Audu Complete Project

DEMOCRACY AND POLITICAL PARTICIPATION IN NIGERIA:
A STUDY OF WUKARI LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA, TARABA STATE.
BY
USENI AUDU
TSU/FSMS/PL/14/2020
BEING A RESEARCH PROJECT SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF
POLITICAL SCIENCE AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, FACULTY OF SOCIAL
AND MANAGEMENT SCIENCE,
IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT FIR THE AWARD OF BACHELOR OF SCIENCE (B.Sc)
POLITICAL SCIENCE AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
TARABA STATE UNIVERSITY, JALINGO.
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND OF STUDY
1
The political stability and development of any political system is a function of the
awareness and positive involvement of the citizens in civic and political matters. This is the reason
why Appadorai (2004) posited that democracy demands from the common man a certain level of
ability and character: rational conduct and active participation in the government. In Nigeria,
political activities and transition I have been marked with turbulence, uncertainties and violence.
Right from the First Republic, the Nigerian politics is characterized by greed, love of
power, violence, assassination, thuggery and election rigging. Violence has become synonymous
with Nigeria’s political culture such that virtually all elections held so far in the country are violent-
ridden (Ojo, 2014). Although the Nigeria general election which was held in 2011 was relatively
peaceful, however, it was also marked with some irregularities. According to Okpi (2011),
although the national assembly election held on Saturday, April 9 2011 has been appraised by
many as successful, some cases of malpractices and violence recorded across the country threaten
to dim light on democratic progress.
During the election, there were reported cases of underage voting, distribution of money at
polling centers, manipulation of voters’ register, diversion of electoral materials, ballot box
snatching, unlawful possession of firearms and other electoral offences. This political scenario
engendered lukewarm political attitude and participation among some citizens. In a political
system, the citizens can be involved in the political process and decision making by joining
political party, voting during election, participating in electoral campaign, community affairs and
other political activities. The level and pattern of political participation of the citizens determine,
to some extent, the success of the political system. In Nigeria, politics is seen by a number of
people as a dirty game which must be avoided. This is as a result of the undemocratic tendencies,
deception, violence and uncertainties that characterize the political system.
Commenting on the political apathy displaced by Nigerian citizens during the 2011 general
election, The INEC chairman, Professor Attairu Jega lamented: That there exists voters’ apathy in
2
Nigeria is no longer contentious. Voters turnout in the just concluded general elections had
provided a scientific and empirical evidence of the existence of voters apathy and disinterestedness
of sections of the electorates in elections…This urgly scenario has implications for popular
participation and governance. (Odebode, 2011:2) this is corroborated by the report of an interview
conducted during the 2011 election. One of the respondents said “My father told me not to vote
when I was leaving home. This morning, my father said I was wasting my time. He said all
politicians were the same and it would make no difference”. Statistical analysis of the 2011 general
elections showed that only 35% of the registered electorates voted during the election.
Commenting on this the INEC chairman expressed that the scientific evidence of poor turn-out of
voters during the election was at variance with the belief that Nigerians showed much enthusiasm
during the polls (Odebode, 2011).
The development and sustenance of true democracy in Nigeria depends, to a large extent,
on the electoral system. The confidence of the citizens in the electoral system and their
participation in the electoral process are requisites for the enthronement of responsible and
democratic leaders. The success of the 2015 Nigeria general election requires transparent electoral
process and mass participation of the electorates.
The reality of the attempts to subvert the concept of democracy to serve the interests of a
few, rather than a greater majority, still looms high. The emerging democracy was artificial and
reflexive of external imposition. It is a weak democracy that repudiates inalienable ethos of its true
identity. Democracy and political participation are related to good governance is interrelated and
complementary but appear to be antithetical in Nigeria. Democracy in Nigeria is alien and its
practice has proved difficult.
Democracy is abused; good governance becomes elusive and evasive. This is what Darl
(1989) describes as “virtual democracy”, democracy that shares resemblance with true democracy
but lacks basic tenets of democracy. Democracy in Nigeria has three unique features which
3
include: insulation of economic matters from popular participation, manipulation and
monopolization of democratic process including the use of violence and electoral fraud to secure
legitimacy and peripheral participation of citizens. Surface-level participation does not have far-
reaching influence on the outcome of policy choices.
According to Oke (2010) democracy involves the opportunity to participate in decision
making in the political process. It repudiates arbitrariness and authoritarianism. It extols the
consent of the governed and it protects human personality and values (Ake, 1991). Democracy,
whether liberal, African or modern, includes equal opportunity for all, fundamental recognition of
popular sovereignty, representativeness, majority rule, minority rights, popular consultation, right
of choice between alternative programmes, consensus on fundamental issues, as well as essentially
periodic elections (Oke, 2005). The concept of democracy confers the opportunity to participate
in decision making by all.
Democracy here goes beyond opportunity of election. Although, the centrality of elections
to democratic process cannot be over-emphasized, democracy is not wholly centered on election.
For democracy to evolve good governance, it must be liberal and participatory. In this sense,
Liberal democracy entails not only free and fair elections in terms of voting administration, it
requires a more comprehensive fairness of political competition embodied in the concept of a just
and open competition. In a liberal democracy, the electoral arena is open, and the playing field is
reasonably level.
Only in a free society with opportunity of free participation and respects for citizens’ rights
can good governance be achieved. True democracy places emphasis on freedom, and open
competition, popular and meaningful participation, responsiveness, transparency and
accountability. Freedom to organize, freedom to protest anti-people policies and freedom to
demand and assert citizens’ rights and interests, freedom of the press to report, investigate and
expose government policies and actions without fear or favour. According to Diamond (2005),
4
“Only in a climate of true political and civil freedom can a country achieve the absolute
fundamental condition for development: responsible government that is government that is
committed to the advancement of the public good, rather than the private interests of its own
officials and their families and their cronies”.
1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
Though, Okoli and Onah (2002) submit that development involves progression, movement
and advancement towards something better. Democracy could be said to be better as compared to
the Military Era before the Fourth Republic but, it has been characterized with democracy and
political participation, politicking of core government policies and programs vis-à-vis interest of
the masses. In furtherance to this, the current democratic system has been threatened with policy
somersault, policy reversal, human right abuse, economic bondage and monumental corruption. It
is against this backdrop that the research is being carried out with the intent of proffering solutions
to the democratic challenges witnessed.
The experience with citizens’ participation in electoral politics in Nigeria generally
and Taraba state in particular has not been encouraging. Even where development of local
participation is an important tool of rural development and where political education in mass
participation is a key element of the development strategy, programmes have not developed
genuine participation and responsibility among the people. The people have become recipients of
development as if development is something outside their realms of experience and right
respectively. There are political, socio-cultural and bureaucratic constraints to political
participation.
In effect therefore, the study will seek to provide answers to the following fundamental
questions: What is the nature and character of democracy and political participation in Nigeria?
How does political participation promote democratic consolidation in Nigeria? What are the
5
political, socio-cultural and bureaucratic constraints to political participation in Nigeria? What is
the way forward as regards mitigation of political participation in Nigeria? How can identified
challenges be addressed?
1.3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS
The following research questions shall serve as guidelines towards the achievement of the
objectives of this project work:
i. How the nature and character of democracy and political participation affected
democratic consolidation in Nigeria?
ii. How political participation promote democratic consolidation in Nigeria?
iii. How political, socio-cultural and bureaucratic constraints promote political
participation in Nigeria?
iv. What are the ways forward as regards mitigation of political participation in Nigeria?
