Columns
WHEN NIGERIA’S DEMOCRACY WILL DIE
WHEN NIGERIA’S DEMOCRACY WILL DIE 
By Emmanuel Aziken
What may remain etched in the memory of many people following last weekend’s governorship election in Edo State may be the picture of Governor Godwin Obaseki sitting down in the wee hours of Sunday on the corridor of the collation centre of the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC in Benin City all alone.
Video images showed him handling his phone apparently trying to send messages to someone. Following that, he was shown being marched away from the commission’s office following an abortive move to protest what he alleged as the manipulation of figures from the election that held the day before.
The governor cut a sorry picture of a man helpless as the forces of state overwhelmed him. The governor and his favoured party have alleged that their agents were locked out of the collation centre during which they claimed figures were manipulated to declare contrary results as cast by voters.
What goes around actually comes around. Exactly eight years ago, Obaseki as the candidate of the All Progressives Congress, APC was reportedly the beneficiary of the same manipulation.
At that time in 2016, following the election on September 28, 2016, in the wee hours of the following day, enablers of the ruling party in the state were alleged to have shut out the opposition and done whatever they did and Obaseki was the following day announced as the winner of the election.
The developments in Edo in the last week have inevitably brought out warning signals of serious threats to Nigeria’s democracy with the most ominous menace being the collation centre.
The most significant oddity in Edo last weekend was the fact that collation was aborted in some local government areas and relocated to the State headquarters of INEC where oppositionists claim they were refused entry.
That was a fundamental breach of INEC procedures and guidelines which the commission’s officials remarkably failed to address. Why was the scheduled venue for the collation changed? As with the commission’s willful refusal to use the IREV portal in the 2023 presidential election, INEC has again failed to give any logical explanation for the decision not to abide by its guidelines on the collation of results.
The controversy around the collation of the results in Edo again brings to fore the long-held belief that collation centres are the axis of evil in Nigeria’s electoral process.
The brazen disruption and disregard of the laid down rules for collation of election results as we now know are helped by corrupt INEC officials working in cahoots with security agencies.
In Edo, it was reported that a high- ranking police officer masterminded the relocation of the collation centres from at least two local government areas to the INEC headquarters.
Expectedly, no one has been questioned as to why this was done. INEC that should ordinarily defend the integrity of its systems and procedures has been lame to respond.
It is suffice to say that the brash disregard of the electoral process was not countermanded by superior authorities of the commission which under the laws should have reviewed the process to allow a fair assessment of the complaints.
It is remarkable that many of the observer groups including YIAGA Africa were ferocious in their condemnations of the processes that took place in Edo State last weekend.
As some now say what you need to win an election in Nigeria is to have sufficient money to bribe INEC, and security officials and you are on course to being declared winner of the election. The next step is to use state resources to defend the election in the judiciary.
It is perhaps against this background that the review of the Edo election by Prof Sam Amadi, director of the Abuja School of Political and Social Thought comes to mind.
In his now viral conference, Prof Amadi lamented that the continued progression in error by the Nigerian state towards manipulative elections could sooner than thought destroy the country’s democracy.
Amadi was on spot in pointing out the dangers in allowing INEC as it is to carry on the game of elections without fundamental reforms. The appointment of persons into the electoral management body as embodied in the positioning of clearly partisan aides of political actors is one of the most visible dangers of the present setup.
No one would believe that the former aides of political actors would conduct elections that would not be susceptible to malpractices.
What Prof Amadi recommends and which your correspondent fully adopts is to implement the recommendations of the Justice Mohammed Uwais panel instituted by President Umaru Yar‘adua.
It is a pity that President Goodluck Jonathan failed to implement the recommendations of that committee.
It will be foolhardy for anyone to expect President Bola Tinubu to implement this prescription.
Political actors including opposition leaders must put pressure on the National Assembly to push through the recommendations. If Atiku Abubakar, Peter Obi, and other 2027 gladiators are really keen on keeping Nigeria’s democracy they should bring pressure on their members in the National Assembly to go in the direction of the Uwais report.
They can move in this direction quickly given the fact that the APC at the inauguration of the present House of Representatives was a minority. Given the issues and apprehension in the land, it is possible to get a sufficient number of lawmakers from the APC to move in this direction and perhaps save Nigeria’s democracy.
If not, Nigeria’s democracy may die sooner than we can imagine.
By Benedict Binebai
Manipulative history often distorts the truth by presenting a biased interpretation of events, omitting key facts, and misrepresenting evidence to fit a specific narrative or ideology. This can be achieved through propaganda, simplification, or stereotyping, which can be used to influence opinions or beliefs.The Itsekiri history of Warri justifies the subheadings of manipulative history in the following ways:
Biased Interpretation
The Itsekiri narrative often portrays themselves as the sole founders and owners of Warri, downplaying the roles and contributions of other communities, such as the Urhobo and Ijaw. This selective presentation of facts supports a predetermined narrative of Itsekiri dominance and ownership.
Omission of Key Facts
The Itsekiri narrative often omits or glosses over the historical conflicts and power struggles between the Itsekiri and other communities, such as the Urhobo and Ijaw. This omission of key facts creates an incomplete and inaccurate picture of Warri’s history.
Distortion of Evidence
The Itsekiri narrative often misrepresents or manipulates historical evidence to support their claims to dominance and ownership. For example, they may emphasize their historical relationships with European colonizers to justify their perceived superiority over other communities.
