of the election results. The constituents, for example, gave me 97% [of the vote] cannot in all honesty be treated on some issues with constituencies that gave me 5%”. Perhaps one can say this is not surprising as over 80 percent of Buhari’s 15.4 million votes come from the north and less than 8 percent from the south-south and south east zones of Nigeria. Emphasizing further, the Chairman of the Northern Elders Council, Alhaji Tanko Yakassai agreed that the President’s appointment so far showed that he was favouring his section of the country, where he got the most number of votes. According to him, “If you look at the voting pattern, zone by zone, you will see that Buhari is compensating the zones that favoured him. It depends on the angle from which you look at it. If you are a patriotic Nigerian, you will see it from the patriotic angle, if you’re a parochial Nigerian, you will see it as right” (Sahara Reporter, 2015).
At this juncture, it is worthy to state the president through his sectional outlook in terms of appointment has contravened the Federal Character Principle law. It would be recalled that the inclusion of the Federal Character in the 1979 and 1999 Constitutions of Nigeria was a necessary strategy primarily aimed at promoting inclusiveness, equitable sharing of national posts, even distribution of natural and economic resources, national loyalty, harmony and peaceful co-existence among the competing ethnic nationalities. Accordingly, Section 14(3) of the 1999 Constitution provides: “The composition of the Government of the Federation or any of its agencies and the conduct of its affairs shall be carried out in such a manner as to reflect the federal character of Nigeria and the need to promote national unity, and also to command national loyalty, thereby ensuring that there shall be no predominance of persons from a few State or from a few ethnic or other sectional groups in that Government or in any of its agencies.” It means that: The composition of the Government of the federation or any of its agencies, shall be carried out in such a manner as to reflect the federal character of Nigeria and the need to promote national loyalty, thereby ensuring that there shall be no predominance of persons from a few states or from a few ethnic or other sectional groups in that government or any of its agencies (Nnoli, 1996, cited in Adeosun, 2011).
Pursuant of the above provision, Section 135(3) states that in the appointment of Ministers, the president shall reflect the federal character of Nigeria” provided that in giving effects to the provision aforesaid, the president shall appoint at least one Minister from each state who shall be an indigene of such state (Nnoli, 1996 in Adeosun, 2011). Moreover, Section 157 provides that appointment by the President into the offices of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Head of Service of the Federation, Ambassadors, or the principal representatives abroad, Permanent Secretary or other Chief Executive in any Ministry or Department of the federal Government, or any office on the personal staff of the president shall have regard to the federal character of Nigeria and the need to promote national unity. Section 197(2) provides that the composition of the officer corps and other ranks of the Armed Forces of the Federation shall reflect the federal character of Nigeria. Various other provisions were made in the constitution to ensure that the federal character principle was operative in the political process (Nnoli, 1996 in Adeosun, 2011).
Imperatively, it is deducible that the Buhari has flagrantly and defiantly ignored and violated the federal character principles as enshrined in the extant constitution, thereby, igniting the mutual suspicion, hatred and mistrust among the competing ethnic nationalities as well as jeopardizing previous attempts at national integration, unity and security of the Nigerian state. Also, in line with the alienation policies and exclusionary agenda of the Buhari administration, efforts have been made to tactically exclude the regions that voted against the president from enjoying the dividends of government. While the President granted approval of a new rail line from Kano to Daura, his home town, the West Wing (Warri-Lekki) of the East-West road and 2nd Niger Bridge are lying fallow. In the same vein, findings indicates that out of the 14 World Bank-sponsored projects in the country, seven are exclusively for the North, while six others are meant for the whole nation (South-West, South-South, South-East, North-West, North-East, North Central and North West); and the remaining one is for Lagos State. Titled ‘Projects and Operations’, these projects were listed under June 2015 – June 2017 projects (Punch, 2017). The implication is that in addition to solely getting the lion’s share of the projects, the North also shared in the remaining 50 per cent with the South-West, South-East and South-South.