1.4 OBJECTIVES OF STUDY
The objectives of the study are to:
i. To examine the nature and character of democracy and political participation that affected
democratic consolidation in Nigeria
ii. To identify how political participation promote democratic consolidation in Nigeria
iii. To examine how political, socio-cultural and bureaucratic constraints promote political
participation in Nigeria
iv. To proffer a solution as regards mitigation of political participation in Nigeria
1.5 RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS
The research hypothesis that will serve as the yardstick for the administration of the questionnaire
shall be based on the theoretical framework that political education is fundamental to political
participation. Therefore, the research hypotheses are:

6
H0: There is no strong relationship between democracy and political participation to democratic
consolidations in Nigeria
H1: There is a strong relationship between democracy and political participation to democratic
consolidations in Nigeria
1.6 SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY
This research work is significant because it is aimed at explaining political participation in the
context of good governance in Nigeria. This will enables us to appreciate the fact that the
formulation of a national agenda through dialogue by all stakeholders is a prerequisite for political
participation. However, the research work highlighted the nature and character of democracy and
political participation in Nigeria. The research work brought to the fore the utility or otherwise of
the elite theory in explaining political participation in Nigeria. The study will contribute to existing
stock of knowledge by helping students and scholars alike to better appreciate the fundamentals of
the elite theory to contemporary political analysis.
1.7 SCOPE AND LIMITATION OF THE STUDY
A study of this kind is not left without limitation or challenges among the challenges that the
researcher was confronted with, the challenges are as follows:-
Time: There was not enough for the researcher to carry out the comprehensive work, due to the
fact that the researcher has other academic activities lined up for him to attend to and also to
prepare for the final year examinations.
7
Finance: This is another challenge that almost marred the project work, as the researcher does not
have adequate fund to carry out the research work in terms of searching for relevant materials and
transportation. These are few of the problems or challenges that the researcher was confronted
with.
1.8 DEFINITION OF KEY TERMS
DEMOCRACY; Appadorai (2004) described democracy as a system of government under which
the people exercise the governing power either directly or through representatives periodically
elected by them.
POLITICAL PARTICIPATION; Akamare (2003) political participation is an aspect of political
behavior and it focuses on the way in which individuals take part in politics. It is a voluntary
activity and one may participate directly or indirectly. Sidney Verba and Nie (1972:2) they opined
8
that Political participation as ‘’those activities by private citizens that are more or less directly
aimed at influencing the selection of government personnel and/or the actions they take’’.
ELECTION; Schumpeter (1942) Election is the very heart of democracy. He goes on to state that
it is an “institutional arrangement”, as a means of filling public offices by a competitive struggle
for the peoples vote. Olisa etal (1991) Elections are the mechanisms for selecting people into public
offices or other private positions.
REFERENCES
Ake, C. (1991), “For Africa, the way forward”. The Guardian, 13 November, Lagos, pp. 2-3.
and Administration Research . ISSN (Paper)2224 – 5731
Appadorai, A (2004). The Substance of Politics (Fourth Impression). India, Oxford University
Press.
Diamond, L. (2005), Democracy, Development and Good Governance: The Inseparable Links. A
Paper Delivered at the Maiden Annual Democracy and Governance, Ghana, March 1,
Lecture of the Ghana center for Democratic Development (CDD).
9
Diamond, L. (1999), Developing Democracy: Toward Consolidation, The Johns Hopkins
University Press, Baltimore.
Robert Darl (1989). Democracy and it critics, Yale University Press, New Haven. p. 222
Oke, L. (2010), “Democracy and Governance in Nigeria’s Fourth Republic” in Agagu, A.A.,
Arowolo, D., Afinotan, L.A. and Lawal, T. eds Public Administration in Nigeria,
Alabi-Eyo & Co. Ltd, Akure, pp. 312-322.
Oke, L. (2005), “Globalization, Democracy and Women Empowerment: Issues and Challenges in
Nigeria” in Olufayo, O.O. (Ed.) Perspective on Globalization and Africa Development.

Bolabay Publications, Lagos, pp. 72-81.
Osaghae, E.G. (1998) Crippled Giant: Nigeria since Independence (London: C Hurst)
Schumpeter, J. (1942), Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy London: Allen and Unwin.
Sidney and Verba (1972:2). Participation and Political equality: Cambridge, Eng.; New York:
Cambridge University Press,
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
2.1 INTRODUCTION
Generally, literature review means the review of the works of several authors, thinkers,
philosophers, writers, commentators, who have written books on the same problem areas. The
purpose of literature review is, to provide a theoretical perspective for the research work. For the
purpose of this research work therefore, the works of several authors will be reviewed. The
concepts to be reviewed in those works including concepts like: democracy, political participation
10
in Nigeria, dynamics in political participation, political participation and sustainable development,
democracy political participation and good governance, empirical review, election and finally the
research work adopt elite theory as a theoretical framework.
2.2 LITERATURE REVIEW
The term democracy appeared in the (15th century BC) which derived from two Greek
words: (demos) which mean people and (kratos) which means rule. Literarily, democracy means
‘rule by the people’. Appadorai (2004) described democracy as a system of government under
which the people exercise the governing power either directly or through representatives
periodically elected by them. In the ancient states, direct democracy was possible because all adult
members of the community could easily take part in decision making. Population growth and
expansion in political boundaries have made direct democracy impracticable in the modern
political system.
This is the reason why representative democracy has replaced direct democracy in different
parts of the world. Representative democracy is an indirect democracy where sovereignty is held
by the people’s representatives. Watter Lanqueur cited in Idowu (1998) pointed out that although
the conditions of modern state make direct participation of all the people in government of the
state impossible, the concept of democracy still emphasises the rule of the people. That is, the
sovereign power is indirectly exercised by the people through a system of representation.
Consequently, political participation, particularly in the electoral process, is a fundamental
requirement of representative democracy. This is the reason why Appadorai (2004) argued that
where, on account of an atmosphere of fear and coercion, people do not feel free to discuss or vote,
democracy cannot be said to exist, even though the other political rights are enjoyed by the people.
Sovereignty (2010) identified some of the requirements of democratic rule as: at least two party
system to give room for freedom of choice; periodic election that is based on universal adult
11
suffrage; free and fair election to allow the political party that has the support of the majority to
control the machinery of government and civil liberties such as freedom of association, religion,
speech and freedom from arbitrary arrest.
Representative democracy rests on the assumptions that the citizens possess and
demonstrate some civic capacities. These civic capacities involve three qualities: intelligence, self-
control and conscience. The citizens must be able to understand the interest of the community, to
subordinate his own will to the general will and must feel his responsibility to the community and
be prepared to serve it by voting (Appadorai, 2004). In the contrary, indolence, indifference and
political apathy have hindered the entrenchment and sustenance of representative democracy in
Nigeria. Falade and Orungbemi (2010) argued that true democratic governance is absent in Nigeria
and many parts of Africa. The political culture in
In the views of Bernard C, (1998) “democracy’’ is perhaps the most promiscuous word in
the word of public affairs”. A term that can mean anything to anyone is in danger of meaning
nothing at all he concludes. Perhaps a more helpful starting point from which to consider the
meaning of democracy is Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg address, delivered in 1864. At the height
of the American civil war Lincoln extolled the virtues of what he called “government of the people,
by the people and for the people”. By this, it becomes very clear that democracy links government
to the people. Dicey in his work, laws and opinion in England (1905), treated democracy as a form
of government under which majority opinion determines legislation. According to him, “it would
be unwise in a democracy to enforce laws not approved by the people”.