Propaganda
The narrative often uses emotive language and loaded terminology to influence readers’ opinions or beliefs. For example, they use terms like “founding fathers” or “traditional owners” to emphasize their perceived historical rights and privileges.
Simplification or Stereotyping
The Itsekiri narrative often oversimplifies the complex historical relationships between the Itsekiri and other communities, portraying themselves as the sole beneficiaries of Western education, Christianity, and modernization. This oversimplification perpetuates negative stereotypes about other communities and reinforces Itsekiri exceptionalism.
Lack of Transparency
The Itsekiri narrative often lacks transparency regarding its sources, methods, and potential biases. This lack of transparency makes it difficult to evaluate the historical narrative critically and identify potential manipulations or distortions.
Emotional Manipulation
The Itsekiri narrative often uses emotive appeals or sensationalism to elicit a specific response or reaction from readers. For example, they may emphasize their historical cultural heritage or traditional practices to evoke a sense of nostalgia or pride, while downplaying the cultural heritage and traditions of other communities.
By examining the Itsekiri history of Warri through these subheadings, it becomes clear that the narrative exhibits characteristics of manipulative history, which can be used to justify a particular agenda or ideology.
Consequences of Manipulative History
Manipulative history can have far-reaching consequences, including the perpetuation of biases and stereotypes, justification of oppression or dominance, and erosion of trust in historical narratives and institutions. By distorting the past, manipulative history can create a false narrative that supports a particular agenda or ideology, leading to ongoing social and cultural tensions. This can contribute to polarization and conflict, as certain groups may feel marginalized or excluded from the dominant narrative.
The consequences of manipulative history can also be seen in the loss of cultural heritage and the undermining of critical thinking. By erasing or distorting certain narratives or perspectives, manipulative history can lead to a lack of understanding and appreciation for the complexities of the past. Furthermore, manipulative history can inform poor decision-making and policy development in the present, as inaccurate lessons are drawn from a distorted past. Ultimately, manipulative history can have a profound impact on our understanding of ourselves and our place in the world, highlighting the importance of promoting accurate and nuanced historical narratives.
Column – IduwiniVoice
Where falsehood reigns for decades, truth can reign everlastingly. This underscores the enduring power of truth, even in the face of prolonged deception. This notion is particularly pertinent in contexts where misinformation and falsehoods have been deeply ingrained in societal narratives, such as in the case of the “Warri Falsehood” and the “Warri Truth.” Here, the city of Warri in Nigeria serves as a microcosm for the struggle between falsehood and truth, where decades of misrepresentation and distortion can be challenged by the emergence of authentic voices and narratives.
The Warri Falsehood may manifest in various forms, including historical revisionism, cultural appropriation, or the suppression of marginalised voices. For instance, the dominant narratives surrounding Warri’s history and culture may have been shaped by those in positions of power, often to the detriment of the city’s indigenous communities. However, the Warri Truth represents a counter-narrative that seeks to reclaim and reassert the authentic experiences and perspectives of the region’s people. This truth-telling can take many forms, including art, literature, and oral traditions.
The struggle between the Warri Falsehood and the Warri Truth is not merely an academic or intellectual exercise; it has real-world implications for the people of Warri and beyond. When falsehoods are allowed to reign unchecked, they can perpetuate harm, injustice, and inequality. Conversely, the emergence of truth can be a powerful catalyst for healing, reconciliation, and social change. By amplifying the voices and stories of marginalised communities, the Warri Truth can help to create a more nuanced and accurate understanding of the region’s history and culture.
Ultimately, the triumph of truth over falsehood requires a sustained commitment to critical inquiry, cultural preservation, and community engagement. As the people of Warri and other affected communities continue to challenge dominant narratives and assert their own truths, they can create a more just and equitable society. By embracing the complexities and diversity of their experiences, the Warri Truth can reign everlastingly, providing a powerful testament to the enduring power of authenticity and resilience.
Truth is God’s greatest virtue of existence; let us respect and celebrate it.
Igumugumu
Prof. Benedict Binebai
The chains that bind us come in many forms – oppression, ignorance, fear. They weigh us down, restrict our potential, and silence our voices. But there is a powerful force that can shatter these chains: truth. When we confront the truth, no matter how difficult or uncomfortable, we begin to break free from the shackles that hold us back.
Truth has a way of illuminating the darkest corners of our minds and societies. It exposes the lies, the injustices, and the inequalities that perpetuate our bondage. As we embrace the truth, we gain the strength and courage to challenge the status quo, to demand change, and to fight for our rights. The chains that once bound us begin to weaken, and we start to feel the warmth of freedom’s breeze on our skin.
Breaking chains with truth is not a one-time event; it’s a continuous process. It requires vigilance, determination, and a commitment to seeking knowledge and understanding. As we uncover more truths, we become more empowered to take control of our lives, to make informed decisions, and to shape our own destinies. The chains that once held us captive begin to crumble, and we emerge stronger, wiser, and more resilient.
When we break chains with truth, we not only liberate ourselves, but also inspire others to do the same. Our stories, our experiences, and our triumphs become beacons of hope for those still trapped in the darkness of ignorance and oppression. As we march forward, hand in hand, truth becomes the rallying cry that unites us in our quest for freedom, justice, and equality. Together, we can shatter the chains that bind us and forge a brighter, more enlightened future.