God fatherism has become an attribute in modern day Nigerian politics which could either foster democratic stability or retard democratic progress. This study hopes to bring to a clearer understanding, the nature and prevailing characteristics of godfather/godson relationship, the dimension it has assumed in recent times and how it has shaped and influenced the adult citizenry in the country. In order to achieve this objective, secondary data was applied to get a concrete information on the damaging dimension that godfatherism has taken. The problems were observed and it shows that there is high degree of political apathyism among the Nigerian people who fell that their vote does not count. Even those with political interest, now conclude that it is who the godfather wants that actually gets into office. This has gradually affected political participation. From the study, it is recommended that the evil of godfatherism need to be greatly tackled by all and sundry, particularly, the government, and civil society in order to ensure adequate political participation by Nigerians
The human race will never see the end of troubles until political power is entrusted to the lover of wisdom “Plato Republic”. My first approach to the challenge of this topic, is that we have no choice but to seed to return to the basic context in which Nigerians see the godfather or the conflicts as a segment of the political process as well as the figure, standing against the intellectual extrapolations originating in, and also sustained by, the media.
Politics as a concept when considered against its definition by David Easton, could be said to have been in existence as early as any grouping or organization of people which is formal or sometimes when informal. The Eastonian definition posits that politics is the “authoritative allocation of scare values”. This definition could also be viewed from the point of struggle for the political power will to authoritatively allocate these values through the point of influencing the decisions of who gets what, when and how and finally climaxing at the contestation for the voice of veto on the implementation of the decisions taken.
However, from the above brief overview of the concept of politics would reveal some key factors, the values of resources available to be shared amongst members of the scarce and cannot sufficiently satisfy the needs of every member of the group. This is why there is need for an authority which will decide on the allocation of these scarce resources supposedly in accordance with priority of importance. Another factor to be printed out is that since the decision of ‘what’ anyone would get from the system resides at the points of who makes up the authority of allocation, there is therefore clashes and disagreements at these decisions points.
If the two above factors are aggregated, it would become clear that the political process is one that can be figuratively termed, WAR. And if all these conflicts cannot be amicably resolved by way of resolutions, then the system is at a point of crisis.
The trend of ‘political godfatherism’ which in turn is derived from the maker or sustainers of an aspect of reality, a people to whom great importance is attached. We can then see that there is a relationship between godfather and god-child; godchild being a child for whom one takes responsibility by making promises to help grow in a sphere of life, and god-fatherism has become one of the greatest problem facing the Nigerian political system. It leads to corruption because you have to make returns (he that soweth bountifully, reapeth bountifully). The holder of the political position becomes a stooge to his godfather because he that pays the piper dictates the tune. By the time the godson refuse to meet their (godfathers) demand, it is eventually impeachment from political offices (what a man soweth, that he reap).
In the Nigeria fourth republic dispensation (1999 till date) in question, Anenih – Igbinedion, the Sariki – Lawal face-off, Nwobodo –Nnamani quagmire, Adebibu – Ladoja crisis, Uba – Ngige sage and all other godfather – protégé crisis in Nigeria do not only portend great danger to our democratic experiment, but also on the very essence and validity of our existence as a nation. The billions of naira expended by Nigerian godfathers for bankrolling the elections of their godsons, have totally monetized elections in Nigeria, which automatically disqualifies men of honour, character and integrity from holding elected public positions. Without doubt, the phenomenon has assumed this bizarre from since the enthronement of Nigeria civil rule on May 29, 1999. it started with the acrimony that existed between chief Anthony Anenih (godfather) and Lucky Igbinedion (protégé), the governor of Edo State between May 1999, to May 2003. Chief A. Anenih was purported to have endorsed the candidate of Lucky Igbinedion against other contenders as the governor of the state and also bankrolled his campaign expenses. But Lucky Igbinedion failed to reciprocate the gesture of Anenih by not giving him adequate government patronage and by acting in ways as loyal ‘godson’. The episode unfolded itself between Dr. Jim Nwobodo (godfather) and Dr. Chimaroke Nnamani (protégé), of Enugu State. Though the godson eventually subdued the godfather after a fierce struggle for the soul of the state. (Essence Library, Godfatherism in Nigeria Politics, 2004, p. 64).
However, during the second term of President Olusegun Obasanjo, the phenomenon of godfatherism becomes more alarming and dangerous to the survival of Nigeria’s fledgling democracy. In Oyo State, South-West Nigeria, Adebidu (godfather) and Ladoja (protégé) battle for the soul of Oyo, has affected governance in the State and has reenacted political violence which it was famous for. At the long run, Ladoja won the State gubernatorial election, defeating the incumbent governor, Alhaji Lam Adeshina of the Alliance for Democracy (AD). He was eventually sworn in on 29th May, 2003. When Adedibu decided to nominate 80 percent of the new commissioners and special advisers, Ladoja decided to act fast. He tricked Adedibu to go on a much needed rest abroad and he made sure the speaker Moroof Olawale Atilola led House of Assembly immediately approved his list of commissioners that was the end of the pact between Adedibu and Ladoja. The animosity between Adedibu and Ladoja was put into display during the electioneering campaign for the March 27, 2004 Local Government Elections. Ladoja was left to his devices until he was consumed through “impeachment” by the tiger he mounted in 2003. (Celetine Okafor, The Ladoja Impeachment, January 14, 2006).
Another important episode that unfold was that of Chris Uba (godfather) and Chris Ngige (protégé), of Anambra State. After the Oath –taking at the Okija shrine by the godson, he refused to play ball as arranged, looting, bloodletting, gubernatorial abduction and judicial ambushes has become common place activities in Anambra State. Until the 16th March, 2006. The godson (Ngige) was finally removed from office. (Essence Library Godfatherism in Nigeria politics, 2004, p.65).
