HOW DOES WEAK INSTITUTIONS AFFECT OUR DEMOCRATIC

GOVERNMENT IN OUR COUNTRY TODAY?

Introduction
Democracy is a system of government that emphasizes majority rule.
Democracy advances the principles of free and fair elections, citizen
participation, human rights and the rule of law (Diamond 2004). 1 Therefore, the
peaceful transition of government, broad-based citizen participation in decision-
making, the protection of human rights and the entrenchment of the rule of law
– which are requisites for social cohesion, sustainable development and civic
engagement – are predicated on the successful operation of democracy.

In 1960, when Nigeria attained political independence from Britain under a

democratic parliamentary system, there was high hope as to the nation’s ability
to lead other African countries in the area of proper democratic governance,
considering its size, resources and population. Surprisingly, after 63 years of
political independence, the country is yet to imbibe proper democratic ethos,
which is the precursor to good governance and development in a society.

WEAK INSTITUTIONS—THE BANE OF DEMOCRACY

Institutions are an integral part of any political society. It consists of systems
that make rules that guide human behaviours and ensure the structuring of the
resulting behaviour to promote social interaction, order, cooperation and
economic progress (Nganje 2015).2 Institutions are therefore responsible for
lawmaking and adherence to such. States with resilient political institutions
produce strong laws, while poor laws are associated with states with weak
institutions.

1 Diamond, L. (2004): What is Democracy? http://www.standard. edu/∼/diamond/Iraq/whalsDemocracy 012004.htm

2 Nganje, F. 2015. Moving beyond Africa’s crisis of institutions. South African Institute of International Affairs Occasional
Paper 222. Johannesburg: SAIIA

1
Institutions can only be effective when they are independent, free from control,
accountable and transparent. The success or failure of democracy in countries is
tied to the ability of the state to deliver political goods; these being citizens’
expectations of the government. Political goods include ‘enforceable rule of
law, security of property and inviolable contracts, a judicial system, and a set of
values that legitimize and validate the local version of fair play’ (Rotberg 2016:
3).3

It also includes creating an enabling environment for citizen participation in

politics. Meanwhile, the provision of these goods is a function of strong
institutions. Therefore, the prevalence of weak institutions will lead to a deficit
in political goods thus increasing the risk of democratic recession.

There is no gainsaying that the records of elections, participation, human rights

and the rule of law in Nigeria are low due to weak institutions (Yagboyaju &
Akinola 2019).4 Weak institutions foreshadow political crises, especially in an
ethnically diverse society as found in Nigeria. The identity-superiority contests
that characterize such societies are anathema to democracy. For instance, the
recurring contestation and violence between the ethnic groups in Nigeria not
only hinders national integration but impedes the country’s democratic
progress .

More so, in weakly institutionalized societies where powers are concentrated in

the executive branch, the leaders are often unrestrained and may seek to
overpower other institutions of government in a bid to ensure a continued stay
in office or unfettered access to state resources. This was experienced in

3 Rotberg, R.I. 2016. Failed states, collapsed states, weak states: Causes and indicators.
https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/statefailureandstateweaknessinatimeofterror_chapter.pdf
4 Yagboyaju, D.A. & Akinola, A.O. 2019. Nigerian state and the crisis of governance: A critical exposition.
SAGE Open, 9(3): 1-10
5 Pérez-Peña, R. 2022, 30 March. President dissolves Tunisia’s parliament, deepening political crisis. The New
York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/30/world/africa/ tunisia-president-dissolve-parliament.html.
2
Tanzania where President Kais Saied suspended the parliament in March 2022
(Pérez-Peña 2022).5 It was also experienced in Nigeria, where the Judge that
gave judgment on Nnamdi Kanu’s case was transferred out of Abuja,
immediately after delivering judgement.

In a state with weak institutions, the mechanisms of controlling social conflict

are also weak and may often result in contestations that, when not properly
handled, evokes civil unrest, and in some cases, military coup.

