Frank – Collins Okafor Ph.D
Senior Lecturer,
Department of Political Science,
Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka
Anambra State, Nigeria
&
Udochukwu Onyekachukwu .A.
Ogbaji M.Sc
Lecturer,
Department of Political Science
Nwafor Orizu College of Education,
Nsugbe
Anambra State, Nigeria.
Abstract
This study is on the application of Locke’s social contract
theory, hinged on the cornerstone of popular consent to the explanation of
political development in Bayelsa State within the year under review. The objective of this study was to establish
a nexus between consent and the nature of political orientations and the level
of political development in Bayelsa State.
The study tested the hypothesis that there is a significant relationship
between the level of development of political institutions in Bayelsa State and
the lack of consent and the subjective orientations of the people. Our findings
show that the lack of consent which leads to the absence of a popular mandate,
the subjective orientations arising thereof and the low levels of
specialization and functionality of political institutions contributes to the
problem of political development in Bayelsa State. That is, the absence of popular consensus,
the prevailing subjective orientations of the people arising from the failure
of successive governments to meet their expectations and their cognitions about
the political process is responsible for the low level of functionality of
political institutions and as such stalls the political development of the
state. We recommend, amongst others that
the civil society organizations in Bayelsa state should actively engage in an
aggressive issue-based voter education and make adequate preparations for
monitoring elections in the state as a way of protecting and promoting the
viability of democratic institutions and protecting the public mandate
expressed by the ballot.
Background
of the Study
The
social contract is an implied agreement by which people form nations and
maintain a social order. That is, this contact create the state which exist to
improve order with the aim of maintaining security, well-being and freedom of
man (Ibaba, 2004: 100) Of note is the common position that runs through the
postulation of the social contract theories. That the emergence and development
of political society is given impetus by the common consent of men to provide
for the inadequacies of the existing objective patterns of social relation
found in the state of nature; a situation characterized by the absence of
codified laws and institutional processes of political relations.
Thus,
in the state of nature, men enter into a social contract that creates the state
which forms the cradle for its political development. Interestingly, though
Marxists do not anchor the political development of the state on a social
contract, they see the political development of the state as arising from
consent and the collective will to solve the inherent contradictions in social
relations (Tubodenyefa, 2010: 9).
Implied in the above is the notion
that the development and viability of the institutions of government take rook
from tacit or explicit consent of all.
Accordingly, it can be explained
that, that which shape development and viability of the political institutions
of the state is the consent of the individuals in it. Political institutions of a political
community take the form which the consent of majority affects it. According to
Locke,
…that which (shapes) any community
being
only the consent of the individuals
in it, it is
necessary the body should move
whither the
greater force carries it which is
the consent
of the majority (Locke, 1960: vii,
section 96).
At this point, we should not lose
sight of the fact that in modern democratic government, this majority consent
is given through elections which still remain the basis for popular
sovereignty. In other words, elections have come to serve as the medium for the
contract which embodies the majority consent that gives government the mandate
to move society to develop politically.
Taking
reference from the above, the nature of development of political Institutions
in Bayelsa State can be explained with a link to the existence of a common will
or a contract that supposedly confines the government to operate within the
space of political actions based on consent and collective will.
Our
interest in this study thus arises from the need to investigate the link between
consent as expressed in the nature of elections in Bayelsa State and the
existing realities on the nature of political institutions as a means of
explaining the political development of the state.
Statement
of Problem
Obviously,
political development, like other development processes, is centered on man and
the political institution he builds to move society forward. As such, it is
man’s deliberate efforts that shape his attitudes and the values he places in
conforming to the required norms and codes of those institutions. It is in this
light that we begin to question existing political realities in Bayelsa State.
So
far, since the state creation exercise of 1996 that saw the emergence of
Bayelsa as a political entity, we have witnessed four successive general
elections which have ushered in governments who supposedly emerged through
popular consent.
But
from a critical analysis of the Bayelsa situation, there seems to be a divorce
between emergence of governments and popular consent; a triangular gap between
existing and professed institutions of government, political orientations of
the inhabitants and corresponding participatory antecedents that go with these
institutions, taking that a politically developed society is one that is
structured on a virile civil society, an active political culture and a sound
political socialization machinery.
As
mentioned earlier, the election of a government into power pre-supposes a
contract between it and the electorate, where there exists a genuine contract
between the government and the people of Bayelsa State the government
obligation should be to ensure the development and viability of the political
institution of the State. But contrary to this expectation, existing realities
shows that successive government in the state have operated and continue to
operate without recourse to the collective will which reinforces the seeming
lack of participation on the part of the populace in the political processes
which expresses itself in the failure of the government in the state to
initiate viable development programmes. A situation, which further distances
the people from the government which is supposed to represent supposed to
represent their collective will and as such ensure the political development of
the state, and by extension ensure the security, well-being and freedom of the
state.
Indeed,
the need to question whether there exist contracts between the governments and
the governed in the state is further heightened when we look at election
practices and the institutionalization of rigging in the state, which tends to
reinforce the prevailing subjective individual attitudes and values towards
electoral procedures.
In
this regard, one becomes inclined to question the state of individual on
rotations towards the political machinery in Bayelsa State and the perception
of their roles in the political processes and overall effect on the political
development of the state. This presents a problem that requires study. This
study raises the following question:
To what extent has consent and
obligation toward political institutions and processes stall political
development in Bayelsa State?
