SKC Ogbonnia
Before assuming the presidency in May 2015, Muhammadu Buhari rightly proclaimed that “corruption will kill Nigeria, unless Nigeria kills corruption.” Unfortunately, however, after barely one year in office, a diverse segment of the population began to openly pray for the freedom of corruption, in-so-far there is food on the table.
By December 2016, the Nigerian legislature answered by formally introducing a bill to amend the Constitution to grant its members immunity or, more plainly, the unrestrained freedom from prosecution against corrupt practices. As if the circus lacks in folly, the Senate followed by mysteriously rejecting the president’s nominee to head the war on corruption. But this whole dilemma has roots deeper than the ordinary eye can meet.
Not long ago, the transition to a democratic government in 1999, after years of military rule, seemed like the ultimate game-changer. There was a semblance of freedom in most areas of national life. It then seemed the citizens had finally become free from the shackles of dictatorship that had strangled the country for ages. But without needing to hold one’s breath, a more complex problem soon emerged: The way the political elites conceived the freedom turned out to be upside-down.
The crux of the matter is that the very practice of Nigeria’s democracy also allowed the leaders the freedom to do as they chose. In the process, they chose to revert back to the military style of dictatorship, leading to the gross mismanagement of resources and human right abuses.
This culture of impunity under a democratic setting resulted in massive corruption. Different attempts by successive governments to combat the societal ill were openly frustrated at the courts, where some unique tenets of freedom and rule of law were employed to produce unsavoury outcomes. Despite the fact that Nigeria was consistently ranked near the top of the global corruption index, no major politician served a jail term on the African soil from 2008 to 2015, apart from the lone case of Olabode George. Not surprisingly, freedom of corruption became the order of the day. With the price of crude oil then already beginning to take a nose dive, it was only a matter of time before the national economy would crumble.
That was the exact situation in 2015 when the masses beckoned back Buhari for salvation. For many, Buhari was a ramrod-straight ex-general whose austere image as well as anti-corruption track record were best suited to oust a weak and pliable incumbent president in Goodluck Jonathan.
Since assuming the office, however, Buhari’s war against corruption has been a vain pursuit. Any attempt by the president to introduce far-reaching anti-corruption measures is readily resisted, with the opposition always clinging to one form of freedom or the other. A current example is the issue of special courts being canvassed by the president to expedite corrupt cases. Of course, the delay in setting up the courts has nothing to do with the lack of human resources, especially in a country where thousands of jobless lawyers roam the streets.
The special courts, instead, are to de-oxidise the existing culture where judges and politicians combine to sustain freedom for corrupt leaders through frivolous adjournments, plea bargains, and state pardons. Regrettably, the critics of the special courts, most of who constitute the first line of defense for the corrupt oligarchy, quickly pounded on the president, digging out all sorts of legal jargons to ridicule the initiative. They would helm the argument by invoking the independence of the judicial branch and, of course, appeal to the broader democratic freedom. But while this warped notion of freedom may seem to favour those in the position of power, it is definitely failing Nigeria as a whole.
Lampooning only the opposition for the clog in the wheel of Buhari’s change agenda is an injustice to human conscience. The president has to share part of the blame. He effortlessly ruptured the balloon of public goodwill initially inflated by a cocktail of desire for change and the myth of a legendary track record.
Apart from the slow pace of his government, Buhari forgot there is always a delicate balance between freedom and authority. His early missteps, particularly the mode of political appointments, the refusal to obey court orders, and lack of transparency, simply evoked a frightening nostalgia of the dictatorial tendencies that doomed his military regime. Such excesses, or rather abuse of freedom, coupled with the harsh economic condition on the ground, were all the corrupt oligarchy needed to gain the public support to subdue the president.
The aim here is by no means to circumvent the role of freedom in democracy. Viewed in its totality, freedom is not only essential for democracy, it is also vitally important for any human or organisational development. But however indispensable it might seem, the cardinal truth is that in democracy as we know it, neither the freedom nor the liberty is rooted in an abstract sense where the leaders or the followers are free to do as they please.
Often ignored in the contemporary discussions of Nigerian democracy is the ageless adage: every coin has two sides. There are positive and negative kinds of freedom. On the one hand, positive freedom refers to where people are free to engage in endeavours towards the common good. It goes with moderation, responsibility, and accountability.
Importantly, positive freedom is open to all—not just the sole province of the leaders themselves. On the other hand, negative freedom typifies the prevailing Nigerian situation where leaders freely engage in acts inimical to the common good. Such negative freedom allows Nigerian leaders to hide behind all sorts of rule of law to loot the public treasury without qualms.
Change does not come easy, especially in an environment where most processes are fraught with rules of law tightly woven with negative freedoms. Yet, there is hope. President Buhari can still reset by cautiously navigating through the prevailing rules of law while strengthening the system to wipe out the negative freedoms undermining the leadership processes. But any reset requires a change in style. What Nigerians sought and voted for in 2015 and hope to see today is a resolute, just, and transparent leader capable of demonstrating serious consequences for corrupt practices regardless of whose ox is gored.
Ogbonnia wrote from Houston, Texas via [email protected]