Also, societies with weak institutions are characterized by the inability to

control corruption which limits economic growth and encourages autocrats to
take power or sponsor the circumvention of term limits to ensure an indefinite
stay in office. Yet, states with weak institutions are also vulnerable to internal
shocks (competition for scarce resources, identity-based crises, inter-clan armed
conflict, militias, corruption, military takeover) and external shocks (regional
influence, lack of political will and support from western countries).

DEMOCRACY, DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTIONS AND GOOD

GOVERNANCE IN NIGERIA
Democratic institutions such as Judiciary, INEC, Executive and the Police are
put in place by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria to act as
mechanisms for the smooth conduct and enthronement of political leaders
through periodic elections. However, these institutions lacked the capacity to
perform well due to the prevailing circumstances of the environment in which
they are situated— weakened moral threshold and poor ethical values
(Abubakar 2011, 1–2).6

3
Ingraham (2005, 390–395)7 see capacity as the “ability to marshal and use
available resources — people, money, talent, and time— in the best possible
way.” She argues that capacity is not just about structure and system alone; but
it involves creative, committed and talented people who make the system work.

The implication of the above conceptualization of capacity on the democratic

process in Nigeria is that no institution can perform its functions properly
without a good structure, system, and committed workforce with high integrity
and sound ethical behaviour.

In Nigeria, one of the major problems responsible for the failure of democratic
institutions is the lack of capacity on the part of the structure, system and
operators of these institutions to achieve set goals. This development is not
unconnected with the fact that many Nigerians, including politicians and
citizens, lack proper democratic ethos to achieve sustainable democratic
governance for development.

THE NIGERIAN JUDICIARY

Section 6 of the Nigerian Federal Constitution of 1999 vested the judicial
powers of the Nigerian Federation on the courts (FGNC 1999). 8 However, the
functions of the judiciary in the promotion of democratic governance in Nigeria
have faced serious challenge of crisis of confidence resulting from some of its
judgments and pronouncements There is no doubt that the judiciary in Nigeria is
grappling with many corruption allegations. There is no denying the fact that
the judiciary plays an important role in the sustenance of democracy. It is the
hope of the common man. Therefore, when it falters and weakens, it leaves dire
consequences.

6 Abubakar, M. 2011, March 8. Jega to INEC officials: No more room for misconduct. The Guardian Newspaper
(Lagos), pp. 1–2.
7 Ingraham, P. W. 2005. Performance: Promises to keep and miles to go. Public Administration Review,
65, 4 (July/August): 390–395.

4
It is important to note that the Chief Judge of Nigeria has the important sacred
role and duty to advance the needed reforms in the judiciary. In this regard, he
must work with the other arms of government. This is because the inability of
the three arms of government to work in harmony will ensure instability of the
nation, but not as rubber stamp, the weakness of the judiciary and the masses
has robbed the country of the dividends of democracy. While the independence
of the other three arms of government in accordance with the doctrine of
separation of powers is necessary, it should never be at the expense of the
harmonious relationships and synergy amongst them.
The working conditions of the judicial officers should be substantially improved
because of their peculiar duties in a democracy.

Furthermore, the respect of court rulings should be given due consideration by

the executive and the legislative to enable the rule of the law play its role in a
democracy. The judiciary and the masses as arms of government over the years
in Nigeria can check the activity of government, Public opinions and pressure
groups, through the platform of the different courts constitution, newspapers,
magazines, radio and the television.

The judiciary and the masses view has the potential to influence government
policies and programme in a democracy. The judiciary has the power to make
court decisions that interpret and apply the constitution in case they hear and act
upon that can help entrench true democracy in Nigeria. Constitution
interpretation by the judiciary helps in the shaping of government and its
processes in a democratic setting. For example, in a democracy, it is the
electoral laws that determine the quality of the electoral system. The judiciary
has powers to entrench democracy in Nigeria through judiciary reviews; as the

8 Federal Republic of Nigeria (FGNC). 1999. Constitution. Abuja: Government Press.

5
courts have power to decide if what government does squares with what the
constitution provides.

