Chuks Okocha in Abuja
A professional-democracy activist and founding National Secretary of the Alliance for Democracy (AD), Professor Udenta O. Udenta, has proposed the institution of a Sovereign Commission for Democratic Sustainability and National Stability to tackle Nigeria’s political tensions and stop elections from triggering nationwide crises.
In a press release, Udenta argued that the problem forward of the 2027 common election goes past who emerges president, stressing that the nation should prioritise nationwide unity and democratic stability over particular person political ambitions.
For instance, he mentioned that whereas he’s a fervent Peter Obi supporter and can vote for him, there are different gamers who will drive this challenge with him which can be supporters of President Tinubu, former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, Gov Seyi Makinde, and the opposite presidential candidates.
He additional asserted that “elections cannot, by themselves, build trust or guarantee stability,” including that the important query is “what becomes of the nation the day after?”
He pressured that “Nigeria’s survival must matter more than the fortunes of any politician,” as a result of “Nigeria is not temporary.”
The proposed fee would deliver collectively the sitting president, all licensed presidential candidates, nationwide leaders and chairmen of political events, leaders of the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) and Trade Union Congress (TUC), the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU), the Nigerian Union of Journalists (NUJ) and civil society representatives.
Udenta pressured that the initiative was designed to be a sensible platform for dialogue moderately than “another committee of former officeholders or political elders issuing communiqués that gather dust.”
He proposed that every one political events and their presidential candidates make seven pre-election commitments, together with collaborating within the fee no matter electoral end result.
According to Udenta, membership could be primarily based on candidacy, declaring that it “only derives from one’s status as a presidential candidate. Period!”
Other proposals, he mentioned, embody a dedication by the winner to convene the fee after the election, set up a time-bound 18-month Government of National Unity primarily based on competence, and pursue reforms to cut back the winner-takes-all nature of presidential politics.
The proposed reforms additionally embody laws for audited public funding of eligible political events, proportional government illustration, a nationwide dialogue on an Afrocentric democratic mannequin and the restoration of cabinet-level Special Advisers for Inter-Party Matters and Civil Society Relations.
On political social gathering financing, Udenta cited Germany, Sweden, South Africa, Kenya, Malawi and Tanzania as nations with public subsidy preparations for political events.
He argued that clear funding tied to verified electoral thresholds would “reduce parties’ dependence on wealthy patrons, encourage stronger organisation and help credible opposition parties survive between elections.”
The professor maintained that such funding have to be ruled by disclosure necessities, impartial audits and penalties for abuse, moderately than left to the discretion of the ruling social gathering.
Udenta additionally outlined a timeline for the proposed fee, calling for all presidential candidates to “jointly urge calm and direct disputes through lawful channels” inside 72 hours of the declaration of election outcomes. He proposed that the fee maintain its first formal assembly inside 30 days and publish substantive suggestions inside 100 days, requiring a public response from the president.
Udenta warned towards complicated nationwide stability with the suppression of dissent, declaring: “A stable country is not one in which citizens are afraid to speak.”
According to him, real democratic stability requires residents to disagree peacefully, journalists to examine with out intimidation, courts to function with out political interference,e and peaceable protests not to be criminalised as treason.
He additionally insisted that opposition events should retain their freedom to criticise the federal government, noting that “a voter who supported the shedding candidate doesn’t turn out to be much less Nigerian when the outcomes are introduced.
Beyond electoral reforms, Udenta known as for stronger federating items and subnational establishments to cut back the focus of energy and sources on the centre. He argued that extreme centralisation makes management of the Federal Government an all-or-nothing political contest.
In his concluding problem to political leaders, Udenta requested: “Will you help build a democracy that belongs to the whole country, or preserve a system in which every election threatens to divide it?”
He pressured that though political rivalry and competitors have been mandatory in a democracy, they have to not undermine nationwide establishments, including that “only our collective commitment to the national interest can determine whether Nigeria endures and thrives.”