The projects exclusive to the northern region worth $1bn are: Multi-Sectoral Crisis Recovery Project for North-eastern Nigeria ($200m; Borno, Yobe and Adamawa); State Education Program Investment Project ($100m; North-East states); Community and Social Development Project ($75m; Borno, Yobe, Adamawa, Taraba, Bauchi, and Gombe); Youth Employment and Social Support Project ($100m; Borno, Yobe, Adamawa, Taraba, Bauchi, and Gombe States); Additional Financing Nigeria State Health Investment Project ($125m; Bauchi, Borno, Gombe, Taraba and Yobe) and the Third National Fadama Development Project ($50m; selected area in the North-East) (Akinloye, 2017). The seventh northern project worth $350m is for the Kaduna State Economic Transformation Program-for-Results Project $350m. The KSETPRP, which was approved in June 2017, is expected to close on March 31, 2021. Projects worth $2.9bn were earmarked for the nation which northern states are also expected to benefit from. They are: Better Education Service Delivery for All ($611m); Mineral Sector Support for Economic Diversification Project ($150m); NEITI Reporting Compliance ($0.32m); the Polio Eradication Support Project ($125m); National Social Safety Nets Project ($1.8b); and $200m-Agro-Processing, Agricultural Productivity Enhancement and Livelihood Improvement Support Project specifically designed for Kano, Kaduna, Lagos, Cross River, Kogi, Enugu and three other states (Akinloye, 2017). Astonishingly, the foregoing confirms the revelation made by the World Bank President Jim Yong Kin during a press conference in Washington DC in which President Buhari had asked him to focus developmental programs in the northern region.
Aside uneven distribution of physical infrastructure, Buhari has been found to have comprised in the fight against corruption as well as management of ethnic-based militias. While the President has been proactive in harassing members of the opposition parties and dissenting voices under the pretence of fighting corruption, the same measure has not been applied on those facing corruption charges in his administration. A report released by the Intersociety Civil Society group identified that the Buhari’s administration has breached the constitution of Nigeria through promotion of nepotism and favouritism of corruption and abuse of office contrary to Section 15 (5) of the 1999 Constitution; manipulated and bastardized the anti-corruption policy where only members of the opposition parties and southerners are labeled corrupt or charged for corruption whereas morally dirty and indicted members of the ruling party including those that funded the election campaigns of the Buhari’s Presidency are shielded or protected; and using corruption to fight corruption and mainstreaming fake anti corruption for the purpose of confusing Nigerians and misleading the international community. The implication of the one-sided fight against corruption has inexorably increased the corruption index of Nigeria as released by the Transparency International.
In the light of the foregoing illustrations and analysis, we argue that the rational choice of voters in the 2015 presidential election in Nigeria shaped the dynamics of governance in the post-election era. While the northern region are favoured by the central government for voting massively for the incumbent president on the basis of ethno-religious affiliation, the people of the south south and southeast have been at the receiving end of their decision at the poll for voting their son who eventually lost the election. On this note, we can conveniently state that the ethno-religious voting during the 2015 presidential election affected the political development of Nigeria under the Buhari administration.
Regionalization of political appointments by Buhari administration and ethno-regional agitations in Nigeria
The entity known as Nigeria today as noted earlier in this study is a conglomeration of varied ethnic nationalities distinct principally in socio-cultural, political and economic terms before the emergence of colonialism. However, through the divisive policies propagated by the colonial government, the amalgamation of these nations though without their consents was orchestrated and religiously executed (Ezirim et al., 2015). These development among other things institutionalized strife, hatred, mistrust, competition and inter-ethnic rivalry among the competing nationalities. After independence, it was discovered that lack of adequate representation by the ethnic groups would constitute a serious impediment to national integration; therefore, several attempts were made by the successive Nigerian governments to find political solution to this problem. Meanwhile, one of the earliest and enduring efforts evolved to ensure inclusive governance, allay the fear of domination and equitable distribution of public offices is the establishment of the federal character principles.
Conceptualizing, federal character according to Olagunju (1987) is a deliberate design to accommodate less dominant but forcibly expressed interest. To Ezeibe (2012), federal character principle involves a deliberate plan to construct means of ensuring the proper distribution of amenities and government projects in a country. More recently, Ezeibe, Abada & Okeke (2016) had argued that federal character is a political expediency evolved to enhance inclusive governance among the six geo-political zones especially as it relates to the allocation of political and public sector appointments including the office of the president in order to tame the ugly incidence of ethno-regional domination in all human endeavours in Nigeria. Within the context of 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended, section 14(3) noted that: “the composition of the Government of the Federation or any of its agencies and the conduct of its affairs shall be carried out in such a manner as to reflect the federal character of Nigeria and the need to promote national unity, and also to command national loyalty, thereby ensuring that there shall be no predominance of persons from a few State or from a few ethnic or other sectional groups in Government or in any of its agencies”.