Objective
of Study
The objective of this study is to
establish a nexus between consent and the nature of political orientations and
the level of political development in Bayelsa State. The specific objective is:
To determine the extent to which
consent and obligation towards political institutions and processes impedes
political development in Bayelsa State.
Significance
of the Study
This study seeks to provide a
scientific base for the nexus between collective consent and the level of
development of political institutions in Bayelsa State. In view of the above,
the significance in the study becomes evident in several ways. First, the
findings of this study will throw light on how the decisions of the existing
state of development of political institutions in Bayelsa State is influenced
by the nature of the prevailing political orientations. This becomes clearer when
we recognize the fact that most Bayelsans are aware of their apathy towards the
political process but are yet to recognize the manifest link between this
apathy and the level of development of political institutions in Bayelsa State.
We believe that the findings of this study will bridge this information gap.
Scope
and Limitations of the Study
This study on Lockean Social
Contract and Political Development: A study of Bayelsa State (1999-2007)
intends to establish a nexus between consent and the nature of political
orientations and the level of political development in Bayelsa State and to
determine the extent to which consent and obligation towards political
institutions and processes impedes political development in Bayelsa State from
1999-2007.
The period 1999 to 2007 was selected because
it covers two democratic dispensations with governments that were deemed to
have acquired political power through democratic elections. And in theory, such governments will have
their legitimacy and authority founded on popular consent and participation.
Thus,
this period provides us with the opportunity to evaluate the extent to which
consent, participation and political orientation have affected political
development in Bayelsa State.
The
limitations encountered in the study were with regards to the retrieval of the
distributed questionnaires and in getting respondents to complete them within
the prescribed time frame. Yet at the end of the exercise, we were not able to
retrieve all the questionnaires given to the respondents. Out of the 150
questionnaires, 141 were returned. Second, the study suffered from shortage of
finance. A study of this nature requires enough funding if possible from a
donor agency to ensure a comprehensive study. Third, the unwillingness of the
staff of the local governments to release some basic information needed for the
study is another serious problem.
However, it must be pointed out that
spirited efforts were made to address some of these limitations. For example, we
had to rely on academic journals, research thesis, magazines, newspapers and
the internet to get some of the needed data when local government officials
were not forth-coming.
Theoretical
Framework
The
social contract theory will serve as the theoretical framework of this study.
In this regard we shall adopt the Lockean perspective of the social contract
theory. Locke’s position on the social contract provides an aspect of the
rationale behind the historically important notion that legitimate state authority
must be derived from the consent of the governed (Locke,1960: vii, section 56).
According to Locke:
Men being... by nature all free,
equal and independent,
No one can be nut out of his estate
and
Subjected to the political power of
another
Without his own consent (Locke, 1960:
vii, section 56).
Consent
thus becomes what Locke uses to underscore the legitimacy of a political or
civil society. In his words, where ever any number of men is so united into one
society as to quit everyone his executive power and to resign it to the public
there and there only is a political and civil society (Locke, 1960: vii,
section 89).
Based
on Locke’s position on the incorporation of a political society, we shall
anchor our analysis of development of the political system on consent, which he
consider to be the major determinants of the dynamics of the emergence and
development of political society.
We
must also make clear that under democratic tenets, in contemporary times, the
medium for consent and the means through which governments derive legitimacy is
through elections. Through elections, the electorate gives their consent to the
emergent government whose programmes for the collective good are in sync with
the wishes of the people. Writing on the role of consent and the development of
the political institution of a society, Locke noted:
…that which moves any community,
being
only the consent of the individual
in it, and
It being necessary to that which is
one body
to move one way: it is necessary body
should move that Way whither the
greater
force carries it which is the
consent of
the majority (Locke,1960: vii,
section 96).
What is clear from the above is that
consent, and in this case given through election which legitimizes governments,
serve as the impetus for political development of the state.
Deducible
from the above is that the salient characteristics of the processes of
governance and the individual orientations to it influence and impact on the
level of development of political institutions.
With the above line of thought we
want to argue that the level of development of political institutions in
Bayelsa State and the practice of democratic tenets in the state is a logical
outcome of the lack of consent and the subjective orientations of the people.
Research
Methodology
For the purpose of this study, both
primary and secondary data were used. That is, data generated expressly for
this study and such other information extracted from hooks, Journals,
Newspaper, Internet and related studies.
For the purpose of testing and
evaluating our hypothesis, primary data gathered through fieldwork were carried
out in the eight (8) local government areas in Bayelsa State. Our sampling will
be done through probability and non-probability sampling techniques. This will
include the random sampling and the judgmental sampling techniques. Given the
nature of the variables under study and the size of the population, which
covers the eight (8) local government areas of the state, two communities will
be sampled from each local government area making the total number of
communities to be sampled to sixteen (16).
To
be selected for sampling will be the administrative headquarters of each local
government and one other community. The reason for selecting the council
headquarters and one other community is that the council head quarters will
cover the need for sampling politically active respondent while the other
community will cover up for the necessity of wider coverage.
The
sixteen communities selected which automatically covers sixteen constituencies
out of the twenty four (24) in the state legislature adds up to 70% of the
total area under study.
The local governments and the
communities selected are listed below.
