NAME: FATUNMIBI FAVOUR OLUWASEMILOORE

MATRIC NUMBER: 198746

DEPARTMENT: ADULT EDUCATION

FACULTY: EDUCATION

COURSE CODE: POS411

DATE: 4TH JUNE 2021.

ASSIGNMENT QUESTION:

QUESTION 2: DEPLOY ANY THEORY OF YOUR CHOICE FOR ANALYZING A

CONTEMPORARY SOCIO-ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL ISSUE IN A COUNTRY OF
YOUR CHOICE.

APPLYING THE SYSTEMS THEORY IN POLITICAL ANALYSIS TO ANALYZE

ELECTORAL MALPRACTICES IN NIGERIA
 INTRODUCTION
As Dr Moses T. Aluaigba (2016) aptly put it, the conduct of free and fair elections provides a
yardstick to measure the quality of democracy in a country. Credible elections are the platform
on which the populace partakes in democracy by electing representatives of their choice as
public office holders. This process enhances the confidence of voters in democratisation, and
rekindles the prospect of consolidating democratic institutions, particularly in democratising
states. The conduct of elections in Nigeria since 1999 has been inundated with spiralling
malpractices in the electioneering process. The trend has worsened with each round of
elections, as typified by the 1999, 2003 and 2007 polls. During these three elections, rigging,
violence and intimidation flourished. He further argued that it is not the regularity of elections
that can strengthen democratic heritage in Nigeria, but how transparent the country’s electoral
process is.

THE SYSTEMS THEORY IN POLITICAL SCIENCE

A system is a body of interdependent parts that work together to achieve a common goal. The
systems theory in political science is a broad descriptive theory of how the various parts and
levels of a political system interact with each other. The central idea of systems analysis is
based on an analogy with biology: just as the heart, lungs, and blood function as a whole, so do
the components of social and political systems. When one component changes or comes under
stress, the other components will adjust to compensate.

The adaptation of system theory to political science was first conceived by David Easton in
1953. In simple terms, Easton's behavioral approach to politics, proposed that a political system
could be seen as a delimited (i.e. all political systems have precise boundaries) and fluid
(changing) system of steps in decision making. He saw it as integrating all activities through
which social policy is formulated and executed—that is, the political system is the policy-making
process.

The policymaking process basically follows the following steps:

 Step 1: Circumstances in the social or physical environment surrounding a political

system produce "demands" from the electorate and "supports" for action or the status
quo are directed as "inputs" towards the political system, through political behavior,
elections, polls and other forms of political participation. e.g people can ask for a more
transparent electoral body.
 Step 2: These demands and supporting groups stimulate action in a political system,
leading to decisions or "outputs" directed at some aspect of the surrounding social or
 physical environment.e.g the National Assembly may edit the policy guiding the
counting and reporting of election results.
 Step 3: After a decision or output is made (e.g., a specific policy), it interacts with its
environment, and if it produces change in the environment, there are "outcomes." E.g. if
the National Assembly implements a more transparent counting and reporting system
during elections, it will be applied during the next election and then evaluated to see its
effectiveness.
 Step 4: When a new policy interacts with its environment, outcomes may generate new
demands or supports and groups in support or against the policy ("feedback") or a new
policy on some related matter.e.g. if the transparent reporting system solves the
problems of electoral malpractices, then the people send support and approval to the
government as feedback. If not, they send another demand for a more effective
solution.
 Step 5: Feedback, leads back to Step 1, forming a never-ending cycle.

ELECTORAL MALPRACTICES IN NIGERIA

According to Moses T. Aluaigba (2016), electoral malpractice generally refers to an instance
where acceptable norms and principles that confer credibility on elections are desecrated; and
in their place duplicity, falsehood, manipulation and cheating by any means are deployed to
sway the outcome of elections. Ezeani (2005) defines electoral malpractice as ‘illegalities
committed by government, officials responsible for the conduct of elections, political parties,
groups or individuals with sinister intention to influence an election in favour of a candidate(s)’
(Ezeani 2005, p. 415). Birch (2011) divides electoral malpractices – which she calls ‘electoral
corruption’ – into three categories. They are malpractices that relate to the legal framework,
malpractice related to preference formation, and malpractices centred on electoral
administration. Electoral malpractice in any form is anathema to democracy because of its
retrogressive effect on the quality of democracy in a country. As a rule, electoral malpractices
are not condoned anywhere in the world but rather censured. Abhorrence of electoral
malpractice is necessary. If malpractices such as winning elections through rigging, massive use
of money, use of violence against political adversaries and so on are unbridled, the tendency is
for a negative culture of ‘political larceny’ to be inculcated by politicians. This ultimately dilutes
the potency of elections as a means of peaceful transfer of political power and as a tool to
legitimise political power.
In every country where democracy thrives, stringent laws exist to guide the conduct of polls.
However, because it is through elections that people decide who occupies particular elective
public offices, politicians and groups sometimes resort to the use of vile unscrupulous methods
to win elections. Therefore, it behoves any political entity to put in place rules and regulations
that all stakeholders in the electoral process must obey. These regulations also spell out the
punishment to be meted out to any ailing individual and group that engages in electoral
malpractice. In Nigeria, the legal framework that defines how elections in the country are
conducted, what constitutes electoral offences, and how offenders are punished is found in the
Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 and the Electoral Act 2010, as amended.
The 1999 Constitution deals mainly with the structures necessary for the conduct of elections
for the various political offices in Nigeria and the constitution of the electoral body, the
Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as well as Election Tribunals. By contrast,
the Electoral Act 2010 contains detailed definitions of electoral malpractices and the
punishment accrued to them.