Pursuant of the above provision, Section 135(3) states that “in the appointment of Ministers, the president shall reflect the federal character of Nigeria, provided that in giving effects to the provision aforesaid, the president shall appoint at least one Minister from each state who shall be an indigene of such state”. Section 157 also provides that “appointment by the President into the offices of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Head of Service of the Federation, Ambassadors, or the principal representatives abroad, Permanent Secretary or other Chief Executive in any Ministry or Department of the Federal Government, or any office of the personal staff of the president shall have regard to the federal character of Nigeria and the need to promote national unity”. Section 197(2) further provides that “the composition of the officer corps and other ranks of the Armed Forces of the Federation shall reflect the federal character of Nigeria. Other provisions were also made in the constitution to ensure that the federal character principle was operative in the political process”.
However, despite these constitutional provisions, evidences abound that the government of Buhari have flagrantly abused the federal character principles through the regionalization of political appointments. In the context of this study, regionalization of political appointments connotes deliberate plans and attempts by the present government to skew major and sensitive political and public appointments in favour of the northern section of Nigeria. For instance, Ezeibe et al (2016) had argued that the initial 30 appointments for key government official made by President Buhari upon assumption into office, 22 appointees were from the north while only 8 were from the south. Interestingly, none of the appointees was from the south east. Also, an inspection of the appointments made by the Buhari administration into the various security agencies would x-ray the extent at which the federal character principles have been abused. This is presented in the table below:
TABLE 8 List of Key Appointments in Security and Paramilitary Establishments made by Buhari
Figure 4.List of Key Appointments in Security and Paramilitary Establishments made by Buhari
Source: Intersociety, 2018
From the preceding table, the study found that majority of the appointees into the headship of various security organizations in Nigeria were largely drawn from northern extraction while only three were from Southern Nigeria. Unfortunately, the southeast region is not represented in the Nigeria’s security architecture. On the other hand, emerging fact revealed that from May 29th 2015 to July 2016, Buhari appointed made 122 appointments with north having 75 while south had only 47. While the South East had only 12, Buhari’s North West had 34 chunks of political officers (BusinessDay, 2017). In the same vein, out of the 15 new directors of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation, 10 (67 percent) come from the mostly Hausa- Fulani North, three are Yoruba, two come from the South-South and none from the South-East. These lopsided appointments no doubt have earned Buhari the accolade of an ethnic champion who can perpetrate illegality in pleasing his people. By making these Northern-dominated appointments, President Buhari has contradicted the letter and spirit of the constitution he swore to uphold, specifically the federal character principle in Section 14(3), which says ‘The composition of the government of the federation or any of its agencies and the conduct of its affairs shall be carried out in such a manner as to reflect the federal character of Nigeria and the need to promote national unity, and also to command national loyalty, thereby ensuring that there shall be no predominance of persons from a few state or from a few ethnic or other sectional groups in that Government or in any of its agencies.
Obviously, the one-sided disposition of the Buhari in terms of political appointments has continued to ignite ill-feelings particularly among the disadvantaged groups, thereby leading to resurgence of ethno-regional agitations. This view was supported by Ezeibe et al (2016) who attributed the recent agitations for self determination by members of the Movement for the Actualization of the Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB), Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta (MEND), Niger Delta People Volunteer Force (NDPVF), Niger Delta Peoples Salvation Front (NDPSF) and Niger Delta Vigilante Force (NDVF) to the perceived marginalization of the regions in federal appointments and other benefits. Speaking further, the Leader of the Oodua Peoples’ Congress, Dr. Frederick Fasheun decried the level of lopsided appointment under the Buhari administration, noting that the trend is an act of impunity which has continued to cause agitations in the country. According to him, “the President must realize that favouring the North with his lopsided appointments is an act of impunity, and it has sparked the raging agitations for disintegration, ethnic separatism and restructuring. Continuing down this path will further overheat the polity. The agitations for Biafra, for example, began and became heightened with the president’s flagrant disregard for the extant provisions of the constitution and his failure to run an all-inclusive government (The Nigerian Voice, 2017).