In Yenagoa Local Government Area, we
chose Yenagoa town and Biseni, in Brass Local Government Area, we chose Twon
Brass and Okpoama, in Nembe Local Government Area, we chose Ogbolomabiri and
Basambiri, in Ogbia Local Government Area, we chose Ogbia Town ana Otuoke, in Sagbama
Local Government Area, we chose Sagbama Town and Agbere, in
Kolokuma/Opokuma Local Government
Area, we chose Kaiama and Opokuma, in Ekeremor Local Government Area, we chose
Aleibiri and Ekeremor town, while in Southern Ijaw Local Government Area, we
chose
Opokuma and Amassoma.
Instrument
for Data Collection
The major instrument for data
collection is the questionnaire, which was designed to elicit responses from
the literate segment of the sample communities. We designed the questionnaire
to generate information on issues relevant to the research question. To this
end, both closed and open ended format were employed. A total of 150
questionnaires were administered. Out of the 150 questionnaire, 50 were
distributed to the selected communities in each of the three senatorial
districts in the state. These questionnaires were distributed to these
communities based on their population percentages.
Method
of Data Analysis
The statistical method for data
analysis is the frequency distribution. To this end, the responses obtained
from the questionnaires were collated, tabulated and expressed in simple
percentages with which we interpret and evaluate our research hypothesis.
The
Concept of Social Contract
The social contract describes a
broad class of republican theories whose subjects are implied agreements by
which people form nations and maintain a social Order. It implies that the
people give up some rights to a government and /or other authority in order to
create and jointly preserve social order. The social contract theory provides
the rationale behind the historically important notion that legitimate state
authority must be derived from the consent of the governed.
Thomas Hobbes, John Locke and J. J.
Rousseau are the most famous philosophers of the social contract theory. The
starting point for their theories is an examination of the nature of man, of
the human condition absent from any structured condition. A situation they call
state of nature; a state of being where an individual’s words or actions are
bound only by his interests or conscience. From this common starting point, the
proponents of the social contract theory attempt to explain, in different ways,
why it is in an individual’s rational self-interest to voluntarily subjugate
the freedom of’ action one has in the state of nature in order to obtain the benefits provided by
the formation of social structure. (Burnell, www.wikipedia.com).
This presents the notion of a sovereign will to which all members of
society are bound by the social contract to obey and respect. It is the definition of this sovereign will
that differentiates the social contract theories. What becomes clearer at this
point is the fact that the state therefore becomes what man willed, an
artifice. This view which is the core of the machine theory of the
state is grounded on the moral
conviction that the state is the result of a genuine agreement on the part of
individuals (Nwosu, 2006: 163). According to Nwosu,
(it is) a creative agreement
which, for the
first time, brings
law and order into
existence. It
substitutes order for chaos
and extracts from
man’s sovereignty
obligation to obey..
.an obligation which
must be understood
in the context of
consent given by men
(Nwosu, 2006: 163).
The end of the state necessitated by
man’s rational choice to escape the inconveniences of the state of nature and
its short comings is well articulated by Rousseau when he maintained that:
the passage from the state of nature
to the
civil state produces in man a very
remarkable changes, by substituting
in his
conduct justice for instinct and by giving
his actions the moral quality that
they
previously lacked....and voice of
duty
succeeds physical impulses, and law
succeeds appetite.. (Rousseau, 1967:
22).
Rousseau goes further to state that
man loses some rights in subjugating himself to the sovereign will of the
state, he in turn acquires greater ones in return according to him, man is
deprived of many advantages that he derives from nature, he acquires equally
great ones in return; his faculties are exercised and developed..his feelings
are ennobled, his whole soul is exalted to such a degree that...he ought to
bless without ceasing the happy moment that released him from it forever and
transformed him from a stupid and ignorant animal into an intelligent being and
a man (Rousseau, 1967: 22-23).
The above captures the line of
thought of social contracts theories as to the necessity, role and morality of
the state. It is at this point that we will examine the views of John Locke.
John
Locke’s Social Contract Theory
Locke made use of the social
contract to explain that legitimate political authority was derived from the
consent of its people, which could be withdrawn when the freedom of the
individual was violated or curtailed. Thus, his “Two Treatises of Civil
Government” preached and defended freedom, consent and property.
Locke’s explanation of the origin of
political society and political power began with a description of the state of
nature. A state of nature which was of
perfect equality and freedom as regulated by the laws of nature. According to
Locke:
To Understand political power right, and
derive it from its original, we must
consider, what state all men are naturally
in, and that is, a state of
perfect freedom to
order their actions and of dispose of their
possessions and persons as they think fit,
within the bounds of the law of nature,
without asking leave, or depending upon
the
will of any other man (Locke in Gutenberg e-book, 2008.).
From the above, Locke presented the
individual as natural, free and becoming a political subject to a government
out of free choice. To get out of the state of nature, Locke maintains, men
make a contract to enter into civil society; a contract of all with all. It is a social or more truly, a political contract
since it establishes political society (Locke, 1960, chapter 11, section 6).
Locke uses the social contract to
tell us the meaning and importance of consent to authority and political
progress. That the manner in which a political society evolves, take shape and
content, is given direction by the acquiescence of its citizens. It expresses
how the consent of’ the majority gives shape to the political society that
emerges and the nature and development of the political institutions that
society propagates to conduct its political affairs.