Since the re-emergence of democracy in Nigeria in the Fourth Republic, the country has
conducted six nationwide elections (in 1999, 2003, 2007, 2011, 2015 and 2019), all of which
were marred with varying degrees and forms of malpractice. According to Yagboyaju (2011 pg.
93), the inference from the conduct and outcome of these elections is that Nigeria is yet to
demonstrate the attributes of a growing democracy. It is from this statement made by
Yagboyaju that the need is presented for the systems theory to be applied to understand the
electoral malpractice problem and profer a solution to it.

A democracy is a political system that allows citizens to participate in the activities of the
government by choosing representatives to govern on their behalf and also by allowing them to
influence government decisions through public opinion measured by polls and other means.
Many people have examined the electoral malpractice problem in Nigeria and concluded that
the source of it is the existence and influence of certain selfish and corrupt individuals sitting at
the helm of power, especially the control of election results. While this is not a lie, it is not the
fundamental cause of the problem.

APPLYING THE SYSTEMS THEORY IN POLITICAL ANALYSIS TO ANALYZE

ELECTORAL MALPRACTICES IN NIGERIA
Electoral malpractices in Nigeria is a major problem at the macro-political level. It affects the
entire state and governmental process. However, elections in Nigeria are not conducted at the
whims and call of a single individual or even a group of people, no matter how powerful they
are. Therefore, the problem is not caused by individuals, although they are instruments of
malpractice. The problem is much more a systemic problem.

At this juncture, many "vocational political analysts" would jump to the conclusion that the
cause of prevailing electors malpractice in Nigeria is the corruption within the government
system. While this is as well a fact to some extent, it is still not the root cause of the problem.

The errors prevalent in the above "analyses" is that they are neither empirical nor theoretical.
That they are not empirical means they are not based on confirmed facts and figures. They are
mainly postulations made from the subjective opinions of individuals. That they are not
theoretical means their analyses does not draw its framework from any theory of political
analysis. Neither does it follow a logical process of establishing a new theory. Therefore, to
have accurate and effective analysis, we need to apply the knowledge derived from theories
generated from past verified studies.

 The genesis of the problem is not in the processing stage.

David Easton's systems theory divides the political system along the lines of the policymaking
process. In this system, there are four principal stages:

a. The input (demands, support)

b. The processing in the political system
c. The output (policy, decisions, actions)
d. The feedback
The input stage is done principally by the citizens especially the masses who are being
governed. The government only acts on what the citizens input. Those who blame the
individual manipulation within the electoral system or the corruption of the entire electoral
system for the prevalence of electoral malpractices have bypassed the input stage and placed
all the fault on the processing, which is done by the govern. Of course, this is only natural since
human being naturally look to blame everyone else except themselves for failure.

 The whole process is dependent on the input

A careful perusal of the systems theory propounded by David Easton will open the eyes of the
observer to see that the entire political process is dependent on the input brought into the
system, and not the processing point. It is the input of the citizens that determines the
deliberation of the policymaking body and as well sets a course for the outcome of their
deliberation, which are policies. It is also the feedback given again through the input system
that makes the processing point know if it has successfully discharged its duties to the
satisfaction of the electorate.

The processing system can only become rogue when the input system fails to send in its own
part. The government can only become corrupt and electoral malpractice can only become
prevalent when the citizens do not send in quality demands and evaluations of the actions of
the government.

According to the Social Contract Theory, human beings are naturally selfish and brutish and
therefore need to be placed under strict control and monitoring. The individuals in the
processing unit of government are not exempted from this law. According to Max Weber,
power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. When power is left unchecked,
unmonitored and unbalanced, the wielder of power becomes susceptible to corruption. The
corruption within the government which gave rise to persistent and prevalent electoral
malpractices could only have happened because the input from the citizens which was
supposed to serve as a check to the power of the government officials was absent.