Bryce, (1921) sees democracy as a form of government in which the people rule by
expressing their sovereign will through the votes. The test of government being the welfare of the
people. Seely (1995) describes democracy as a form of government in which everybody has a
share. Democracy can therefore be seen as a system of government in which the citizens directly
or indirectly take part in deciding who should hold one office or the other at a regular interval.
12
Marx and Engel (1981) defined democracy as “the dictatorship of the proletariats”. To
authors, democracy is anything but a system, which the ruling class uses to exploit the masses. In
other words, they disagreed that democracy is a government of the people, for the people and by
the people. The pillars of democracy included: sovereignty of the people; government based upon
consent of the governed; majority rule; free and fair elections; equality before the law; due process
of the law; constitutional limits of government; social, economic and political; pluralism; values
of tolerance; pragmatism; cooperation and compromise (Journal of Democracy).
Democratic participation on the other hand, is a situation where the government exercise
freedom in adult suffrage and participate in an egalitarian way in the working of government
democracy, predicted on a free, frank, fair and cordial dialogue of every person within the geo-
political entity (Tobi, 1996). Okafor (2000) argues that democracy has endured as the most
acceptable throughout the world because it seeks for the good of a majority of the people in a
state/nation. It recognizes the rights and importance of every citizen in that system. According to
Plato’s Republic, Socrates and his contemporary philosophers identified three classes of people in
a state – the ruling class, the wealthy class and the poor masses who constitute the majority of the
society (Onah, 2005).
Democratic participation in modern times recognizes that each of these classes is equal
before the law of a given state; hence, every citizen has a right to participate in the government
and deserves a fair share of the resources and also a fair share in the contribution towards the
development of the state. Democratic participation, according to Onah exists in an environment
where there is efficient and effective electoral body, registration of voters, conduct of free, fair and
periodic elections, and provision of social services and maintenance of existing infrastructural
amenities like tap water, good roads, good schools, sound education, electricity, employment
opportunities etc. by the people’s representatives both at the local and central levels. Also, there
13
should be equal rights, justice, equity and fair play among the polity. This means that democratic
governance involves mass participation in decision making and in government.
Equally, democratic governance allows for mass participation by the adult governed in the
selection/or election of leaders and representatives by means of free and fair electoral process
(Fishkin, 1991). In a nutshell, democratic governance ideally, is a situation where the general
(common) will overrides personal will (Joseph, 1983). One can therefore accentuate that a
democratic government or governance is not merely government by majority rule; it is also
government in which minority rights are protected. Democracy applies in a polity when rules and
conventions of the political game are set and operated members of the polity through consensus
and active involvement. Without commitment to the rules of the game by members of the polity,
the whole idea of democracy becomes a fiction or at best mere idealism.
In other words, the major question about democratic participation does not relate to the
issue of what rules and principles exist but whether the rules and principles are largely accepted
and respected by both micro and macro nationalists in a given polity such as Nigeria. Nigeria is
characterized by intolerance, intimidation, thuggery, assassination, bitterness, apathy, indolence,
money and ethnic politics. As a result of this, the ingredients of democracy have not been able to
thrive after many years of political independence in Nigeria.
2.2.1 Political participation in Nigeria
Political participation is the involvement of the citizens in the political system. Eakin cited
in Adelekan (2010) described political participation as the process through which the individual
plays a role in the political life of his society and has the opportunity to take part in deciding what
common goals of the society are and the best way of achieving these goals. According to Akamare
(2003) political participation is an aspect of political behaviour and it focuses on the way in which
individuals take part in politics. It is a voluntary activity and one may participate directly or
indirectly. The various ways by which the people can be involved in the political system include
14
selection or election of political leaders, formulation of policies, community activities and other
civic engagements.
According to Awolowo and Aluko (2010), the essence of political participation in any
society, either civilized or primitive, is to seek control of power, acquisition of power and to
influence decision making. Political participation is a means of contributing ones quota to the
political system and overall development of the nation. Political participation is one of the
fundamental requirements of democratic governance.
This is the reason why Adelekan (2010) emphasized that ideally, democracy means
individual participation in the decisions that involves one’s life. In a democratic system, there is
the necessity for the citizenry to be fully involved in the democratic procedures of the choice of
rulers and effective communication of the public policies and attitudes. Any claim to democratic
regime or state must essentially embrace a high degree of competitive choice, openness, and
enjoyment of civic and political liberties and political participation that involves all groups of the
society (Arowolo and Aluko, 2010).
The extents to which people participate in the political system differ from person to person.
Falade (2008) identified six types of political participants. These are:
i. The inactive: These are the people that take no part in any .political activity
ii. Voting specialists: These are the people that get eagerly engaged only in voting. Besides
voting, they are not concerned about other political activities.
iii. Parochial participants: These people participate in politics occasionally. They vote or get
involved in any other political activity only when it affects their personal interest.
iv. The communalist: These are those who get engaged in voting regularly, they also get
involved in community affairs but they are not involved in political campaign activities
v. The campaigners: They are actively involved in political campaign but inactive in other
community affairs.
15
vi. Complete activists: They are highly involved in all political activities. They actively
participate in voting, political campaign, community activities and make contact with
public officials.
Some of the factors that determine political participation are: cultural, economic, political,
religious and educational backgrounds of individuals. Also, the level of political awareness as well
as the measure of confidence in the political process determines the extent to which the citizens
participate in the political system. In Nigeria, politics is influenced by money, ethnic and religious
factors. Since independence in 1960, religious and ethnic politics characterize electioneering
process in Nigeria. This is the reason why Albert Legogie, former deputy Senate President, pointed
out that it was clear from the trend of the election that there was a big gulf, a dichotomy between
the north and the south and between Christians and Muslims (Adeyemo, 2011).
For instance, during the post-presidential election violence in the Muslim dominated northern
part of Nigeria, southerners and Christians were attacked and killed while many churches were
burnt. Falade, (2007) expressed that politics in Nigeria is regarded as a dirty game and it is
practiced with bitterness, hatred, rancor and other associated evils. The outcome of this is that
Nigeria is in vicious cycle of political crises and instability. Deceit and unfulfilled promises by
political leaders discouraged a number of Nigerians from participating in election and other
political activities.
Falade (2008) argued that politicians make series of promises during election campaign. Most
of these promises are not fulfilled after they had been voted in to power. As a result of this, some
voters loose interest in election. One of the respondents interviewed during the 2011 election
expressed that “I have come to the sun to suffer even though I am not benefiting anything from the
government…I don’t even have confidence in them because they have been failing us generally”
(Adelakun, 2011).
16
There is low level of political participation among the Nigerian citizens. Many Nigerians are
indifferent in political matters. The INEC noted that Nigerians’ participation during the last general
election in the 2011 was low. Only 35% of the 70 million registered voters took part in the election.
The Friedrich Elbert Stiffing Foundation conducted a research on the 2011 election and identified
lack of transparent elections, election violence and politicians’ noncommittal to their campaign
promises as major reasons for voters’ apathy in the country (Odebode, 2011).
