X-raying Fayose’s victory over Fayemi BY AZUKA ONWUKA Sunday, June 22, 2014 was a day of joy for many Nigerians, especially those interested in football. After the barren draw the Super Eagles played with Iran in their opening match at the Brazil 2014 FIFA World Cup, many Nigerians became angry and disappointed with the team. However, a slim victory over Bosnia and Herzegovina early Sunday brought joy and relief to many Nigerians. But there was a group of Nigerians whose joy was dampened: Members and sympathisers of the All Progressives Congress. What started like a huge joke on Saturday became official some minutes after 1am on Sunday when the Independent National Electoral Commission announced that Governor Kayode Fayemi of Ekiti State had been defeated by a former governor, Mr. Ayodele Fayose, of the Peoples Democratic Party. Many factors made the victory of Fayose sad news to the APC. The first was that the presidential election is less than one year away. Such a defeat would send signals to the electorate about the vulnerability of the party even in its stronghold, the South-West. Secondly, since last year, the APC had been gaining political office holders through defection, creating the impression of a surge in popularity over the PDP. A loss to the PDP in Ekiti would blunt that surge. And coming at a time a defected governor (Murtala Nyako of Adamawa State) and his deputy had been served an impeachment notice by the new PDP-dominated Adamawa State House of Assembly, it did not look good. In addition, with the recent defections from the APC in Edo State and Zamfara State, the tide seems to be turning. The reason these recent defections seemed ominous was that hitherto, the key defections had been mainly from the PDP to the APC. In contrast, defectors from the APC to the PDP had been non-holders of elective officers. Thirdly, Fayemi was said to have transformed Ekiti State in the three years he had spent in office. So why should his good performance be rewarded with electoral rejection? Fourthly, the APC members had called Fayose a “thug”, “rabble-rouser”, an “empty barrel”, a man “facing criminal charges”, and other unprintable names. In contrast, Fayemi is a PhD holder, soft-spoken, polished, intelligent, and gentle. Incidentally, Ekiti is portrayed as a state of intellectuals. So, how could a “thug” win an election against “a result-oriented, urbane intellectual” in “a state of intellectuals”? Nonetheless, Fayose beat Fayemi. And it was not just that Fayose beat him, the margin was wide. Besides securing about 57.9 per cent of the total votes cast, Fayose’s 203,090 votes almost doubled the 120,433 votes received by Fayemi. In addition, Fayose beat Fayemi in all the 16 local government areas of the state. To cap it all, the election was reported by every observer as free and fair and transparent: one of the best conducted by INEC. So there was no way “rigging” would have been blamed for the shocker. The only lame excuse that a few people have proffered is that of inducement. Ironically, all the key parties and candidates shared items, especially rice, to the electorate before the election. Before now, the advice to the electorate was: “If they give you money or rice, collect it but go ahead and vote according to your conscience.” Therefore, anybody who uses inducement as the reason for this defeat is only insulting the Ekiti people as incapable of thinking for themselves. But importantly, Nigerians need to learn some lessons from this election. The first is that power belongs to the people. No matter how good or powerful a candidate is, in a true democracy, power belongs to the people. The people decide whom they want, no matter how seemingly obtuse that decision looks. The second point is that democracy is still the government of the people, by the people and for the people. One thing everybody says about Fayose is that he is close to the grass roots: he eats with the common people, attends their events (weddings, burials, naming ceremonies, etc), rides on okada (commercial motorcycle), etc. Fayemi is said to be good and gentle but aloof and elitist. His good-intentioned actions like the ban of okada on major roads, merging of the three universities of the state (University of Education, Ikere; University of Science and Technology, Ifaki-Ekiti and University of Ado-Ekiti), reduction of the Teachers’ Pecuniary Allowance from 27.5 per cent to 16 per cent, and the introduction of the Teachers Development Needs Assessment, to assess them obviously did not go down well with the common people. Even though leaders should take bold steps that may hurt the people in the short run but benefit them in the long run, they must gauge the people’s feelings. Leaders must strike a balance between giving the people what they want and what is in the interest of the organisation. Change must also not be drastic. In politics and leadership, balance is the best. The third lesson is that the Nigerian electorate are not sheep. They have a mind of their own. That also leads to the next point, which is that contrary to the impression created by many, Nigerians are going party-blind. Nigerians have seen that there is no difference between the PDP and the APC or APGA and Labour Party. The same candidates move from one party to another once they fail to get what they want in one party. Those in governance who are performing well are not doing so because of their party but because of who they are. Across the parties, there are role models and waste pipes. Parties must therefore be circumspect about welcoming defectors with pomp and circumstance. How can a party explain to its supporters and prospects that the same people their party has been calling a “thief” for years has become a “saint” overnight, not through repentance but by the mere act of changing parties? In the same vein, the masses are not sold on the penchant of one party to demonise the other while portraying itself as a party of angels. They see what happens in each party. Rather than being sold on such holier-than-thou posturing, the people feel repulsed by it as dirty politicking. The other lesson is that our democracy must move to the level where candidates and their parties must rise above politics to learn how to concede defeat and embrace the opponents. Such will ensure that elections are not followed by violence and bad blood. If the candidates are indeed fired by the desire to serve, they must be willing to think more about the well-being of the people and the nation and less about their ambitions. Dr. Alex Ekwueme did it in 1999 when Chief Olusegun Obasanjo defeated him at the PDP presidential primaries and Ekwueme went ahead to raise Obasanjo’s hands in the PDP campaigns in the South-East. Former Speaker, Hon. Dimeji Bankole, conceded defeat in Ogun State in 2011. As the candidate of the PDP in Anambra State election in 2010, Prof. Chukwuma Soludo came second and promptly conceded defeat to Governor Peter Obi. When APGA screened Soludo out in the Anambra governorship primaries of 2013, he accepted the decision in good faith and went on with his life. Fayemi has acted like a gentleman and an exemplary politician by promptly conceding defeat, calling Fayose to congratulate him, describing Fayose as “my brother”, and promising to meet with him in a matter of hours to start the discussion on a smooth transition. We need more of such politicians. Finally, contrary to the pessimism of some people, our democracy is growing. Our major problem is from the state governors who have vowed never to allow the opposition party win a single local government area in the states they control, except in Nasarawa State (which many claim happened because the governor was not in full control of affairs). Transparent election is more important to a developing country like Nigeria than even critical issues like fighting corruption or provision of infrastructure like electricity and good roads. This is because once the people are allowed to elect the candidate of their choice, political office holders would automatically become responsive and responsible. That would make the political office holders endeavour to satisfy the electorate, who wield the real power, rather than the so-called godfathers and power brokers, who thrive on imposition and selfishness. And satisfying the electorate is the beginning of good governance and accountability through which a nation achieves growth and development and greatness –Twitter @BrandAzuka -- The Punch
Posted on: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 18:42:52 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015