In Nigeria, no president has ever been impeached. The people hardly call for strict monitoring
measures on the representatives elected into power. The only time when Nigerians usually
exercise their political rights is during general elections for the major offices of the government.
Such a loose political participation births a government that is not kept under watch. This lack
of monitoring in turn breeds corruption and malpractices.

There are many ways to get the government to take action on a matter along the lines of the
demands of the people. Elections are not the only methods of political participation or
measures of public opinion. It has, after all, been proven with evidence that the government
can be forced to take action by the people even without elections.

The most recent demonstration of this fact is the nationwide "END-SARS" protests that were
staged in October 2020. Although, repeatedly, Nigerians had over the years demanded the
disbandment of the SARS Unit in the law enforcement, yet the government continued to ignore
those demands. However, when the peaceful protest were staged, the government was backed
into a corner where it was forced to comply with the demands of the people. This proves that
government policies and actions can be influenced by the people through a strong, quality
input sent into the policymaking process.

If Nigerians feel as strongly about electoral malpractices as they felt about the killings
perpetrated by the members of the SARS Unit of the law enforcement, then they should have
taken similar steps to force the government to take action and stop electoral malpractices.
These steps would have become quality input strong enough to turn the wheels of the
processing unit of government in the direction of free and fair elections. As corrupt as the
government was, it had no choice than to disband the SARS Unit when such bold demands
were made. It will likewise have no choice than to eradicate electoral malpractices when such
bold demands are made again.

 The solution lies in quality input through aggressive political participation

Political apathy has been the bane of Nigeria since her independence. Any lasting and relatively
permanent meaningful change that will ever be achieved can only be achieved through
maximum political participation. According to Dr Moses T. Aluaigba (2016), it is not the
regularity of elections that can strengthen democratic heritage in Nigeria, but how transparent
the country’s electoral process is. Such transparency in the electoral process can only be
achieved if the input from the people into the political system becomes much stronger. Then,
the entire system can be steered towards righteous paths.

This process can be kick started by the people demanding a transparent review of the electoral
commission, and not the shoddy review the government claims to carry out where
investigations lead to preposterous claims and pardons. This is the beginning of the input stage.

Even if the government refuses to acknowledge the demands of the people through
conventional means, the people can go ahead to stage protests similar to the "END-SARS"
protests. This further strengthens the input and makes it impossible for the government to
ignore it.

Now, the Nigerian government is also quite popular for making policies that never get
implemented. Therefore, the work of the people is not yet done. Even if the government makes
the policy but fails to implement it, the people can employ several ways to send effective
feedback to the government:

 They can stage a nationwide protest again to ensure implementation of the policy.
 They can stage a mass boycott of the elections done with malpractice and appeal to the
court for such results to be declared void. If the courts are already corrupted as well,
theybcan always apply to the International Court of Justice. It is the aggressive
determination of the people that can force the government to take proper action.
 Lastly, they can choose to monitor the elections by themselves. If the electoral officers
cannot be trusted, the people can monitor the results closely by themselves and ensure
maximum transparency. This is also a method of sending feedback to the government
and demanding proper action.

CONCLUSION

The evidence presented above have surely demonstrated that the electoral malpractice
problem plaguing Nigeria is due to a system failure. The systems theory in political science has
been adopted to generate a deep analysis and understanding of the problem and also to
generate a solution to the problem, which is aggressive political participation on the part of the
people.
REFERENCES

1. David Easton (1953). The Political System

2. David Easton (1965). A Systems Analysis of Political Life, New York, S.32.

3. Moses T. Aluaigba Ph.D (2016): Democracy Deferred: The Effects of Electoral

Malpractice on Nigeria’s Path to Democratic Consolidation
4. Ezeani, EO 2005, ‘Electoral malpractices in Nigeria’, in G Onu & A Momoh (eds),
Elections and democratic consolidation Nigeria, Nigerian Political Science Association,
Lagos
5. Birch, S 2011, ‘Electoral corruption’, Briefing paper IDCR, viewed 10 October 2012,
http://repository.essex.ac.uk/4484/1/05_11.pdf
6. Yagboyaju, AD 2011, ‘Nigeria’s fourth republic and the challenge of a faltering
democratization’, African Studies Quarterly, vol. 12, issue 3, pp. 93-106, viewed 7
December 2012, http://sites.clas.ufl.edu/africa-asq/files/Yagboyaju-V12Is3.pdf