Going back to Locke’s postulations,
once civil society was established, the individuals established a government to
act as a judge in the form of a fiduciary power for promoting certain ends, the
solutions to the three lacks of the state of nature inclusive. However, Locke
describes the process that leads to this in the following manner:
This
is done by barely agreeing to unite into
one
political society, which is all the
compact there is, or needs be, between the
individuals that enter into or make up a
commonwealth. And thus, that
which
begins
and actually constitutes any
political society is nothing but the consent
of any
number of freemen capable of a
majority to unite and incorporate into such
a
society. And this is that, and that only,
which
did or could give beginning to any
lawful
government in the world (Locke in Petit, 1997).
This way, the obligation to obey the
government would depend on the fact that public power was used for peace,
safety and the public good of the people.
Locke also assented categorically that governments, being only a
fiduciary power, can be altered, changed or dissolved legitimately
........when by arbitrary power of
the prince, the elections
and ways of elections were altered
without
the consent, and contrary to the
common
interests of the people (Mukherjee
and Ramaswamy, 2007: 204).
What becomes pertinent to note from
the above and which logically applies to the Nigerian experience is that the
incapacity of the Nigerian electorate to give consent to the government of the
state which is presumed to exist for the public good has altered the efficacy
of her political institutions and as such tends to stall her political
development. Put the Nigerian political
development, and in particular the Bayelsa State experience, is mitigated by,
the peculiar orientations that run through the electorates, who by one device
or the other are unaware of the importance of their consent to the emergence of
any government and the basis of the state.
What becomes of essence to us in Locke’s
postulations with regard to the social contract is the place of consent. For
the state must be founded on consent and the government that manages the state,
on trust. And when that government acts untrustworthily it has lost the
people’s consent and mandate and must be dissolved.
But what becomes of the political
development of a society which in the first instance recognizes that necessity
of popular consent but does not in the least provide adequate institutional
channels for the interplay of that consent? This will be analyzed further when
we review the concept of political development. 0n the three social contract
theorists, Locke is closer to Rousseau than to Hobbes. For as Locke believes
the contract does not remove the supreme power form the people, so does
Rousseau speak of the “inalienable sovereignty of the people.”
The
Concept of Political Development
Political development, like every
other concept in the social sciences has been subjected to the rigors of the
crises of conceptualization. It has also not been spared of the influence from
ideological standings between Marxists and Liberal scholars.
However, from a clearly liberal
standpoint, political development is seen as the movement of society from one
stage usually but not always a primitive one, to a more advanced and complex
socio-political system. Modernization scholars who are of this bent see
political development as the evolution of societies from traditional forms of
political and social organization into modern forms centering on the state
(Palmer, 1999:6). David Apter has defined political development as a process
which affects choice (Palmer, 1999:6) and where the modernization focus helps
to make sense of the choices likely to be at our disposal (Apter cited in Park,
1984:34). To make sense of Apter’s definition we will have picture a political
system that has been highly regularized with institutional differentiation,
which allows choice in the political system. But even at this, Apter is
speaking of a consequence of political development and not political
development itself.
However, Dorsey, on the other hand,
defines political development as the changes in power structure and processes
that occur concomitantly with changes in the conversion levels in social
system, whether such conversions change primarily in their political, social
and economic manifestation (Dorsey cited in Chilton in
www.d.umin.edu/chilton/articles/PI).
Dorsey’s conception also helps in identifying the process of political
development but not what it is. The analytical shortcomings of the above definitions
is that if through it conceptual clarification we can be able to evaluate is
causes and consequence, then the concept of political development must be
differentiated from them. Same limitation goes with Karl Deutsche’s conception
of political development as the process in which major clusters of old social,
economic and psychological concomitants are eroded or broken and people become
available for new patters of socialization and behaviour (Deutsche cited in
Chilton in www.d.umin.edu/chilton/articles/PI). But again, one asks, is
political development the only process that can obliterate or change existing
socio-political structures?
However, for Huntington, political
development takes the shape of a complex of structures and norms regulating the
polity. He maintained that it is the institutionalizations of political
organizations and procedures which is characterized by their direction and
level of adaptability indicated by a long and regular chain of leadership
adapting themselves to new challenges to the system (Varma, 1975: 324).
Huntington’s conception thus portrays political development in the light of
political system moving towards the direction of greater adaptability,
complexity, autonomy, and coherence.
However, Almond and Powell define
political development in terms of the two main parts of the political system.
That is, political structures and political culture. They define political
culture “as the pattern of individual attitudes and orientations towards
politics among the members of a political system. It is the subjective realm
which underlies and gives meaning to political actions (Almond and Powell, 1966:
21).
These individual orientations are the
cognitive orientation which is the individual’s knowledge of political objects
and beliefs; Affective orientations which are his feelings of involvement,
attachment or rejection towards the political system; and the evaluative
orientations which are the individuals’ judgments and opinions about the
political system.
Now, if we subscribe to the notion
that political development clearly arises from and affects individuals,
political institutional forms and objective regularized patterns of social
relations, then it becomes possible to locate political development in terms of
characteristics of individuals and characteristics of institutions (Park, 1984:
46-48)
Almond and Powell’s conception of
political development attempts to bridge the gap between political culture
(Individual attitudes and orientations) and political structures. From their
perspective, when we talk of political development, we refer to two related
changes in political culture and political structure (Almond and Powell, cited
in Ake, 1979:4). When political culture becomes secularized, individuals become
increasingly rational, analytical and empirical in their political actions.
Thus secularization affects and enhances structural differentiation. In other
words, cultural secularization necessitates the specialization of institutional
roles or the establishment of new roles and structures.