The political apathy in Nigeria is based on the twin problems of ignorance and deliberate
deception by some politicians. The consequence of this is the inability of the masses to have a link
between their state of underdevelopment and their non participation in the electoral process
(Fabiyi, 2010). In the light of this Falade (2007) concluded that the Nigerian political culture has
not given room for the entrenchment and sustenance of true democracy. Awolowo and
Aluko(2010) expressed that the low level of political participation of the Nigerian women is
becoming alarming and disturbing. Since the emergence of political independence in 1960, the
Nigerian women have remained invisible in the political process.
The 1985 Beijing declaration to which Nigeria is a signatory provides that 30% of all positions
in government should be given to women. This policy is yet to be implemented in Nigeria because
there is a continuing trend of male domination of political and other public positions (Oloyede,
2004; Adelekan, 2010).The marginal involvement of African women in the political process
results from the lingering inhibitive cultural and patriarchal forces against women’s engagement
in politics that characterized African traditional societies (Chuku, 2009).
2.2.2 Dynamics in Political Participation in Nigeria
The present situation in Nigeria has not shown any distinct departure from the period of
the First, Second and aborted Third Republic of 1993. There was a stable political condition and
security of life and property before January and July 1966 that marked the incursion of military in
to Nigeria politics. Before the Nigeria independent of 1960, the political arrangement favoured
17
competitive politics both at the Federal and Regional level. As a result of political participation
that favoured competitive politics based on party platform and superiority might especially at the
side of Federal Alliance that granted unequivocal support to marginalize other political leaders
from various ethnic cleavages contributed to “breakaway faction of most of the major political
parties of the first Nigeria Republic. The situation continued until the constitution of the second
Republic which replaced Republican System of government to Presidentalism with such principle
of constitutional supremacy. This system breeded new faction of god fatherism to whom the
electorate surrender and give solidarity. The innovations which encouraged cross cutting party
formation (1979 and 1999 constitution) provide incentives for party formation on national
character in sharing party and political offices.
The introduction of two party system (in the aborted Third Republic, 1993) which seems
to have closed the ethnic solidarity in political participation had subverted to inter – and intra-
party solvocation. This hypothesized indices, might probably account for the unexpected ethnic
big tent parties, Social Democratic Party (SDP) and National Republic Convention (NRC)
respectively in the un-celebrated Third Republic. The outlook of the present ruling party that
symbolized NPN (1979-83) had for long time succeeded in its magnanimous incorporation of all
diverse ethnic and regional constituencies that make up Nigeria entity. In 1999, the two political
parties of Alliance for Democracy AD and All Progressive party lead by Chief Olu Falae
demonstrated a cross- cutting ethnic voting pattern because of national sympathy for June 12
election that presumed to have favoured his geo-political zone, Chief Obasanjo who won the
election got minimum support of the votes majority from the North’s in 27 out of 36 States of the
Federation.
In his second term, the ruling Party P.D.P had increased on its electoral minimum of 25%
by 5 additional States therefore making it a total of 32 out of 36 States in Nigeria. The derivatives
advantage of this outcome of the election result in 1999 as it was demonstrated earlier by the
18
annoyed election of June 12 1993 is that, the age-long desire of Nigeria to have a leader that reflect
their ethnic or sectional Kinship had changed and also it make the intension of the Nigeria political
actors ( both the leaders and the followers) to have a leader who is expected by his action to be
committed enough to pursue national interest rather than caring about his ethnic origin.
In the Nigeria subsequent elections, the 2007 Yar’dua/Jonathan connection and 2011
(Jonathan/ Sambo) that was expected to build-up on the existing foundation by any factor (overt
or covert) still manifested in dimensional ethnicity electoral coloration. . The principle of zoning
as a political phenomenon, its role and significance as it was overwhelm pronounced during the
Nigeria June 12 political crisis reminds in the pinnacle of political party without hurting such
chances of winning public election.
The zoning arrangement as informal means of ethnic accommodation in Nigerian politics
since 1979 is otherwise known as power sharing which remained innovative in the political
arrangement of that period in question. The arrangement therefore, seeks to distribute balance of
opportunity and rotates key governmental and party offices among the nations, diverse ethnic
religious and geo-political constituencies. Because of mismanagement of this opportunity at the
level of elite class, critics alleged that arrangement was fraudulently designed as it favoured one
major ethnic group against others.
2.2.3 Political Participation and Sustainable Development in Nigeria
In most cases the attitude of Nigeria leaders, in political participation demonstrated
different kinds of electoral reservations. Political participation had become a function of social
economic status derivation especially in Nigeria that replicated the position of the people’s daily
prayer which says “our Lord/Father gives us our daily breads...” since political participation is
interpreted to mean what “one will eat and where one will sleep”. Political participation becomes
a statistical analysis of political leaders as they allocate scarce resources on both the advantages
and disadvantages to “who get what, when and how’.
19
Therefore, citizen had regarded participation in politics (or elections) only as a fortune to
human and social development. Analysts therefore, considered some variables that are connected
with allocation of scarce resources, which among many other factors stand in between leadership
and followership that was developed on variables at the level of policy implementation which is
congruent to cooperation, understanding; and that has exposed the level of compliance by the
followers. Policy implementation failure remains one of the hallmarks of publics policies which
serves as obstacle to development had strangulated political participation at various level of
government.
The inability of most of our political leaders (policy makers) to effectively formulate clear
policy out comes, inadequate governance mechanisms and the failure of implementing agents to
adequately capture the essence of such implementation because of limited capacity or authority
vested them contributes to the failure of many designed policies for developmental projects. In
addition, it is not enough to develop goals and objectives for the advancement of society, rather it
is the translation of these goals into concrete programmes and projects that could enhance citizens
welfare which hitherto increases citizens levels of political participation.
Associate intricacies towards the actualization and sustainable of meaningful development in
Nigeria include unemployment, corruption, favouritism nepotism, prebendalism, impunity and
bureaucratic bottle neck.
Among these important factors that are essential towards public policy implementations is
cooperation; Its impact on the actualization of meaningful development is unquantifiable.
Cooperation as one political analyst described it is the interactions among actors aiming at solving
public problems by working together rather than by working separately. To facilitate this, variables
like resources interdependence, goal congruence and mutual trust should be present. It is by the
virtue of this cooperation, development is attainable. It’s follows therefore, that the retardation of
physical and administrative development in Nigeria arises as a result of the above mentioned social
20
vices which includes lack of cooperation at the level of intra and inter-governmental relation which
led to reduction at the level of political participation.
This lack of cooperation probably because of different political parties involving both the
States and Federal government, with the persistence high level of political rivalry and national
crises hence, social-economics and infrastructural development at the units (states and local
government) of federation reminds stagnation. “Federal government” as Labaran Maku the former
Nigeria Minister of information (under President GoodLuck Jonathan) defined it when he paid
courtesy visit to Osun State in 2013 said, it is a central of policy making and the subordinate units
(local and States) act at the level of policy implementation for meaningful development. However,
with this high level of hostile relationship that arises as a result of party superiority, (defectors
from P.D.P.to A.P.C), how would the State move forward in carrying out most of their
developmental projects? And how would the State execute the Federal government projects(plains
and actions)? With this unfolding hostile relationship and apparently federal government
inconsistent with the releasing of monthly legitimate State allocation, effective physical
development is banned to progress.
With the recent political awareness also, such rivalry is bound to boomerang. In the South
Western part of the country for instance: in Osun, Oyo, Ekiti, Ogun and Lagos State that are
controlling by All Progressives Congress (APC), the level of development and the increasing level
of social infrastructural facilities provided in most of these states, as commented by many National
dailies, had contributed to the economic well being of citizens.
