CHAPTER ONE
Background to the Study
Rubin, et. al. (1994) defines crises ―as a perceived divergence of interests or beliefs that the parties’ current aspirations cannot be achieved simultaneously. It can manifest itself in many forms, some of which may be violent and inflict pain and suffering on both parties in crises and to other people who may not be directly involved, due to its spillover effect. Wolff (2006:2) also observes that ―crises is a situation in which two or more actors pursue incompatible, yet from their individual perspectives entirely just goals‖. Crises ―is a process that begins when one party perceives that another party has negatively affected, or is about to negatively affects something that the first party cares about‖ (Robbins, 1998). The aim of every party in a crises situation is to achieve values or goals dear to it. Hence, each of the party in crises employ moves and counter-moves to displace each other as they both struggle to achieve the valued resources, which is/are the object/s of contention. Furthermore, crises occur when individuals or groups are entangled in the pursuit of incompatible goals. However, crises have the potential to assume functional or dysfunctional outcomes, depending on how the parties in a crisis perceive the crises and respond to it. On one hand, if the perception of the parties to crises is positive, then their response to the crises would be constructive and positive – vice versa. Functional crisess engender creativity, positive growth and development, mutual understanding and healthy relationship between individuals and groups. According to Tjosvold (1997), crises may be perceived as inevitable in successful organizations‘, because crisess serve as a mechanism for engineering social relationship in groups and organizations for positive growth and increased productivity. While on the other hand, dysfunctional crisess causes disunity, hinder progress and development, affect decision making, create animosity and hatred between individuals and within or between groups. For the purpose of this paper, it is important that an attempt is made to define intra-party crises. From a political view point, Kenneth Boulding (1963: 5) defines crises ―as a situation of competition in which the parties are aware of the incompatibility of potential future positions and in which each party wishes to occupy a position that is incompatible with the wishes of the other. This definition vividly describes the nature of intra-party crises. But it is still necessary to ask, what is intra-party crises? Intra-party crises can be defined as a crises which occurs when members of the same political party pursue incompatible political goals or try to influence the decision making process of the party to their advantage. Intra-party crises often plays out in the selection of members for elective positions both within and outside the party. Political party as a social group cannot avoid crises because where ever people come together to associate even when they do so to pursue common interest, tendencies are that members of such group would pursue their personal interests rather than the group‘s interest. However, what is important is that the group members’ interests should be subordinated to the larger interest of the group. As Dudley (1973) argues that ―one basic characteristic common to all human organization is the interaction and interdependence among their members. Usually, political parties try to aggregate the varying interests of their members and articulate a unified front for achieving party‘s objectives. The research seeks to investigate internal party crisis and electoral success in Nigeria a study of pdp in ondo 2016 governorship election.
1.2 Statement of the Problem
A political system cannot be adjudged democratic if it is deprived of the central role of political parties in its political process. The reason is that political parties are the medium for the expression of a vital feature of the democratic process. Internal party relations are important because it determine the health and resilience of the party system and by extension the outcome of democracy and the nature of the political system itself. Similarly, Mersel (2006) stresses that various democracies in recent times have faced the problem of non-democratic political parties, most parties only focus on outside activities, i.e elections into public offices, neglecting internal planning and organization. Mersel argues that to find out if political party is non-democratic, consideration should be paid to party’s goals and practices. In the case of Nigeria’s political parties, majority of them often ignore essential elements such as their internal structures, including effective communication. Political parties have argued too that they are democratic, maybe only their external operations, but what about their internal organizational functions. The interaction between parties and democracies should reflect the adherence not only to democratic goals and actions but also to internal democratic structures. The problem confronting the research is to appraise internal party crisis and electoral success in Nigeria a study of pdp in ondo 2016 governorship election.
1.3 Objectives of the Study
To determine the effect of internal party crisis on electoral success in Nigeria a study of pdp in ondo 2016 governorship election.
1.4 Research Questions
What is internal party crisis and electoral success in Nigeria?
What is the effect of internal party crisis on electoral success in Nigeria?
What is effect of internal party crisis on electoral success in pdp ondo 2016 governorship election?
1.5 Significance of the Study
The study shall proffer an appraisal of the effect of Internal party crisis on electoral success in Nigeria a study of pdp in ondo 2016 governorship election.
1.6 Research Hypothesis
Ho The effect of internal party crisis of pdp on electoral success in ondo 2016 governorship election is high
Hi The effect of internal party crisis of pdp on electoral success in ondo 2016 governorship election is low.
1.7 Scope of the Study
The study focuses on the appraisal of internal party crisis and electoral success in Nigeria a study of pdp in ondo 2016 governorship election.
1.8 Limitations of the Study
The study was confronted by some constraints including logistics and geographical factors.
1.9 Definition of Terms
INTERNAL PARTY DEMOCRACY
Internal party democracy is a term used to describe a wide range of means for including party members in internal party deliberation and decision making.
INTERNAL PARTY CRISIS AND ELECTORAL SUCCESS IN NIGERIA (A STUDY OF PDP IN ONDO 2016 GOVERNORSHIP ELECTION)