In a clear language, we can draw the
relationship between political and social consensus, a participatory regime, an
active political culture and political development. This link expresses itself
in the fact that social and political consent is given basis through
participation and participation in-turn enhances participant political
orientations or cultural secularization which in-turn enhances structural
differentiation. In the words of Almond and Powell, it is through the
secularization of political culture that rigid, ascribed and diffuse customs of
social interaction come to be overridden by a set of codified, specifically
political, and universalistic rules. By the same token, it is the
secularization processes that bargaining and accommodative political action
becomes a common feature of the society, and that the development of special
structures such as interest groups and parties become meaningful (Almond and
Powell cited in Ake, 1979:60).
On another plain, what happens to the
political development of a society when individual political orientations are
highly parochial and subjective? What happens to elections, to party
competition: to representation and to the rule of law? And if we are to
subscribe to the link Almond and Powell draw between the nature of political
culture and political institution as fundamental to political development, what
can we say about political development in Bayelsa State?
For it is with this schema and the
four concrete area of the nature of Bayelsa state; social force and patterns of
political participation and competition, civil society and political order that
we can better appreciate how social and political consensus affects the
structure and nature of political development in a state like Bayelsa State.
Deducible from the above, the mere
essence of political consensus as basis for the political development of
society and its institutions in contemporary modern societies can be logically
linked to a social contract entered into for the increased secularization of
the political institutions in society. Though the differences in circumstances
from a pre-political state of nature to an already existing though constantly
changing political society is well recognized, we cannot overlook the essence
of consent as a basis for the contract which necessitates society to develop
into a highly politicized agglomeration of structures and institutions for the
order of man and his political relations with other men in the society.
Research Setting
Geography
and Location of Bayelsa State
Bayelsa State is located in the
heart of the Niger Delta. Accordingly, it represents the most characteristic
geology soil, flora and Fauna of the Niger and Benue river basins (Tubodenyefa,
2010:48).
The land area of Bayelsa state
describes the geometric shape of a triangle with its apex in the area north
east of the bifurcation of the River Niger into the forcados and Nun River
system in Sagbama local government area. The north western limit of the state
is at the estuary of the Ramos River, a distributary of the Forcados River
system. While the south- eastern margin of the state is at the mouth of the
Santa Barbara River around Kula. This whole delimitation covers an area of over
12,000 km2 with over 185 km of coastline which describes the arc of
the Niger Delta (Oyegun in Alagoa (ed), 1999:31).
The state is geographically located
within latitude 040 45 north, 03023 south and longitude
05022 West and 06045 East and shares common boundaries
with Delta State on the North, Rivers State on the East and the Atlantic ocean
on the West and South (Bayelsa Paradise Revealed, 2006:3). According to official figures from the 2006
population census, Bayelsa state has a population of 1,704.515 people (NPC,
2006). Below is a presentation of the population of the state by local
government.
LGA
|
MALE
|
FEMALE
|
TOTAL
|
Brass
|
94,359
|
89,768
|
184,127
|
Ekeremor
|
137,756
|
131,835
|
269,588
|
Kolokuma/Opokuma
|
39,952
|
39,314
|
79,266
|
Nembe
|
66,768
|
64,198
|
130,66
|
Ogbia
|
92,015
|
87,591
|
179,606
|
Sagbama
|
95,667
|
91,202
|
186,869
|
Southern Ijaw
|
165,329
|
156,479
|
321,808
|
Yenagoa
|
182,240
|
170,045
|
352,285
|
Total
|
874,038
|
830,432
|
1,704,515
|
Population
of Bayelsa State by Local Government. Source: NPC, 2006
A Brief
Profile of Bayelsa State
The notion of states’ creation in
Nigeria is underscored by the perception that it is a viable tool for
political, economic and socio-cultural advancement for the people of the area.
This, no doubt, also underscored the agitations that led to the creation of
Bayelsa state in 1996 by the Sani Abacha led military administration.
This notion is paraphrased better by
the report of the Justice Ayo Irikefe panel of 1979 when it maintained that:
The basic motivation in the demand
for
New states was rapid economic
development all other reasons by
state
agitators were in the view of the
panel, to
large extent mere rationalizations
to
achieve the basic purpose of
development (Amatari and Odondiri in
Alagoa (ed), 1999: 236)
The demand and agitations for the
creation of what is now Bayelsa state, according to Okoko and Lazarus (1999:
253-256) can be divided into four historical phases which corresponds to four
related state movements.
The first historical phase was the
Rivers State movement (1953 - 1967) which was when minorities demanded separate
states as a means for allaying fears of domination of majority ethnic groups,
the demand was for a Rivers State consisting of Brass, Degema, Ogoni, Port
Harcourt, Ahoada and the Western Ijaw division from the western region. Even
with the creation of Rivers state in 1967, it soon, became clear that the
development aspiration of the riverine people could not be met.
This fact gave impetus to the Niger
Delta state movement spanning 1979 to 1983. The clamour for a Niger Delta state
was a reaction against the fact that infrastructural development was been
concentrated in Port Harcourt and other upland areas. Thus, the Niger Delta
state was to be drawn from the riverine area of Brass, Yenagoa and Sagbama in
old Rivers State; Bomadi Burutu and Ijaw
area of Warri in Delta State and the Ijaw areas of llaje-Ese of Ondo state
(Okoko and Lazarus, 1999: 254).