Meanwhile, a coalition of Niger Delta militants equally attributed the current agitation across the country to the lopsided appointments by the Muhammadu Buhari administration. The militants observed in a statement issued that most of the heads of key public positions were from the northern part of the country, adding that such skewed appointments were an indication of an agenda against other ethnic groups and geo-political zones. Signatories of the statement from the coalition are John Duku of the Niger Delta Watchdogs (Convener, Coalition of Niger Delta Agitators), Ekpo Ekpo (Niger Delta Volunteers), Osarolor Nedam (Niger Delta Warriors) and Henry Okon-Etete (Niger Delta Peoples Fighters). Others are Asukwo Henshaw (Bakassi Freedom Fighters), Ibinabo Horsfall (Niger Delta Movement for Justice), Duke Emmanson (Niger Delta Fighters Network), Inibeghe Adams (Niger Delta Freedom Mandate), and Ibinabo Tariah (Niger Delta Development Network). The coalition said, the current agitation across the country is caused by the President Buhari’s lopsided appointments against the federal character and social laws (Akasike, 2017).
Similarly, there is a claim in certain quarters that the poor handling of banditry and herdsmen violence could be attributed to the President’s soft spot for his nationality (Guardian, 2018). It is alleged that while the President treats his kinsmen with kid’s glove, militants and freedom fighters operating mostly in south south and southeast zone are visited with full coercive strength of the state (Okafor, 2018; Onwubiko, 2018; Olufemi, 2021). For instance, a study by Intersociety (2016) observed that the Buhari government is vicariously and personally responsible for the regime murder of over 1000 nonviolent and unarmed citizens mostly Christians and southerners; proxy killing of over 1000 nonviolent and unarmed citizens using the Fulani Janjaweed; and killing of over 3000 citizens by violent non-State entities like Boko Haram and Fulani insurgents occasioned by regime incompetence and incapacity.
CONCLUSION
In view of the identified gap in the existing literature, the present study systematically examined the dynamics of ethno-religious voting pattern and its implication on governance in the post-election era. It will be recalled that the existing literature have been preoccupied with the events that shaped the 2015 presidential elections with paying attention on how the electoral decision affects governance in the post election era. Using Nigeria as a point of departure with credible illustrations drawn from 2015 presidential elections, the present study arrived at the following findings:
- That ethnicity and religion played vital role in determining not only the outcome of the election but also has continued to shape tune of governance in the post election era
- That regions that voted massively for the winner of the presidential elections were duly compensated while those with minimal support have been sidelined from democratic dividends
- That the president is pursuing a sectional policy in which his region has benefitted bountifully from juicy positions at the detriment of the southern region
- That the one-sided outlook of the president has been responsible for the revival of agitations across the southern region of Nigeria.
Indeed, this study concludes on the need for voters to see party ideology as basis for electing public officials instead of ethno-religious sentiment. It further advocates for inclusive governance in which every nationality would be accommodated in the body polity called Nigeria.
REFERENCES
Abell, P. (2000). Putting social theory right? Sociological Theory Journal Volume 18, Issue 3. Page 518-523.
Adamu, S. Y. & Abubakar, M. A. (2017). Election and voting pattern in Nigeria: A study of 2015 governorship Election in Bauchi State.International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Invention. Volume 6 Issue 11. PP.52-59
Adamu, A., Ocheni, D. & Ibrahim, S. U. (2016). Money politics and analysis of voting behaviour in Nigeria: Challenges and prospects for free and fair elections. International Journal of Public Administration and Management Research (IJPAMR), Vol. 3, No. 3, May, 2016.
Adeosun, A. B. (2011). Federal character principle and national integration: A critical appraisal. International Journal of Politics and Good Governance, 2(2), 1-13.
Agomor, K. & Adams, S. (2014). Determinants of voting behaviour in Ghana. A Paper Presented at the Global Awareness Society International 23th Annual Conference –Montego Bay Jamaica, May 2014.