2.2.4 Democracy, Political Participation and Good Governance: The Interface
Democracy, on its own, does not connote good governance. It is not an end in itself but a
means to an end. Deep-rooted and consolidated democracy in form of liberalism or what Cheema
and Maguire (2004) call ‘maximalist democracy’ indeed has been found to be able to engender
good governance. According to them, maximalist democracy encompasses “various rights and
21
liberties that have to be associated with a competitive and inclusive system of government.
Diamond (1999), while appraising the maximalist approach of democracy, submits that democracy
is a concept that allows for fundamental human rights, broadening political participation and
guaranteeing credible and periodic election.
For democracy to evolve good governance, Linz and Stepan (1999) suggest five inter-
related conditions that must exist which include: the rule of law to guarantee citizens’ freedoms
and independent associational life, functional state bureaucracy which can be used by the
democratic government to deliver public good, free and lively civil society, a relatively
autonomous and valued political society and an institutionalised economic society.
Political participation is sine qua non to good governance. Political participation, which
includes citizens’ involvement in the decision making process, contribution to public debate on
national issues and voting, needs to be encouraged. Wider political participation naturally endows
policies that emanate from that process with legitimacy, as people feel sense of belonging and can
lay claim of ownership to such policies. Policies are more likely to be sustainable when they
receive popular understanding and support, most especially when women, youths and minorities
have input into governmental decisions and also be provided with mechanism through which
unfavourable policies are contested and protested against. The purpose of broad inclusion of
citizens in the policy making arrangement is to create sense of belonging and awareness necessary
for the sustainable of policy even if it is a short-term painful policy that will provide long-term
reward. This public participation model is potent enough to consolidate democracy and engender
good governance.
Since most people in Nigeria desire economic development and the physical improvement
of their infrastructure and environments, responsive government will be such that seeks and
promotes economic development. On its own, good governance depicts the degree to which
institutions of a particular country (such as Executive, Legislature or Judiciary) and processes
22
(such as the role of political parties in election) are transparent, accountable to the people and allow
them to freely participate in decisions that affect their lives.
Good governance is when the authority of the government and sovereignty reside
ultimately with the people and are responsive to them (Diamond, 2005). Government and its
institutions must, as a matter of welfare policy, be pro-poor and should promote human
development of all citizens. Robert Dahl (1989) identifies three elements that distinguish
democracy from other forms of authoritarianism: the democratic process promotes individual and
collective freedom, it promotes human development and the democratic process, though not
perfect, as the best way by which people can protect and advance their common interests and
goods.
The beauty of good governance stems from its tendencies to empower citizens the
opportunities to use their discretion and provides with opportunities of self-fulfillment and self-
actualization by deliberately enhancing the capacity of individual citizen, who will in turn
transform other factors of production into productive purposes for national development. Human
development is the means through which other forms of development are achieved. Good
governance must indeed democratize the process of decision making in a way to guarantee the
involvement of the groups for which decisions are being made. For example, wealth creation
programme can only be potent and sustainable only if the affected group is involved at all levels
of decision making process.
Governance is good when it is not discriminatory and tends to treat every member of
society according to the established norms; laws should be applied to both the haves and the have-
nots in the society. Citizens regardless of social status, ethnic origin or sex, should be given
unrestrained access to justice and that judiciary, as an arbiter, should be independent and neutral
in the interpretation of law and efficient manner. Expectedly therefore, good governance is
achievable in the atmosphere of sustenance of the rule of law. Good governance should also focus
23
mostly on results and not processes in order to engender development. It should be measured on
government’s delivery inputs. That is, good governance is not about budget provisions; it is about
actual accomplishment and its good intentions. Good governance is not only critical to
development but should also have the capacity to use resources effectively to create wealth and,
in addition, induce economic growth and engender sustainable development.
Finally, democracy, political participation and good governance promote development.
Liberal and consolidated democracy puts considerable constraints on the individuals to behave
within the confines of the law and also allow the electorate to determine who occupies what
position. The institutions of good governance must be funded, staffed, trained, equipped and be
made independent in a manner that will investigate, expose, and punish corrupt conduct, and thus
vigorously discourage it in the future. Good governance can be enhanced through enhancing the
quality of democracy, including the devolution and decentralization of power and resources,
protection of human rights, removal of corruption, speeding up of justice and strengthening
electoral commission through viable and sustainable reforms.
2.2.5 Empirical Review of Political Participation in Nigeria
Rachman and Kescon (1985) in their studies on leadership styles have identified three
broad categories of leadership style as thus, the Autocratic Method, Democratic or participative
style and Laissee-faire Style. The United State Army Hand book, 1973 inter changeably named it
as Authoritarian or Autocratic, Participative or Democratic; Delegative or Free Reign. Autocratic
Method is straight – forward manners that gives directive and orders to follow. In the preferential
usage of the Autocratic Method, leader may or may not consult others.
This makes it to be effective especially when quick decision is needed since the leader has
the power to give order at will. In this sense, some people tend to perceive of this style as a vehicle
for yelling, using demeaning language, and leading by threats and abusing their legitimate power.
Otherwise, this is not the authoritarian style usage but “bossing people around” Doclark
24
(2013).Such usage of power has no place in a leader’s repertoire. In another perspectives,
democratic or participative style of leader encourages a free flow of opinion while it is obvious
that leader has the final decision, other followers make their suggestions or views known for
possible consideration. The leader has the skill to moderate and direct others. A situation when
followers are able to analyze the situation beyond the crises point and determine what needs to be
done and how to do it. This is done with certain level of delegated authority in democratic setting
also known as representative democracy.
Drawing from the perception of the trio Fafowora (1993), they argued that the major
problem that inhabitants of Nigeria society are facing centered principally on both the style of
leadership and followership; accordingly, this had resulted to enormous political, economic and
social instability problems, bribery and corruption also prevailed. The assumption here is that
whether those enormous problems resulted from the problem of leadership or followership. Our
regard to this is in the society is that, one person leads, while others follow, and rhetorically, can
there be a leader without followers and vice versa. These problems among others have prompted
researchers of this view demonstrated on many intellectual discussions, seminal and paper
presentations by those that shared similar or divergent opinion on leadership and followership.
There are three major ways of analyzing the problem as conceptualized by the trio (1993 : 26) that
our major problem revolved round the poor and or bad leadership; that our problem has been that
of poor and or bad followership and that our problem has not been either of those two but a
combination of both.
Stemming further on their analysis, scholars and experts on political behaviour have
devoted much time to seeking insights into different theories of leadership style in relation to
human behaviour and their individual social cultural background. Arriving at this point, analysts
suggested that, the beliefs of political leaders shaped their behavior and their relation with other
people, their decision on what is good and what is bad. And to achieve such unequivocal desire,
25
leaders knows how possible tomaliable and manipulate other political system, therefore, subjected
many institutions of government to their dictates. By so doing, the beliefs of political leaders are
not only product but essential component of all political system. These beliefs that pointed to the
nature of reality, essentially which including the meaning and historical dimension as in relation
to individual persons in the society, explain the way leaders distributed power, authority, and
wealth in political life. Personal interest had been attributed amount those overriding factors that
influence the chosen of Nigerian leader (their predecessors).This was rampant in the era of military
and in the contemporary Autocratic democracy.