The third phase was the agitation for
the creation of Bayelsa state to be comprised of the present Bayelsa state and
Ahoada in Rivers State. But owing to mutual suspicion, opposition and lack of
interest from the elites of both the Bayelsa and Ahoada axis, the agitation failed
and did not produce any result.
The fourth phase was between 1993 -
1996 when Gen. Sani Abacha appointed the Sir Mbanefor Committee. In this light,
the Bayelsa movement forwarded a memorandum to the committee to create a
Bayelsa State comprising of six local government in the then Rivers State;
Brass, Ekeremor. Ogbia, Sagbama, Southern Ijaw and Yenagoa (Okoko and Lazarus,
1999: 257).
However, with the approval of the
recommendation of the committee, General Sani Abacha announced the creation of
Bayelsa State on October 1, I996.
Bayelsa” is an acronym derived from the three original local government
areas- Balga for Brass, Yelga for Yenagoa and Salga for Sagbama. Bayelsa” is
thus composed of the first two letters of Balsa, the first three letters of
Yelga and first two letters of Salga. It was these original three local
government areas that were sub-divided to make up for the present eight. Brass
was subdivided into Ogbia, Nembe and Brass local government area. Yenagoa
became southern areas and Sagbama has become Ekeremor by its sobriquet “Glory
of all lands’ which is a replacement for “pride of the nation”.
Since its creation, Bayelsa State has
had the following administrators and Chief Executives:
Navy Captain Philip Oladipo Ayeni
(Military Governor 1st Oct. 1996-28Feb. 1997), Police Commissioner Habu Daura
(Acting Governor 28 Feb, 1997- 27th June, 1997), Navy Captain Omoniyi Caleb
Olubolade (Military Governor 27th June, 1997 - 9th July, 1998), Lt. Col. Paul
Edor Obi (Military Governor 9th July 1998 -29May, 1999). With the enthronement
of a democratic dispensation in 1999, the first elected civilian governor of
the state was sworn in. Till date, the civilian governors of the state have
been:
Chief Diepreye Solomon Peter Alamieyeseigha
(First Executive Governor: 29th May 1999-9th December, 2005), Dr. Goodluck
Ebele Jonathan (Second Executive Governor 12th December 2005 - 29th May, 2007).
Chief Timipreye Silva (Third Executive Governor 29th May 2007 to date).
The periods, between the election and
removal of the first executive governor, the ascension of his deputy Dr.
Goodluck Jonathan as governor to Chief Timipreye Silva have witnessed political
activity that have really destabilized the character and political orientations
of the people of the state. The first executive governor Chief D. S. P
Alamieyeseigha was impeached by the state house of Assembly on grounds of
corruption, and gross misconduct, an event necessitated by the charges brought
against them by the Economic and Financial Crime Commission (EFCC). The events
leading to his eventual impeachment by the State House of Assembly are in
themselves studies in politics. Also
worthy of such a study and a test for the political orientation of the masses
in the state are the events and circumstances leading to the election,
annulment and re-election of the incumbent Governor Chief Silva.
Politics
and the Nature of Political Institutions in Bayelsa State.
Political institutions in Bayelsa
State have been a mix of modern and traditional systems. However, both operate
a distinct but functional with the one more or less influencing the other.
Other than the secular democratic political institutions in the state,
centralized traditional political institutions in the state cuts across the
recognized 20 clans in the state. Each of these clans is composed of several
communities which confederate to form traditional system of administration
headed by a clan head (Ibe - nanawei) (Tubodenyefa, 2010: 59).
One feature worthy of note which
makes traditional political institutions of the state somewhat parallel with
the democratic state machinery is that ascription to the position of clan head
is not hereditary but by election or rotation.
It is this feature and the corresponding influence that goes with the position
of clan head that has served as basis for the nature of development of these
traditional political institutions (Tubodenyefa, 2010: 59).
To understand the nexus between
politics and nature of political institutions in Bayelsa state, it stands to
logic that we first understand the nature and character of politics in the
state. Going by the positions of Claude Ake (1996) and Eme Ekekwe (1996), we
argue that the state in Nigerian is privatized and therefore used by the
custodians of political power to pursue private interests as against public
interests. This phenomenon singularly make state power highly attractive, and
the state being the object of political competition, its nature thus defines
the character of politics (Ibaba,2005: 60).
All these have major implications on
the functionality and development of political institution in the state. From
the above, it follows that where the government lacks the requisite legitimacy
and support of the populace, there exist an absence of a social contract rather
than owe their obligation to the populace, the ruling class is committed to
using state institutions for the actualization of private interest and
primitive accumulation. In such a scenario, there appears to be an objective
nexus between the nature and character of politics in the state and the nature
of existing political institutions in the state.
Social
Contract, Political Consensus and Political Development in Bayelsa State.
The social contract provides the
rationale behind the important notion that legitimate state authority must be
derived from the consent of the governed. The people exercise their right to
choose their government on the basis of an implicit agreement. With the global
wave of democratization and the demand for popular participation, this implicit
agreement has been made explicit through constitutions, electoral procedures
and other explicitly formulated legal procedures; procedures which serve as
instruments for consensus building and collective identity.
What this holds for us is that in
contemporary democratic practices, the contract between the government and the
governed is made explicit by electoral outcomes based on popular choice. It is
this choice which is an embodiment of the general will that gives direction to
the development of the state politically, socially and economically.