Ajijah, A. (2015). Youths sets Jonathan’s bus ablaze in Jos. Premium Time Online Newspaper. https://www.premiumtimesng.com/news/top-news/174622-breaking-youth-set-jonathans-campaign-bus-ablaze-jos.html
Akasike, C. (2017). N’Delta militants blame agitations on Buhari’s lopsided appointments. https://punchng.com/ndelta-militants-blame-agitations-on-buharis-lopsided-appointments/
Ake, C. (1996). Democracy and development in Africa. Washington. The Brookings Institutions.
Ake, C. (2000). Feasibility of democracy in Africa. Dakar. CODESRIA.
Akhigbe, N. (2017). Fact-check: 81 of Buhari’s 100 appointees are Northerners. Business-Day Newspaper. http://www.businessdayonline.com/fact-check-81-buharis-100-appointees-northerners/.
Akinloye, B. (2017). ICYMI: North got lion’s share of World Bank projects under Buhari — Documents. https://punchng.com/north-got-lions-share-of-world-bank-projects-under-buhari-documents/
Aluko, M. A. (2002). The institutionalization of corruption and its impact on political culture and behaviour in Nigeria. Nordic journal of African studies 309-402.
Ameh, C. G. (2015). Angry Buhari’s kinsmen attack Jonathan in Katsina. Daily Post Newspapers. http://dailypost.ng/2015/01/21/angry-buharis-kinsmen-attack-jonathan-in-katsina/
Apowoghaga E. (2014).God-fatherism and the 2011 General election in Nigeria. Afro Asian journal of social sciences Vol.5.Quater IV 2014.
Arrow, K. J. (1963). Social choice and individual values. New York. Wiley.
Babayo, S., Mohammed, A. M., & Bakri, M. (2017). Political behaviour and voting pattern in Nigeria: A study of 2015 Presidential Election. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, Arts and Sciences Vol. 4 No.4, 1-13 October 2017.
Barkan, J. D. (1979). Legislators, elections, and political linkage. In the J. D. Barkan. and J. J. Okumu (Eds), Politics and public policy in Kenya and Tanzania. New York: Praeger, pp. 64-92.
Biglan, A., Ary, D. & Wagenaar, A. C. (2000). The value of interrupted time-series experiments for community intervention research. Prevention Science,1,31–49.
Black, D. (1958). The theory of committees and elections. Boston. Kulwer.
Bowler, S. and Lanoue, D.J. (1992). Strategic and protest voting for third parties: The case of Canadian NDP. Western Political Quarterly, 45: 485-99.
Bratton, M. and van de Walle, N. (1997). Democratic experiments in Africa. Regime transitions in comparative perspective. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
Bratton, M (2013). Voting and democratic citizenship in Africa. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Brewster, B. (n.d). The importance of voting to democracy. https://www.sec.state.vt.us/kids/contest/2005/9_12_winner_2005.htm.
Buchanan, J. M. & Gordon, T. (1962). The calculus of consent: Logical foundations of constitutional democracy. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. http://www.econlib.org/library/Buchanan/buchCv3.html
Campbell, D. T. (1969). Reforms as experiments. American Psychologist, 24, 409–429.
Campbell, A., Philip E. C., Warren E. M., & Donald, S. (1960). The American voter. New York : Wiley.
Chaloupka, F. J., & Grossman, M. (1996). Price, tobacco control policies and youth smoking. (NBER Working Paper 5740). Chicago: National Bureau of Economic Research and University of Illinois at Chicago Department of Economics.
Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings. Chicago: Rand McNally.
Dalton, R. (2001). New Social Movements. In J. Krieger (ed.),The oxford companion to politics of the World. New York. Oxford University Press, 2001. Pg 586-587.
Downs, A. (1957).An economic theory of democracy. New York. Harper.
Egobueze, A. & Ojirika, C. U. (2017). Ethnicity, religion and voter’s behaviour: The experience of the 2015 presidential election in Nigeria. Global Journal of Human-Social Science, Volume 17 Issue 4.
Ejere, E. (2020). Fresh uproar over lopsided appointments at NNPC. https://hallmarknews.com/fresh-uproar-over-lopsided-appointments-at-nnpc/
Elster, J. (1989); Social norms and economic theory. Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 3(4), pages 99-117.