This crisis was very much reflective of how it has always been in the Nigerian polity as it concerns the political elites in the society. They are high and mighty and have the ability to have their way given any situation and almost every crisis that is observed is an after-effect of the muscle flexing amongst them and amongst themselves.
1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
In the proceeding piece of introduction to this work, sufficient and hear exhaustive description and highlights of the various points and forms of manifestation political conflicts in Nigeria fourth republic, was attempted. This was done alongside with the brief overview of the concept “godfatherism” and “political conflicts” in any system, society or political grouping while also considering the frequency of these crisis situations in Nigeria as a nation. Haven looked at the forms of manifestation of the concept. It is proper that we attempt to state the problem(s) that created a sustaining environment for these crisis to blew and thrive.
The first problem could be spotted from the analysis of the above listed political conflicts saga, is that of widespread corruption which has a partner in unpatriotism. Quite consistently, Nigeria has been considered to be among the first five most corruption, fueled by greed for the concept of patriotism, that has resulted in the average Nigeria seeing governance and government as a vehicle for exploitation and self-aggrandizement. So while the people crave for a leadership of lift maintain mercantilism as their watchword and do everything in the hope of monetary gains and kickback. Anambra, Oyo, Enugu, Edo, etc. are still a classic example of this situation.
The second problem easily identifiable in the entire case scenario of the Oyo, Anambra, Kwara, Edo, Borno, Akwa Ibom etc political conflicts is “Elitism”. While the consideration of elitism as a problem would not be universally accepted.
Another problem is one that could be said to be an offshoot of the proceeding problem concept, political godfatherism. Political godfatherism is a concept that although is widely in practice in all parts of the world, have assumed disturbing and worrying dimensions and proportions in the nation today. It has become pertinent to have strong political godfathers before considering running for any elective office and even political appointments. Unfortunately, as it was in Anambra, Oyo, Edo, etc. most of these godfathers offer the services of their support only in anticipation of financial kickbacks that are alarmingly huge and extravagant and opposed to the expected norm of service to the people.
1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
(1) To attempt a disclosure of the Godfatherism and effects of political conflicts by examining the various identifiable causes and effects of Edo State conflict in Nigeria fourth republic.
(2) To firmly establish the fact that political conflicts had become Nigeria’s consistent bedfellow, with a vivid examination of Edo State Government crisis.
(3) And finally, to proffer a panacea to the identified causes of these political conflicts in order to prevent a continuance of its sporadic frequency in Nigeria.
1.4 RESEARCH QUESTION
For the successful completion of the study, the following research questions were formulated:
(i) Do godfatherism have any influence in Nigerian politics?
(ii) Does godfatherism have any effect on the economic development of the state?
(iii) What is the relationship between godfatherism and delivery of dividend of democracy in Nigeria?
(iv) What is the role of godfatherism on democratic consolidation?
1.5 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
The essence of this study is self-explaining in the presentation of the various facts that constitute the crisis of Edo State in question. This study seeks to provide us with detailed account of these state crisis and indepth and exhaustive (as much as possible) analysis of the various factors that comes into play in the saga. This is in the view to finding a lasting solution and thus preventing a reoccurrence of the anomaly in the Nigerian polity.
It is also not in doubt that other scholars could further explore this area of research, just like a few others have done before me, using this work/study as a launch pad. This could be by lending strength and support to some of the ideas or hypothesis that this work seeks to propagate. If could also be by improving in some or all of the errors that I may have unavoidably made in the course of this research. All of these would aid in navigating observers and future researcher of this topic of study, towards the best stock of intellectually analytic compilation on the topic. The end of all these would in no doubt be useful in preventing a future repetition of the errors that are presently a ban on our development in present day.
Finally, it is also noted that this work could be considered as an addition to the bulk of academic and intellectual endeavours and submissions available on this topic and on related topics, particularly in Nigeria. In the final analysis, this work would be seen as another beam of light thrown in the direction of various political upheavals that has bedeviled the country especially in recent times.
1.6 SCOPE AND LIMITATION OF THE STUDY
Although the problem of political conflicts is one that is universally acknowledged and pondered upon, the scope of this particular research work would be limited to Edo State in Nigeria and the time frame of study would be the fourth republic (1999 – till date).
The reason for this is because the happenings in the state reflect the trend that being perpetuated nationally. Moreover, any attempt at proffering a long lasting solution to the problem, it is hoped, would also have a bearing on the entire nation.
However, the study has some constrained and limitations which are:
(a)Availability of research material: The research material available to the researcher is insufficient thereby limiting the study.
(b)Time: The time frame allocated to the study does not enhance wider coverage as the researcher has to combine other academic activities and examinations with the study.
(c)Finance: The finance available for the research work does not allow for wider coverage as resources are very limited as the researcher has other academic bills to cover.
The nature of this research makes it expedient that a secondary source of data is undertaken in order to provide relevant data, effort will be made to collect secondary sources in literature such as book, magazines, newspapers, journals, internet and other similar materials. The principal method used will be questionnaires which will be given to voters in Oredo Local Government Area of Edo State, Nigeria – primary source
1.8 DEFINITION OF TERMS
It is the capacity to have an effect on the character, development or behavior of someone or something or the effect itself.
Godfatherism is a symbiotic relationship between two persons namely; the godfather and the godson where the godfather uses his political power and wealth to secure political position for the godson.
The activities associated with the governance of a country or area especially the debate between parties having power.
Political mobilization is defined as the actors attempt to influence the existing distribution of power. A directional variable is introduced in order to define more precisely the type of relationship which develops between individuals and parties.