Evidently,
there exists a chasm between politica1 consensus and politica1 development in
Bayelsa State. Ours is a chasm created by the antics of a corrupt, selfish and
insincere political class. And the resultant effects of these are only so
evident in the political process in the state.
This
dislocation between popular consensus and the political direction of the state
which showcases the absence of a social contract creates room for inactive
civil society, one that hardly engages in issue based campaigns, the culture of
corruption and political impunity, and political elite that is allergic to the
protection of the public mandate through the ballot. This dislocation also
breeds a widespread disregard for accountability and transparency, a situation
which fertilizes corruption and fosters a culture of violence in electoral
contests.
Research
Hypothesis
This study will test the following
hypothesis:
There is a significant relationship
between the level of development of political institutions in Bayelsa State and
lack of consent and the subjective orientations of the people.
Discussion
and Summary
This study focuses on the
application of Locke’s social contract theory medium for the explanation of
political development in Bayelsa State, Nigeria. The study attempted to unravel
the objective nexus between consent and the development of the state
politically. The specific objective of the study was to establish a nexus
between consent and the nature of political orientations and the level of
political development in the state. In other words, the study attempted to
determine whether the lack of consent and obligation towards political
institutions and processes in the state impedes political development.
The scope of the study covers the
democratic dispensation in the state within the period 1999 to 2007. This
period was selected because of the fact that it covers two democratic
dispensations with governments that were deemed to have acquired political
power through democratic elections, and in theory will have their legitimacy
and authority founded on popular consent and participation a fact which
provided us with the opportunity to evaluate the extent to which consent,
participation and political orientations have impacted on political development
in the state.
Locke’s social contract served as the
frame work for theoretical analysis. We pursued the logic that legitimate state
authority derives from the consent of the governed, a consent implicitly
embodied in a contract, one in which in modern dispensations are made explicit
constitutional measures and other explicitly formulated legal procedures and
which also serves as the motive force for the direction of the state and its
development politically.
The study tested one hypothesis that
there is a significant relationship between the level of development of
political institutions in Bayelsa State and the lack of consent and the
subjective orientations of the people.
Data for analysis and evaluation were
derived from both primary and secondary sources. Primary data was generated
through the use or survey questionnaires distributed to respondents in selected
communities in the state. The method for data analysis was the simple
percentage with which responses were expressed in frequency distribution
tables. An evaluation of our findings will be instructive at this point.
With regards to consent and how it
impacts on the nature of politics in the state, the collated and analyzed data
exposes a dislocation between popular will and state direction. As the data
shows, there is an increasing apathy towards political symbols and processes in
the state. Take a situation 92% of the respondents are registered voters yet
90% do not vote during elections; 86% never took part in any form of political
activities and worse, none of the respondents have ever met with their
representatives in any form of consultation.
What exists is that people either
willingly shy away from performing political functions with direct impact on
policy outcomes or are never even given the opportunity to do so. There is no
means for contributing to social direction. Consent has lost its place as a
potent force for actualizing the ends of the state. Consent as it is expressed
through the articulation and aggregation of the public interest is uprooted
from its place in the pedestal of social and public policies. What such
situation portends in a state that is already privatized and used by corrupt
custodians of political power can only be imagined. With the state being
privatized and politics appearing to be so lucrative, political competition
becomes increasingly fierce and violent and the traditional methods of
consenting to political leadership are either thwarted or done away with. There
is an open war against the growth and entrenchment of democratic norms and principles.
The nature of politics, political
competition and accompanying political practice no longer give room for the
interplay of populace consensus and legitimacy thereby mitigating the
development of political institutions along democratic lines. Emanating from
such a political landscape in the state, elections and leadership succession
processes have become aberrations, inimical to the processes of democratization
in the state. Elections, rather than serve as the umbilical cord that gives life
to political leadership in the state, becomes the gully that separates the
electorate from their leaders.
Election outcomes are determined and
stamped even before Election Day. For example, from our data, 85% of the
respondents never voted in any elections within the period under study. With
the dislocation between those who go out to vote and official election results,
and as claimed by 85.4%, more and more people feel alienated and thus become
apathetic to politics in the state. As is observable, the people of the state
increasingly lose faith in the processes of the state. Arising from this
situation, what spreads among the people of the state is a highly subjective
orientation which contributes further to their alienation from the political
system.
More so, since leadership succession
owes no allegiance to the people nor derives its status from their mandate, it
undermines it whenever possible. The electoral institution no longer serves as
a channel for popular consent but negates democracy and the development of
democratic norms. Deriving from our analysis, it is also determined that the
political class in the state in a bid to maintain their hold on power and the
power play that ensues from such political competition has engulfed political
institutions in the state thus negatively affecting their functionality.
With political actualities in the
state, political institutions progressively lose their functionality due to an
ever increasing subjective outlook on the part of the masses to political
processes in the state. How else do we explain the prevailing orientations
where 70% of the respondents expect the least from the government, and 73%
attach little or no value or importance to their participation and role in the
political processes in the state. All these combine to stall the growth and
viability of political consensus, a participatory regime and an active
political culture, which are all vital ingredients to democratization and
political development and the state. From our evaluation, it is shown that the
force for giving direction to the development of the secularization and
specialization of political institutions in the state rather than emanate from
the consent and mandate of the electorate, are increasingly being influenced by
the existing nature of political competition in the state which at best thwarts
the development of democratic principles.