Erdmann, G. (2007). Ethnicity, voter alignment and political party affiliation in an African Case: Zambia. GIGA Working Paper 45. Hamburg: German Institute of Global and Area Studies.
Ezeibe, C. C (2013). Federal character principle and nationality question in Nigeria. International Journal of Research in Arts and Social Sciences (IJRASS).
Ezeibe, C.C. (2015). Hate speech and electoral violence in Nigeria. A Paper Presented at the Institute of Electoral Studies Roundtable Discussion on the Outcome of the 2015 General Elections in Nigeria.
Ezeibe, C.C., Abada, I., Okeke, M. (2016). Zoning of public offices, liberal democracy and economic development in Nigeria. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol 7 No 3 S1 May 2016
Ezeife, K. (2012). 2015: Nigeria’s biggest headache. Vanguard Nigeria. https://www.vanguardngr.com/2012/09/2015-nigerias-biggest-head-ache/
Eziukwu, A. (2015). Niger Delta militants meet in Yenagoa, threaten war should Jonathan lose presidential election. Premium Times. https://www.premiumtimesng.com/news/headlines/175532-niger-delta-militants-meet-yenagoa-threaten-war-jonathan-lose-presidential-election.html
Ezirim, G. E., Nnamani, K.E. & Nnaegbo, O. (2015). Democracy at the crossroads: Ethno-regional power contestations and democratization in a diversified Nigeria, 1960-2015. South East Journal of Political Science, Vol. 1 (1).
Ferree, K. E. (2004). The micro-foundations of ethnic voting: evidence From South Africa. Afrobarometer Working Paper, No. 40, (June).
FGN (1999). The constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Lagos: Federal Government Press.
Fridy, K.S. (2007). The elephant, umbrella, and quarrelling cocks: Disaggregating partisanship in Ghana’s fourth republic. African Affairs 106(423): 281–305
Gidengil, E., (1992). Canada votes: A quarter century of Canadian national election surveys, Canadian Journal of Political Science, 25: 217-48.
Gottman, J. M., McFall, R. M., & Barnett, J. T. (1969). Design and analysis of research using time series. Psychological Bulletin, 72(4), 299-306. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0028021
Guardian (2018). Buhari fiddles while herdsmen slaughter, say Nigerians. https://guardian.ng/lead-story/buhari-fiddles-while-herdsmen-slaughter-say-nigerians/
Hazarika, B. (2015). Voting behaviour in India and its determinants. IOSR Journal Of Humanities And Social Science Volume 20, Issue 10. PP 22-25.
Horowitz, D. L. (1985). Ethnic groups in conflict. Berkeley. University of California Press.
Ibrahim, J. (2015). Election lessons from the First Republic: It’s the Republic that matters. https://opinion.premiumtimesng.com/2015/03/16/election-lessons-from-the-first-republic-its-the-republic-that-matters-by-jibrin-ibrahim/
Igwe, O. (2007). Politics and globe dictionary. New Edition. Keny & Brothers Enterprise. Enugu.
INEC (2015). Official result sheet of the 2015 presidential election of Nigeria. INEC, Abuja.
Intersociety (2018).125 constitutional breaches & regime atrocities Of Buhari administration in one year. http://www.intersociety-ng.org/component/k2/item/138-125-constitutional-breaches--regime-atrocities-of-buhari-administration-in-one-year.
Jesse, E. (1990). Elections: The Federal Republic of Germany in comparison. Oxford. Berg.
Jupp, V. (2006). The SAGE dictionary of social research methods. London. SAGE Publications Ltd.
Kerlinger, F.N. (1986). Foundations of behavioural research. New York. Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Krippendorff, K. (1980). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. London: Sage.
Küçük, O H., & Toklu, I. T. (2020). What factors affect voting behavior in elections? A research on generation. Business & Management Studies: An International Journal, 8(5), 4546-4574. https://doi.org/10.15295/bmij.v8i5.1679
Lazarsfeld, P. F., Berelson, B. & Gaudet, H. (1944). The people’s choice: how the voter makes up his mind in a presidential campaign. New York. Columbia University Press.
Lewis, P. (2007). Identity, institutions and democracy n Nigeria. Afrobarometer Working Papers, Working Paper No. 68 (March 2007).