A military administrator who step-aside was reported in one of the Nigeria’s monthly
magazines stated that he preferred his former military boss to become the next Nigeria president
purposely as he put it “He saved my career(in military) 30 years ago”. The election was conducted
(with free from fair) and such ex-military boss became the Head of State as earlier predicted. Such
attempt of superimposition as many observers of Nigeria political history assumed, was among the
reasons which led us to the 30 months civil war. This is an indication that many occurring political
events in Nigeria have several reserved presupposition.
2.3 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
This research work adopted elite theory of politics as it theoretical framework. The
concept of elite is based on the notion that every society holds a ruling minority, a group that
control and disputes the most important power sources. The emergence and development of the
elite theory of democracy is credited to prominent classical theorists Gaetano Mosca (1858-1941);
Vilfredo Pareto (1848-1923) and Robert Michels (1876-1936). These theorists offered a radical
critique of the competing theoretical-ideological streams of thought: the democratic theory
government of the people, by the people, for the people in Lincoln’s address, and the Marxist
socialism. The views of these scholars contrast with both of these ideologies. Their various
arguments emphasised an inescapable division between dominant minorities variously called

26
elites, ruling classes, political classes, oligarchies, aristocracies and so on; and the dominated
majority or masses. What is implied here is that, in every organised social system there exist two
groups those who rule (minority) and the ruled (majority). As such, the elite theory is seen as a
theory of the state which seeks to describe and explain the power relationships in contemporary
society in the field of political science and sociology and how social systems are divided into two
classes.
The elite theory is a philosophical explanation of the role of the leadership in governance
as it affects public policy including all socio-economic and political matters. If the formal
structures of government are central to explaining ‘who gets what, when and how’, then the study
and relevance of elite in policy process is equally important. Elites dominate the formal institutions
of government and are a determining factor in governance and decision making processes. Elites
are the decision makers in the society whose power is not subject to control by any other body in
the society.
The works of these prominent scholars are devoted to the explanation of the relations of
classes in social systems. Mosca (1923/1939, 51 in John, 2014) for instance made emphasis on the
ways in which small or a few minorities out-organize and outwit large majorities and that political
classes who are regarded as political elites command certain material, intellectual, or even moral
superiority over those they govern. Pareto on the other hand posit that in a society with truly
unrestricted social mobility, elites would consist of the most talented and deserving individuals;
but in actual societies elites are those most adapt at using the two modes of political rule, force and
persuasion, and these elites usually enjoy important advantages in form of inherited wealth and
family connection in society. In a similar body of ideas, Michels rooted elites (‘oligarchies’) in the
need of mass political parties and all other large organisations for leaders and experts in order to
operate efficiently; as these individuals gain control of funds, information flows, promotion, and
27
other aspects of organisational functioning, power becomes concentrated in their hands and
retaining this power increasingly governs their actions (Michels 1915/1962 in Linz, 2006).
There are varying perceptions on the role of elites in democracy. While some believe that elites
are bulwarks of democracy protecting it from the dangers of totalitarianism, the soul source of
value and element of democratic consolidation and political stability and constituting integrating
force in the society without which it may fall part; others believe that elites are chief threat to the
survival of democracy (Dowse and Hughes, 1983). They have exceptional access to key positions
in the society and appear to wield control over crucial policies disproportionate to their number
and they, to this extent, can understandably be a living contradiction to the notion of democracy.
On this philosophical basis, it is assertive that credit of democratic stability and good governance
should be given to the elite. Also, blame of democratic failure and bad governance will also be on
the elite, since it is central to governance stability or otherwise.
It is scientific to study and analyze governance and democratic process in any country using
elite theory. Elite theory is premised on a number of assumptions:
i. The society consists of two categories: the selected few, who are capable and, therefore,
have the right to supreme leadership; and the vast masses of people who are desired to be
ruled;
ii. That the majority of human beings are apathetic, indolent and slavishly uninformed about
what goes on in the administrative system and permanently incapable of self government.
That is, the elite decides on the structure, the personnel, the process of public policies of
the administrative system;
iii. Hence, the structure, substance and output of the administrative system may be viewed as
the preferences and values of the governing elite (Dowse and Hughes, 1983).
The elite theory postulates that public policy reflects the values and preferences of the elite
rather than demands of the masses. The elite consist of those few individuals who wield powers
28
and hold leading positions in the strategic aspects of society. The majority, the masses, only obey
and are guided, controlled and governed by the few. Many of the elites do not hold formal or legal
authoritative powers but are rather behind the scene, teleguiding and manipulating overt political
and policy actions (Ikelegbe, 1994). It is on the basis of presumptions that the masses are contented
and are incapable of challenging the authoritative position of the elite that informs elites’ reflection
of policy and its processes.
The elite theory directs attention to the source of policy flow and whose interests public
policies serve. The theory attempts a realistic explanation of the source of policy by predicating it
in the elite rather than the masses. It also explains the nature and source of policies in Nigeria.
Various policies in the public service can also be viewed as emanating from the Nigerian elite- the
political, administrative and economic leaders. This is contradictory to democratic tenets that lend
credence to participation, openness, accountability and freedom in all spheres of societal life.
Elites are capable of setting the tone of society by coming out with policies of their choice.
The level of stability and progress achieved in any society is a function elites’ initiatives. The civil
unrest experienced in Africa and the advancement of Europe can not be divorced from the
inclusion and activities of elites in these areas. The fact that Nigeria is oscillating between
democratic stagnancy and governance backwardness is reflexive of elites’ pursuit of personal
aggrandizement and promotion of geocentricism rather than altruistic policies, that are
nationalistic and ‘peoplecentric’ in nature. Peoplecentric policies are policies that are people-
centred, whose objective primarily is designed to engage the citizenry and serve the interest of the
people and the community.
29
REFERENCES
Adamolekun, L (1985) The fall of the second Republic. Ibadan: by spectrum Books Limited.
Adefemi V.I. (200)4 “Participatory Democracy and Good Governance in Nigeria”. Programme
on Ethnic
Adesiyan, E 2013 Electoral Engineering, Ethnicity and Presidential elections in Nigeria (1979 –
2007)
AdewaleAdemoyga (1981) Why we Struck; The story of the First Nigerian Coup. by Evans
Brothers (Nigeria Publishers) Limited.
Ajayi, K. (1995), “The 1993 Presidential Election and Nation-Building in Nigeria” in Mimiko,
N.O. (Ed.), Crises and Contradictions in Nigeria’s Democratization Programme, 1986-
1993. Stebak, Akure, pp. 180-189.
Akande L.F (2014) Public Opinion and Democratic Decision Making in Nigeria.
Public Policy
Akande L.F. 1999 “Military Rule and Leadership style, a case study of General SanniAbacha”.
Unpublished
30
Press.
Auya, O. Anya (2003) “Leadership Education and the challenge of Development in the 21st
Century”.
Dahl, R. (1989), Democracy and its Critics, Yale University Press, New Haven. delivere at the
3rd Emeritus Professor Ijalaye Lecture series held at the Obafemi Awolowo University,
Ile-Ife.
Dowse, R. and Hughes, J. (1983), Political Sociology, John Wiley and Sons, New York.
Falade, D.A. and Orungbemi, O. (2010) Democratic Governance and Political Education in
Africa. Being a Paper Presentation at the 3rd
Falade, D.A. (2008) Questions and Answers on Concepts, Methods, Issues and Problems in
Social Studies. Lagos, Novec’ kol.
