As a hailstorm of condemnation and criticism continue to trail the military following last weekend’s postponement of the February general elections, the military to whom much has been given; and from whom much is expected, went into damage-control mode, reiterating its commitment to support the electoral process and safeguard the nation’s democracy. The assurance was contained in a statement by the Director of Defence Information, Maj-Gen. Chris Olukolade, who stressed that the Armed Forces would remain professional, apolitical and non-partisan in all operations or activities before, during and after the forthcoming elections. Such tepid, if not belated assurances is an affront on the intelligence of Nigerians; a majority of who saw the role of the security agencies in the poll shift as that of Esau’s hand and Jacob’s voice. Otherwise stated, the military merely acted the script prepared by the Presidency and Nigerians are not fooled.
Olukolade maintained that the military was mindful of its constitutional responsibilities and would not depart from it, as it had demonstrated in previous elections. He promised that the March polls would not be different and reminded all military personnel of their service oath and solemn commitment to protect the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria even while remaining loyal to constituted authorities in the country. While also recognizing the peculiarity of the current security challenges, the nation’s larger interest and her security was sacrosanct and beyond any political expediency or ulterior consideration, as such ; “no excuse will be acceptable for any act of commission or omission that tends to compromise the law or the electoral process as well as decent conduct or judgment on the part of any service personnel while discharging duties related to elections in any part of the country,” the statement warned.
While these elections may turn out to be a most momentous event in Nigeria’s history, a lot depends on the kind of country Nigerians and their leaders want, and the commitment with which they pursue that vision. This is why Olukolade’s assurances raise certain posers that called into question the integrity and neutrality of the security agencies. The standing view is that the security chiefs blackmailed and arm-twisted the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Attahiru Jega, to postpone the elections because Olukolade’s selective amnesia is not borne out by the facts leading up to the poll shift and Nigerians have every reason to be worried, given previous antecedents about the military’s role in politics.
Just for the records, on February 2, twelve days before the vote and despite the Boko Haram insurgency in the North East, the entire military high command assured the nation of their readiness to provide security for the elections. During the National Peace Committee meeting in Abuja grouping political parties, the security chiefs led by the Chief of Defence Staff, Air Marshall Alex Badeh gave unequivocal assurances of the armed forces’ readiness for the elections. Badeh averred that “even though we are busy in the North East, we also have capabilities across the nation.” At that same meeting, Chief of Army Staff, General Kenneth Minimah echoed Badeh on the army’s readiness to ensure security, before, during and after the elections. Also speaking at that meeting, the Chief of Air Staff, Air Marshall Adesola Amosun disclosed that election materials were already being distributed to the states; and that everything was on course to meet the February 14 deadline. It was thus with a sense of shock and bewilderment that Nigerians learnt three days later, that the same security chiefs had written to INEC saying they could not guarantee security unless the vote was delayed six weeks. Can Olukolade tell Nigerians what happened in those 72 hours that brought about this complete volte face?
And while we are at it, Nigerians deserve an explanation about the audio tape released by the self-exiled Captain Sagir Koli, detailing how the presidency and the army high command last June used the military, led by Brigadier-General Aliyu Momoh, to rig the Ekiti gubernatorial election in favor of the ruling party candidate, Ayo Fayose; with top ranking military officials like then Minister of State (Defence); Abduljelil Adesiyan, and Minster of Police Affairs; Iyiola Omisore playing cannon fodder. It’s a shame!
The Nigerian Constitution is very clear about the role of the military, who by tradition, are supposed to be detached and unbiased in the leadership selection process. Specifically, Sections 217 (1-3) and 218 (1-4) of the 1999 Constitution detail the processes regarding the establishment, purpose and control of the armed forces of Nigeria, deployable for defending the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the nation against any form of aggression. These sections also demand that the military be subjected to civil authorities. This explains why the President is constitutionally the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, with powers to appoint service chiefs and the operational deployment of the military.
While as commander-in-chief, the president has substantial powers over the military, it is important that adequate precautionary measures are taken not to denigrate the original intentions of the constitution in the application of such powers. From all indications, what happened with the poll shift is that security chiefs simply torpedoed the democratic process on the directive of the President Jonathan. This sets a very dangerous precedent because these constitutional measures are instituted to ensure a stable polity by subjecting the military to civil authorities and to maintain the loyalty of the armed forces to the President as Commander-in-Chief not as a partisan in any election. Abusing these powers, for whatever reason, could destroy the core values and traditions of the military, the consequences of which can be dire for the entire country.
The greatest threat to Nigerian democracy is the abusive use of incumbency for partisan political advantage. Taking the military out of politics is therefore more than an urgent national imperative. Using the military for electoral purposes is a strategy whose expiration date has long passed. Apart from creating the impression that civilians are unable to govern, it harbors grave dangers, beyond compromising the military’s integrity. Granted that deploying the military for elections can yield short-term gains, it is, indeed, a dangerous path to the politicization, with long-term collateral damage to the nation, most notably the destruction of a fundamental institution of the state. The obnoxious practice of heavily armed parading soldiers on the streets before, during and after elections is counterproductive, with adverse effect on the level of political participation, most especially voter turnout.
If the military must be deployed in exceptional circumstances, it must be on the request of the police to avert certain security threats beyond the police’s capability. The police and other paramilitary agencies are better positioned and constitutionally mandated to deal with matters of internal security, including elections. If these agencies are deficient, all necessary measures must be taken to adequately equip the police to cope with the challenges of internal security, including elections security. This is an ideal that must be pursued by the next administration for the good of the nation.