Lindberg, S. I. (2006). Democracy and elections in Africa. Baltimore. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Lindberg, S. & Morrison, M. (2008). Are African voters really ethnic or clientelistic? Survey evidence from Ghana. Political Science Quarterly 123 (1): 95 –122.
Lipset, S. M. (1960). Political man: the social bases of politics. New York: Doubleday.
Marcus, G.E. and M.B. Mackuen, (1993). Anxiety, enthusiasm and the vote. American Political Science Review, 87: 672-85.
Middendorp, C.P. and Tanke, P. R. K. (1990). Economic: voting in the Netherlands, European Journal of Political Research, 18: 535-55.
Miller, W.L., H.D. Clarke, M. Harrop, L. Leduc and Badawi, P.E. Whiteley (1990). How Voters Change: The 1987 British election campaign in perspective. Oxford. Clarendon Press.
Ndegwa, S. (1997). Citizenship and ethnicity: An examination of two transition moments in Kenyan politics. American Political Science Review, Vol. 91 No. 3 (September): 599-616.
Nwachukwu, S. N., Aghemalo, A., & Nwosu, E. O. (2014). Ethnicity and electoral behaviour in Nigeria. European Scientific Journal edition Vol.2
Nwobashi, H. N. & Itumo, A. (2017). Ethnicity, voter behaviour and resurgence of separatists agitations by some ethnic groups in Nigeria: Implications for good governance and democratic consolidation. Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research 25 (3): 439-453, 2017
Noor, M. M., Abdullah, A., Ismail, M. M. (2016). Voting behaviour in Malaysia: Locating the sociological determinants of ethnicity, Middle classes and development gains. World Applied Sciences Journal 34 (6): 805-812, 2016 ISSN 1818-4952.
Oboh, G. E. (2017). Influence of ethnicity and religion in Nigerian elections and the imperative of media intervention. Sociology International Journal, Volume 1 Issue 3 – 2017.
Ogbogu, C. O. & Olaoye, J. A. (2017). The determinants of voting behaviour: evidences from the 2015 elections in Oyo state, Nigeria. Journal of Public Administration and Governance, v. 7, n. 2, p. Pages 12-23.
Okafor, T. (2018). ‘Buhari treating herdsmen with kid gloves’. https://punchng.com/buhari-treating-herdsmen-with-kid-gloves/
Okolie, A. M., Nnamani, K. E., Ezirim, G. E., Enyiazu, C. & Ozor, A. C. (2021). Does liberal democracy promote economic development? interrogating electoral cost and development trade-off in Nigeria’s fourth republic. Cogent Social Sciences,7:1, DOI: 10.1080/23311886.2021.1918370
Okolie, A. M., Enyiazu, C. & Nnamani, K. E. (2021). Campaign propaganda, electoral outcome and the dynamics of governance in the post-2015 presidential election in Nigeria. Cogent Social Sciences,7:1, DOI: 10.1080/23311886.2021.1922180
Olagunju, T (1987). Federal Character and national integration. National Institute for Policy and Strategic Studies Conference Proceedings.
Olaniyi, B. (2015). Thugs fire shots at Rivers APC campaign. https://thenationonlineng.net/thugs-fire-shots-rivers-apc-campaign/
Olayode, K.A. (2015). Ethno-regional cleavages and voting behaviour in the 2015 General Elections: Issues and challenges for democratization and nation building. National Conference on 2015 Elections in Nigeria. The Electoral Institute (TEI) Abuja p.1-23.
Olufemi, A. (2021). Analysis: how Nigerian govt’s bad precedent emboldened Sunday Igboho, other. https://www.premiumtimesng.com/news/headlines/444690-analysis-how-nigerian-govts-bad-precedent-emboldened-sunday-igboho-others.html
Onwubiko, E. (2018). Treating national security threats as family affairs dangerous, says HURIWA.https://guardian.ng/news/treating-national-security-threats-as-family-affairs-dangerous-says-huriwa/
Olson, M. (1965). The logic of collective action: Public goods and the theory of groups. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Onapajo, H. (2012). Politics for God: Religion, politics and conflict in democratic Nigeria. The Journal of Pan African Studies.