Federal Studies (PEFS) Department of Political Science. University of Ibadan.
Fiedier, Fred E (1960) A. Theory of Leadership Effectiveness New York MC Graw – Hill Book
Company.
Ikelegbe, A.O. (1994), Public Policy Making and Analysis, Uri Publishing Ltd, London.
International Conference on Forgotten Africa and African Renaissance at the
Treasure land Conferene Centre, Kumasi-Ghana from 12th to 16th October, 2010
Jussey – Bass (2001) The Leadership pipeline : How to Build the leaders powered company: A
Wiley company 989 market – street San Francisci, C.A. 94103 – 1741: John Wiley and
Son. Inc.lecture at 1200-seater Hall, LAUTECH Ogbomoso.
Linz, J.J. and Stephan, A. (1999), Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation, The
Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore. Long Essay University of Ibadan
Marx, K. and Engels, F. (1981) Selected Works. London: Progress Publishers
31
Odofin, A. 1999 “Towards resolving Ethnic and Nationality Question in Nigeria”. A sectional
paper organized of The Social Sciences at the University of Ibadan on Thursday, 12
March, 1991.
Okeke, C. (2011). European Union Observers Condemn Gov Poll, Saturday Tribune, 30 th April,
2011. 4
Okpi, A. (2011). Despite Polls Success, Violent Hands Continue to Strike. The Punch, Thursday
14 th April 2011.
Oluwatoyin, O. (2007), “Leadership and Followership: The Nigerian Experience”, The Nation,
August 26, pp. 23.
CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY
3.1 INTRODUCTION
This chapter deals with the procedures used in the study. These procedures include; a research
design, method of data collection, sources of data collection, population of the study, sample size,
method of data analysis and finally area of the study. Obviously, due to the objectives this study
sets out to achieve, descriptive research seemed most appropriate. Also this particular chapter will
deals with details of the methods and procedures the researcher followed in carrying out the
research.
3.2 RESEARCH DESIGN
According to Asika (2009), research designs are often referred to as the structuring of investigation
aimed at identifying variables and their relationships to one another. In this study, questionnaire
32
serves as useful guide to the effort of generating data for this study. The survey research design
through the administration of questionnaires was used for the study.
3.3 METHOD OF DATA COLLECTION
Data for the study were collected from both quantitative and qualitative method of data collection.
The quantitative data were collected through the use of two (2) research instruments which were;
(i) Questionnaires administered to public servants, unemployed graduates, self-employed
graduates, under graduates within and outside Adamawa State.
(ii) Oral interview were used to capture the views of some political office holders.
The qualitative data were collected through in-depth interview, observation method and document
review.
3.4 SOURCES OF DATA
The method/instrument for the collection of data for this research work/study is grouped
into primary and secondary source of data. Both are extensively used for the purpose of
drawing an empirical conclusion on analysis of data so as to come up with fairly objective
findings.
3.4.1 Primary Sources of Data
The primary data for this study were obtained through the distribution of questionnaires
which were designed for the people of Wukari Local Government Area of Taraba State. The
primary data were collected through focus group discussion, face to face interview, and use of
telephone interview. In addition to this, oral interviews were conducted chiefly to supplement the
information derived from the questionnaires. The aim of this is to give the respondents the
opportunity of supplying those information they may not give in a structured questionnaire.
33
3.4.2 Secondary Sources of Data
The principal sources of secondary data were collected through textbooks, journals,
newspapers, magazines and internet. Some were also collected from unpublished materials,
archival materials/documents.
3.5 POPULATION OF THE STUDY
The target population of this study was one hundred (100) adult in Adamawa state,
and a total of sixty (60) responded. The population of the study includes all the public servants
within and outside Jalingo Local Government Area, government officials (politicians),
unemployed graduates and undergraduates self-employed graduates etc.
3.6 SAMPLE SIZE AND SAMPLING TECHNIQUE
Considering the limited resources (time, energy & finance) available to the researcher in i-
elation to the quantity of work to done, the researcher will make use of the sample of the population
for the project from which generalization on the research outcome would be made. For this reason,
the researcher also intends to adopt the Convenience sampling technique in selecting the
respondents
3.7 METHOD OF DATA ANALYSIS
After collecting all information on the topic of research using the quantitative methods, the
researcher intends to1 make use of statistical tools such as percentage for univariate analysis and
qui-square for the bivariate analysis respectively.
3.8 AREA OF THE STUDY
Wukari is a local Government area in Taraba State, Nigeria. Its headquarters are in the
Town of Wukari on the A4 highway. The Donga River flows through the area and the Benue River
34
forms a boundary with Nasarawa State to the northwest. The town is the base of the Wukari
Federation, a traditional state. Wukari local government has about 241,546 populations (2006
census), the local government has a total of 4,308km2, and the location of the local government
are 7º51’N 9º47’E / 7.850ºN 9.783ºE Coordinates.
Wukari local government area it share boundary with Ibi local government area by the
West, Gassol local government area by the North, Donga local government area by the East and
Benue State By the South. Wukari local government area consists of seven (7) Districts which are:
Avyi District, Chonku District, Arufu District, Bantaje District, Gidan idi District, Kente District
and Rafin kada District
Wukari local government area also consists of ten (10) wards which are: Avyi ward, Gindin
waya ward, Puje ward, Bantaje ward, Akwana ward, Hospital ward, Kente wards, Tsukundi ward,
Gidan idi, Sondi and Jibu ward.
Wukari Federation
The Wukari Federation is a traditional state in Nigeria, a successor to the Kwararafa state
of the Jukun people. The state is based in the town of Wukari in Taraba State, in the south of the
Benue River basin. The ruler takes the title "Aku Uka". The Jukun were established in Wukari as
early as the 17th century. The town was one of the southern centers on a trading route that
connected via Bauchi to the northern states of Katsina, Kano and Bornu. Large caravans would
bring goods transported from north of the Sahara, exchanging them for slaves, salt and ivory.
It is debatable whether the Jukun were ever the military leaders of the broader Kwararafa
state, as is sometimes claimed, or whether the Aku's role was more a symbolic or ritual leadership
of the different peoples of the Benue river basin. Clearly the Aku Uka of Wukari had considerable
influence. For example, in 1780 the leader of a group of migrants from Bornu felt it necessary to
35
apply to the Aku Uka for endorsement and recognition of his rule over their new settlement at
Lafia, to the northwest. The Aku Uka agreed and gave him the title of Sarkin Lafia Bare-Bari.
The Aku Uka of Wukari became the regional power in the 1840s after the once-powerful
Kwararafa state had been destroyed during the Fulani jihad (1804–1810) and its aftermath. The
consolidation of Wukari as an independent state may have been given impetus by pressure from
the Chamba people, who were pushing westward down the Benue at that time.
When the British incorporated the state into the protectorate of Nigeria around 1900, it was
multi-ethnic, including Tiv and Moslem Hausa-Fulani people as well as the original Jukun. The
British delegated much authority to traditional rulers in the Northern Region. In 1958 the Aku Uka
of Wukari was one of four such rulers serving as a minister without portfolio in the Executive
Council of the region, the others being the Sultan of Sokoto, Emir of Katsina and Emir of Kano.
Religion
Traditional Jukun beliefs and rituals are complex, with unique elements. For example, they
thought that in their migration from Yemen to Kwararafa around 596 AD they were assisted by
giant crocodiles, who were therefore protected, and still have a shrine in the Marmara pond at
Wukari. The Jukun religion includes belief in the divine right of kingship, with the Aku Uka being
considered son of a god. Of several gods, the sun god is paramount. The religion includes belief
in communicating with the souls of the dead.