The courts have power to determine the constitutionality of government actions

to declare illegal, null and void or of no force and effect, especially if the
governmental action is found to violate some provision of the constitution. The
powers of the courts, especially the Supreme Court helps to curb dictatorial
regimes high handedness in a democracy; so that the masses, the oppressed or
the minority will have a say and right in a democracy, even though the majority
may have their way.

INDEPENDENT ELECTORAL COMMISSION (INEC)

INEC is the institution set-up according to the provision in Section 153 (1) f (1)
of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria with the sole power
to conduct all elections to public offices in the country. The structure of INEC is
made-up of the Chairman, 12 Commissioners at the federal level and 36
Resident Commissioners with each one presiding over a state of the Nigerian
Federation of 36 states. One of the major weaknesses of INEC, which has
generated negative feeling about its activities amongst politicians and citizens,
is its composition.

The 1999 Federal Republic of Nigeria Constitution (FGNC) gave the president
of the federation the powers to appoint the chair person, 12 Commissioners at
the federal level and the 36 Resident Commissioners at the state level, although
such appointment must be rectified by the senate (FGNC 1999). 9 The danger in
this arrangement is that where a ruling political party secures majority of seats
at the senate, the president’s choice of nomination of candidates into INEC
could easily be approved to support the course of the ruling party at subsequent
elections.

6
This constitutional provision that gave the power to appoint INEC chair person
to the President of the Federation has created serious doubt about INEC’s
credibility to conduct free and fair elections in Nigeria. Furthermore, Justice
Uwais’ Report on Electoral Reforms (2008) points out that the classification of
INEC as a federal executive body in Section 153 of the 1999 Constitution of the
Federal Republic of Nigeria brings it under the oversight of the executive arm
of government, which makes it improper to conduct free and fair elections.

In addition, the Justice Uwais’ report observed that the funding of INEC
through the Executive arm of government renders it vulnerable to manipulation
and undue influence by the Executive to the detriment of the ‘opposition’ during
elections. According to Saliu and Lipede (2008, 120–151), 10 for democracy to
thrive in Nigeria, the independence of INEC is a desirable requirement. They
argue that the agency must not only profess to be independent, its transparency
must be very clear to all politicians and the citizens to avoid crisis of confidence
in its actions before, during and after elections in the country.

THE NIGERIAN EXECUTIVE ARM OF GOVERNMENT

The Nigerian Constitution vested the power to appoint INEC officials on the
President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, and also the power to release the
fund required for INEC to operate. These provisions have created serious crisis
of confidence between the government and the opposition, to the extent that any
election won by the government party is considered collaboration between the
ruling party in government and INEC.

However, it has been observed that the executive arm of government had
actually at one time or the other manipulated election outcomes in Nigeria by
the deployment of state agencies like the police and the electoral body to its

9 Federal Republic of Nigeria (FGNC). 1999. Constitution. Abuja: Government Press.

7
 advantage during elections. Ikelegbe (2005, 197–214)11, while advancing
reasons for the failure of the democratic governance in Nigeria, argues that the
1983 General Elections, like other elections in the country before it, were
characterized by “incumbency manipulations of state agencies…announcement
of fake results, repression of the opposition and imposition of the ruling party
on the nation.”
This note supports the view that the executive arm of the government failed in
its role as facilitator of democratic governance in Nigeria. This implies that for
democracy and democratic governance to thrive in a society, the executive as a
democratic institution must play a role of an unbiased umpire because the
executive arm of government is not a creation of a particular political party but
of the constitution and hence should be supported by all, including those who
may not be government - ‘opposition’ for the time being, if sustainable
development is to take place in a country.