Onapajo, H. (2016). Politics and the pulpit: The rise and decline of religion in Nigeria’s 2015 presidential elections. Journal of African Elections, 15(2), 112-135. DOI: 10.20940/JAE/2016/v15i2a6
Orji, L.A (2009). Money politics and vote buying in Nigeria: The Bane of Good Governance. Afro Asian journal of social science.Vol.4 No.4.3
Osayi C. (2015). Godfathers and the 2015 Nigerian elections. African journal of election.Vol.7, No 6, 2015.
Pande, R. (2008). Can informed voters enforce better governance? Experiments in low income democracies. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/6c01/e6f7657b36ca57e3a4cebf1eabaf899a8d51.pdf.
Punch (2016). Buhari’s appointments: A tilt towards the North. http://punchng.com/buharis-appointments-tilt-towards-north-2/.
Rajasena, K. S. & Thanikodi, A. (2016). Election manifesto is the key determinant of voting behaviour in Tamil Nadu Electoral politics. Asian Review of Social Sciences. Vol.5 No.2, 2016, pp. 38-43.
Riker, W. H. (1962). The theory of political coalitions. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Sahara Reporters (2015). Buhari’s lopsided appointments split the North, his supporters. http://saharareporters.com/2015/08/29/buhari%E2%80%99s-lopsided-appointments-split-north-his-supporters
Sani, N. (2015). Youths attack Jonathan in Bauchi. https://www.premiumtimesng.com/news/top-news/175443-youth-attack-jonathan-in-bauchi.html.
Satriadi, Y., Yusuf, S., & Ali, R. (2021). Understanding the Voter’s Behavior as an Effort to Increase Publics’ Political Participation in Indonesia. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 11(2), 960-972.
Snyder, R. E. (2011). The impact of age, education, political knowledge and political context on voter turnout. UNLV Theses, Dissertations, Professional Papers, and Capstones. 1400. http://dx.doi.org/10.34917/3310658
Sule, B., Sani, M.A., & Mat, B. (2017). Political behaviour and voting pattern in Nigeria: A study of 2015 presidential election. Asian Pacific Journal of Education, Arts and Sciences. Vol. 4 No. 4.
Tar, U. A. (2010). The challenges of democracy and democratization in Africa and Middle East. Information, Society and Justice, Volume 3 No. 2, July 2010: pp 81-94.
The Nations (2015). Fears as pre-election violence stalks Rivers communities. The Nations Newspaper. http://thenationonlineng.net/fears-as-pre-election-violence-stalks-rivers-communities/.
The Nigerian Voice (2017). Buhari’s Lopsided Appointments Driving Divisive Tendencies – OPC. https://www.thenigerianvoice.com/news/257172/buharis-lopsided-appointments-driving-divisive-tendencies-.html
Tomoz, M. & Van Houweling, R. P. (2008). Candidate positioning and voter choice. American Political Science Review. Vol. 102, No. 3 August 2008.
Ukiwo, U. (2003). Politics, ethno-religious conflicts and democratic consolidation in Nigeria. Cambridge University PressJournal.
Weber. R.P. (1985). Basic content analysis. New Delhi. Sage
Winchester, T. M., Binney, W. & Hall, J. (2014) Young adults and politics: investigating Factors influencing voter decision making. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 26:3, 226-257, DOI: 10.1080/10495142.2014.915635
Zahida, A. & Younis, A. S. (2014). Determinants of voting behaviour in India: Theoretical perspective. Public Policy and Administration Vol.4, No.8, 2014.
Main Article Content
Abstract
This study therefore examined the link between the ethno-religious voting pattern in the 2015 presidential elections and governance in the post-election era in Nigeria. We anchored our analysis on the Rational Choice Theory and relied on documentary method where data were systematically gleaned from journal articles, newspapers, official documents and other online materials while utilizing content analysis as our analytical compass. Based on this, we hypothesized as follow: the ethno-religious voting pattern in the 2015 presidential election has affected political development of Nigeria under the Buhari administration; the regionalization of political appointments by Buhari administration has increased ethno-regional agitations in Nigeria. On this note, the study found that ethno-religious voting pattern played vital role in determining the pace of governance and how resources should be distributed among the competing ethnic nationalities in the post-election era. It is however, recommended that the electorates should embrace party ideology and competence of candidate as the guiding factor for voting in the future elections to be held in Nigeria.
Keywords
Article Details