And given that political institutions
derive their essence from a combination of the existing set of political values
and the written and unwritten rules of the political game and given our knowledge
of political actualities and the nature of the political process in the state,
we are no longer shocked by the level of specialization and secularization of
such institutions in the state as party competition the legislature, the
electoral system all v1ith differing level of influencing the articulation and
aggregation of popular interest, a fact which contributes to the subjective
outlook prevalent among the masses towards the political system in the state.
To the lengths with which our
analysis allowed us, it is evident that what exists in Bayelsa state is a
divorce between the emergence of successive governments and popular consent, a
political culture that is highly subject, lack of a participatory regime and a
more or less inactive civil society all of which contributes to stall the
development of Bayelsa state politically.
The evaluations arising from the
analyzed data thereof validate our hypotheses and objectively show that there
is indeed a cause-effect relationship between the absence of common consent,
the emergent subjective orientations of the people and the low specialization
on political institution in the state.
Conclusion
With regards to the research issues
raised in the study and the analysis arising from the collated data, we accept
the study hypothesis and maintained that there is a significant relationship
between the absence of a popular mandate, the subjective orientation arising
thereof and the low level of specialization and functionality of political
institution and as such low level of political development in Bayelsa state. In
other words, the absence of a popular mandate and the subjective political
orientations of the people of the state arising from their expectation and
cognitions of politics and political processes in the state are responsible for
the nature and low functionality of political institutions in Bayelsa state. A
situation which accounts for the people of the state existing as a political
force that stands only as an externality to the state and its political
processes; a political class which is corrupt selfish and runs the state with
political impunity and is allergic to the development of democratic principles
and a political process that eschews transparency and accountability.
Recommendations
Based on the findings of this study,
we make the following recommendations conscientiously believing that they will
contribute positively to the political development of Bayelsa state.
- That there is the need for civil society organizations in Bayelsa state to actively engage in an aggressive issue based voter education and make adequate preparations for monitoring the forth coming elections in the state as a way of protecting and promoting the viability of democratic institutions and protecting the public mandate expressed by the ballot.
- There is the need for re-orientation on the part of the electorates to overcome the widespread disregard for accountability and transparency of political office holders in the state which fosters the culture of violence in contestations for power.
- We also call for the need to abolish the attachment of incremental financial benefits to political and public office holders which is responsible for the high premium placed on the struggle for the capture of power in the state.
- There is also the need for an increased awareness campaign to enlighten the electorate in the state about the importance of their role and participation in the political process.
References
Ake , C. (1996). Is Africa
Democratizing? Lagos: Malthouse Press
Ake, C. (1979). Social Science as
Imperialism: The Theory of Political Development. Ibadan. University Press
Alagoa, E.J. (1999). The Land and
People of Bayelsa State: Central Niger Delta. Port Harcourt: Onyoma Research
Publications.
Almond, G.A and Powell, G.B. (1966). Comparative Politics: A Developmental
Approach. Boston: Little Brown.
Amatari, Z. and Odondiri, P.G.O.
(1999). State Movements, In Alagoa, E.J (Ed) The Land and People of Bayelsa
State: Central Niger Delta. Port Harcourt: Onyoma Research Publications.
Bayelsa: Bayelsa Paradise Revealed (
2006). Government House, Yenagoa.
Burnell, P. Social Contract
Disambiguation, www.wikipedia.com
Chilton, S. Defining Political
Development. Minnesota Press, www.umn.edu/chilton/articles/DPO
Chilton, S. (1999). Grounding Political Development. 2nd Edition. Minnesota Press, www.umn.edu/chilton/articles
Ekekwe, E. (1996). Class and State
in Nigeria. Lagos: Macmillan
Ibaba, S.I. (2004). Foundations of
Political Science. Port Harcourt:
Amethyst and Colleagues Publishers.
Ibaba, S.I (2005). Understanding the
Niger Delta Crisis. Port Harcourt: Amethyst and Colleagues Publishers.
Locke, J. (2008). Two Treatises of
Civil Government. Gutenberg e-Book
Locke, J. (1960). Two Treatises of
Government. P. Laslett (ed). Cambridge: University Press
Mukherjee , S. and Ramaswamy, S (2007). A History of Political Thought.
Plato to Marx. New Delhi: Prentice Hall.
National Population Commission (NPC)
(2006).Census Official Figures.
Nwosu, OK. S. (2006). States and
Morals: An Introduction. Vol. 1. Owerri: Springfield Publishers
Okoko, K.A.B, and Lazarus, A. (1999). The Creation Of Bayelsa State, In
Alagoa, E.J (ed), The Land and People of
Bayelsa State: Central Niger Delta. Port Harcourt: Onyoma Research
Publications.
Palmer, M. (1999). Dilemmas of Political
Development: An Introduction to Politics of Developing Areas. New York: Peacock
Publications.
Park, H.S (1984). Human Needs and
Political Development: A Dissent to Utopian Solutions. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Petit,P. (1997). Republicans in a
Theory of Freedom and Government. New York: Oxford University Press.
Rousseau, J.J (1967). The Social
Contract and Discourse on the Origins of Inequality. New York: Everyman’s
Library
Tubodenyefa, Z. (2010). Lockean Social Contract and Political
Development: A Case Study of Bayelsa State. An M.Sc Thesis Submitted to
the Department Of Political And
Administrative Studies, Faculty Of Social Sciences, University Of Port
Harcourt, Nigeria.
Varma, S.P. (1975). Modern Political
Theory. India: Nexus Press
No comments:
Post a Comment