MONEY POLITICS AND DEMOCRATIC DEVELOPMENT IN NIGERIA: AN ASSESSMENT OF AKWA IBOM STATE, 2015 – 2019

CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the Study
All elections in Nigeria have historically been characterized by electoral irregularities (Danjibo & Oladeji, 2007). It is noteworthy that the 1961 regional elections; 1964 general election; 1965 Western House of Assembly election; and 1979, 1983, 1979, 1999, 2003, and 2007 general elections were characterized by electoral malpractice (Awopeju, 2011). It is evident that candidates and political parties adopt various means or strategies to rig elections in Nigeria (Ajayi, 2006). They corrupt the electoral process with vote-buying (Echegaray, 2015). Incumbent governments obtain public funds while in power to maximize vote-buying during elections (Devadoss & Luckstead, 2016).
Paradoxically, money itself has become a dominant factor in African politics. Money seems to have taken the centre stage in the political process in most countries and in the Nigerian politics. It is, sadly, now playing an increasingly critical role. It even appears to be so dominant in the electoral process to such an extent that the word ‘money politics’ with a pejorative connotation, has crept into the country’s political lexicon. It is now a critical variable when assessing the level of political corruption in the country.
Many Scholars such as Davies, (2005), Walecki (2006), Saliu (2008), Ojo (2006) have written on money politics and democratic Development in Nigerian politics because of the devastating impact of the phenomenon on the body politics. Money politics can be defined as the phenomenon in the Nigerian electoral process whereby contenders for elective positions use money or money is used on their behalf as an inducement to mobilize and get the support of the electorates which is not based on persuading the electorates to vote according to their wish and conviction but on the force of money that has changed hands. Related to this, is outright vote-buying. Vote-buying in its literal sense, is a simple economic exchange (Ovwasa, 2013).
The Nigerian state often experiences governmental instability in the forms of bad policy options and implementation. The basic necessities of life such as electricity supply, water supply, employment and quality education are inadequate in the Nigerian society. Democracy which is adjudged to be the best form of government all over the world is also being constantly assaulted in Nigeria due to the phenomenon of money politics and democratic Development. Although, Nigeria enthroned democratic governance in the Fourth Republic on May 29th, 1999, the dividends of democracy to the people are very scanty and far apart. This is because the concept and practice of democracy appears to be at variance in Nigeria. Actually, money and democratic Development have vitiated the good qualities of democracy in the country. In fact, the destructive power of money politics has been fingered as one of the factors that undermine good governance in Nigeria.
The role that money and democratic Development play in Nigeria politics today have earned them a dominant position in the election of officers into position of authority where they can authoritatively decide who gets what, when and how. Money seems to have taken the center stage in the political process in most countries and in Nigerian politics. It is, sadly, now playing an increasing critical role to such extent that the word, ‘money politics’ with a pejorative connotation, have crept into the country’s political lexicon”, (Davies: 2006:5). The problem with this situation is that the electoral process is often compromised resulting in elections not being free and fair. It is pertinent to observe that it is not in any way being suggested that the use of money by political parties or any person or group of persons in politics has inherent corruptive influence. The truth is that, money is needed for sundry services and logistics such as mobilization for political campaigns and rallies, printing of posters and manifestoes, production of party emblems and other symbols etc. The only worry, however, is the noticeable corrupting influence of money and vote-buying, and their negative impact on good governance in Nigeria.
1.2 Statement of the Problem
Political parties use various illegal means to ensure electoral success in Nigeria (Oromareghake, 2013). Vote-buying and vote-selling are especially prominent in then Nigerian electoral space (Lucky, 2013). They are the bane of authentic electoral outcomes in Nigeria. Vote-selling is subtle and intrinsically linked to the electoral successes of political parties at all levels of the electoral process. Jensen and Justesen (2014) and Kramon (2013) contended that vote-buying is widespread in many emerging democracies. Scholars use various definitions for vote-buying and vote-selling. Lack of uniformity in definitions of these phenomena among scholars has led to definitional ambiguity with respect to vote-buying, vote-selling, and clientelism (Nichter, 2014). It is arguable that pre-election promises and vote-buying are on the same pedestal in regard to the adverse effects they have on the electoral and democratic process. Lippert-Rasmussen (2011) pointed out that some researchers take the view that vote-buying is antithetical to good democratic governance, whereas others opine that vote-buying is similar to election promises, which are good for democracy. He asserted that vote-buying and election promises equally “distort democratic deliberation” and “violate the norm of political equality” (Lippert-Rasmussen, 2011, p. 144).
Further, there is no consensus on the factors that precipitate vote-selling. Some researchers have opined that vote-buying is a product of poverty, illiteracy, unemployment, old age, early-stage democratization, and/or a winner-take-all electoral system (Danjibo & Oladeji, 2007; Kennedy, 2010; Onapajo et al., 2015; Owen, 2013). In Nigeria, money politics and democratic development is one major challenge that confront democratic governance. The problem of money politics and democratic development has affected development in our country. The money used in the election is often recovered before any other thing is been done. Most politicians who preferred to use money to buy votes from the electorate cannot meet their daily needs, the politician gain their way and buy the conscience of the electorate and thereby bring leadership failure.
It is in the light of the above that this paper come up to address the problem of money politics and democratic development in the Nigerian politics political parties use various illegal means to ensure electoral success in Nigeria (Oromareghake, 2013). Money politics are especially prominent in the Nigerian electoral space (Lucky, 2013). They are the bane of authentic electoral outcomes in Nigeria. Vote-selling is subtle and intrinsically linked to the electoral successes of political parties at all levels of the electoral process. Jensen and Justesen (2014) and Kramon (2013) contended that money politics is widespread in many emerging democracies. In Akwa Ibom State like other states in Nigeria, elections have been surrounded with so many irregularities with money as the major factor especially with respect to vote-buying, vote-selling, and clientelism. It is arguable that pre-election promises and vote-buying are on the same pedestal in regard to the adverse effects they have on the electoral and democratic process. Lippert-Rasmussen (2011) pointed out that some researchers take the view that money politics is antithetical to good democratic governance, whereas others opine that money politics is similar to election promises, which are good for democracy. He asserted that money politics and election promises equally “distort democratic deliberation” and “violate the norm of democratic development (Lippert-Rasmussen, 2011:144). Further, there is no consensus on the factors that precipitate money politics. Some researchers have opined that money politics is a product of poverty, illiteracy, unemployment, old age, early-stage democratization, and/or a winner-take-all electoral system (Danjibo & Oladeji, 2007; Kennedy, 2010; Onapajo et al., 2015; Owen, 2013).
Democracy entails the conception of election as the means of selecting political decision makers. Election is described as the pillar of democracy. Election is the back born of democracy and there is no democracy in the absent of election (Nnoli, O. 2006). Nigeria is a country with a long history of military rule while democracy is seen as the most desirable and best system of government. Election in Nigeria is characterized by multi-party system of politics and systematic institutional arrangement. An understanding of the system of Nigeria elections, it needs a synergy provided by the link against the background of the previous election in Nigeria. Money needed for democracy because much of its political activity simply could not take place without it. Money cannot be kept aside in the political process; campaigns cost money, as political office aspirants need funds to properly remunerate their staff. Fox pointed out that money is needed to prints brochures, pamphlets, radio and television adverts, renting space for campaign offices (Fox 2010).