THE NIGERIAN POLICE FORCE

The Nigerian Police Force is the institution vested with the power to enforce
law and order during the period of elections in Nigeria. The major functions of
the Police at elections include: guaranteeing safety and peace throughout the
election process; safeguarding the security of personnel, materials and venues
for voter registration; safeguarding the security of the life and property of
citizens during voters’ registration, political campaign and voting; and ensuring
the safety of electoral officers before, during and after elections (FGNC 1999).12

However, in spite of these noble functions of the police in the electoral process,
there have been several complaints by members of the public and politicians
that the police force in the country does not maintain impartiality in dealing
with all political parties. Oloruntimehin (2005, 237–252), 13 argues that the role

12 Federal Republic of Nigeria (FGNC). 1999. Constitution. Abuja: Government Press.

13 Oloruntimehin, O. 2005. The Nigeria Police and the 1983 General Elections. In Akinsanya, A. A. and
Ayoade, J. A. (Eds.), Readings in Nigerian government and politics, pp.237–252. Ijebu-Ode:
Gratia Associates International.
8
of the Nigerian Police Force in the 1983 General Elections in Nigeria
contributed to the failure of democratic governance in the country. He stated
that the Nigerian Police Force that ought to protect the sanctity of electoral
process as a means of enthroning genuine political leaders became instrument of
oppression against the opposition in favour of the government in power under
the leadership of Alhaji Shehu Shagari.

Justice Uwais’ Report on Electoral Reforms (2008) points out that in some
instances, the leadership of the Nigerian Police Force often issue instructions
against the opposition by not granting them permits to hold political rallies,
encourage policemen on electoral duty to intimidate and harass people on the
day of polling. All these have cast a shadow of doubt on the police in its ability
to play the roles assigned to them in terms of safety and security of lives and
properties before, during and after elections.

Emphasizing the importance of security in the promotion of the democratic

process for free and fair elections in any society, The INEC Chairman,
Professor Atahiru Jega posits that: While it is true, as some observers have
argued that security around elections only reflect the general security situation
in a country, we believe that insecurity heighten at times of major electoral
events. Therefore, it becomes necessary to pay particular attention to security
issues around the electoral process through concerted efforts of not only
security agencies, but also the wider public (Akintola 2010, 42).14

A situation whereby the police force as a democratic institution that ought to be

a mechanism for the promotion of the democratic system turns out to be the
very instrument of political oppression could lead to the decay of democracy in
that society. Therefore, proper democratic ethos is more likely to be enhanced
and the goals of good governance and development achieved where the law

9
enforcement agents of a country see itself as a defender of the democratic rights
of the people rather than that of the government in power.

CONCLUSION
The judiciary as an institution should hold strongly to Aristotle, one of the often
cited and quoted philosophers, who emphasized the place and import of the
separation of powers as one of the strong pillars of democracy with emphasis on
the independence of the judiciary. The independence of the judiciary as
enshrined in the principle of separation of powers implies that the judiciary
should be independent of the two other arms of government, that is, the
executive and the legislature.

The whole essence of the independence of the Judiciary is to ensure that those
who man the judiciary would be able to carry out their duties without fear or
favour, to enable them deliver judgments in all matters before them (Afe
Babalola, 2019).15 The lawyers and the judiciary as an institution should see
themselves as the defenders of the rule of law, instead of being transactional
with the overriding interest being materialism. Legal advisers to different levels
of government and political parties are duty bound to demonstrate high level of
professional candour and ethical rectitude expected of their office.

Legal advises should sacrifice their office and resign political appointments as a
protest if their idea is rejected by an authoritarian government. This will
demonstrate as a high degree of professional uprightness and ethical rectitude. It
is important for the judiciary officers to know that, if they do not maintain
Justice, Justice will not maintain them.

14 Akintola, K. 2010, December 23. Jega worries over insecurity, safety of elections material, personnel.
Business Day (Lagos), p. 42.

10
The Judiciary should be able to live by example to entrench true democracy in
Nigeria in the 21st century.

15 Aare Afe Babalola. Relevance Of Separation Of Powers And Independence Of The Judiciary.
Https://Www.Abuad.Edu.Ng/Relevance-Of-Separation-Of-Powers-And-Independence-Of-The-Judiciary/
11