These similarities to Egyptian beliefs have led some anthropologists to speculate that the
Jukun originally came from Sudan . The Kuteb people , who speak a related language and live just
to the south of the Jukun, have a tradition that they migrated from Egypt about a thousand years
ago, but their religion is very different.
Recent times
36
Wukari is multi-ethnic. While the Jukun consider that it is their traditional homeland, other
ethnic groups including the Tiv and Hausa have been present for over 200 years. In the 1910s, the
colonial authorities encouraged immigration of Tivs to the region, although they were considered
an "inferior group" with no history of central state administration, and were placed under the
authority of the Jukun Aku Uka. Continued Tiv expansion into Wukari was due in part to
population pressure, and in part to unsustainable slash-and-burn farming methods.
In the 19th century, the Tiv allied with the Jukun to fight the Hausa/Fulani. More recently,
the Tiv and the Hausa have at times allied against the Jukun. However, under the First Republic
(1963–1966), the Jukun and Hausa supported the Northern People's Congress, while the Tiv
supported the rival United Middle Belt Congress, often leading to violent conflict. During the
Second Republic (1979–1983) both the Tiv and the Jukun supported the National Party of Nigeria.
There were clashes in 1990 and 1991 related to whether Wukari should become part of
Tiv-dominated Benue State or Jukun-majority Taraba State. In June 1992, a Jukun member of the
Taraba state assembly, the only woman, was assassinated. The Jukun accused the Tiv of the
murder, and further violence broke out. During this period, as many as 5,000 people may have
been killed and many more forced to move. In 2001 and 2002 there were again clashes between
the Jukun, Tiv, Kuteb and Fulani people of the Federation. The Aku Uka of Wukari, Dr. Shekarau
Angyu Masa-Ibi Kuvyo II, was reported as saying "They (the Tiv) came here to farm; we allowed
them, gave them chieftaincy titles... Now that their population has increased, they believe they are
many enough to colonise us."
In August 2010 there was further fighting, this time along religious rather than ethnic lines.
Christians disputed the construction of a mosque at the Wukari Police divisional headquarters, and
started rioting a few days before a planned visit of the Moslem Sultan of Sokoto , Muhammad
Sa'ad Abubakar III . Lives were lost and property destroyed. The Aku Uka of Wukari and chairman
37
of the Taraba State Traditional Council, Dr. Shakaru Angyu, had reportedly warned the Area
Commander against the building of the mosque, which was destroyed during the disturbances.
On a more positive note, Wukari traditions such as the rituals of the crocodile shrine are of
interest to tourists. The annual Nwonyo Fishing Festival, which has its origins in 1826, includes
boat and canoe racing, diving, swimming, and traditional dancing, and there is a prize for the
person who catches the heaviest fish. The competition takes place at the Nwonyo lake, said to have
been discovered in 1816 by the founder of Ibi, Buba Wurbo, and the first public festival was held
during the reign of Abgumanu II (1903–1915). After a ritual to appease the gods of the river, when
the fishing context began in April 2010 the winner caught a fish weighing 318 kg.
38
REFERENCES
Abimbola O Adesoji and Akin Alao. "Indigeneship and Citizenship in Nigeria: Myth and
Reality" (PDF). Obafemi Awolowo University. Retrieved 2010-10-06.
Boniface I. Obichere (1982). Studies in Southern Nigerian history . Routledge. p. 29. ISBN 0-7146-3106-X
. Retrieved
2010-10-06.
Nigerian history, politics and affairs: the collected essays of AdieleAfigbo . Africa World Press. p. 70ff.
ISBN 1-59221-324-3 .
ENYERIBE EJIOGU (February 21, 2010). "Lafia: Unspoiled, very, very virgin" . Daily Sun. Retrieved 2010-
10-06.
Richard L. Sklar (2004). Nigerian Political Parties: Power in an Emergent African Nation . Africa World
Press. p. 443. ISBN 1-59221-209-3 . Retrieved 2010-10-06.
Fidelis Mac-Leva (24 June 2009). "How Giant Crocodiles Guided Jukun to Kwararafa" . Daily Trust .
Retrieved 2010-10-07.
Michael Lane (1959). "The Aku-Ahwa and Aku-Maga Post-Burial Rites of the Jukun Peoples of Northern
Nigeria" African Music. International Library of African Music. 2 : 29–32. JSTOR 30249506 .
ChukwudiNwabuko (2001-11-16). "End to Tiv Crisis Not in Sight - Sangari" . ThisDay . Retrieved 2010-10-
06.
Abdul Raufu Mustapha. "Transformation of Minority Identities in Post-Colonial Nigeria" (PDF). Oxford
University. Retrieved 2010-10-06.
Andrew Ahiante (2001-11-08). "Tiv, Jukun: A Catalogue of Crises" . ThisDay. Retrieved 2010-10-06.
Jukun-Tiv Conflict in Nigeria (1990-1992)" . Armed Conflict Events Database . December 16, 2000.
"Nigerian soldiers carry out massacres" . International Committee of the Fourth International. Retrieved
2010-10-06.
Sa'adAbubakarZongre (19 August 2010). "Sultan And Wukari Crisis" . Daily Trust . Retrieved 2010-10-06.
Wukari crisis condemned" . The Nation . 04/08/2010. Retrieved 2010-10-06. Check date values in: date=
( help) [ dead link ]
Genevieve Generoso (27 May 2008). "Taraba State Celebrates Nwonyo Fishing Festival" . ABC of Fishing .
39
CHAPTER FOUR
DATA PRESENTATION AN ANALYSIS
4.1 INTRODUCTION
This chapter deal with data obtains from a field survey which includes: data presentation, findings
and discussion on findings. The research work employed the simple percentage ration in the
analysis of the data from the field which was made easy for understanding and were critically
analyzed based on the presentation which was done in a tabular form in order to obtain a more
accurate result in relation to the responses.
4.1 DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS
This research project will present and interprets data obtained from the field survey via the
administered questionnaires. Sixty (60) questionnaires were administered during the field survey.
Furthermore, the entire questionnaire administered during the field survey has been retrieved, thus
representing 100% response rate. Describe statistic is used to analyze the result.
The questionnaire had two section : section (A) was designed to obtained the respondent
personal data while section (B) dealt with research data obtained, which will be represented and
analyzed accordingly, and outcomes (i.e. the research findings) used to verify the assumption as
well address the research problems.
40
4.2 SECTIN A: PERSONAL DATA
Table I: Sex Distribution of Respondents
Category Frequency Percentage
Male 41 68.3%
Female 19 31.6%
Total 60 100
Source: field survey 2017
The table above represents the respondents in sex category, where 68.3% are male and
31.6% are female. This indicates those males are predominant in the study population.
Table II: Age Distribution of Respondents
15-20 4 6.7%
21-25 12 20%
26-30 22 36%
31-35 17 28.3%
36 and above 5 8.3%
Total 60 100
Source: field survey, 2017
The table above shows that out of 60 sampled respondents (6.7%) falls within the age of
(15-20), 20% falls within the age of (21-25) 36.6% falls within the age of (26-30) 38.3% falls
41
within the age (31-35), while 8.3% falls within the age of 36 and above. This clearly indicates that
the vast majority of the respondents between the ages of (36-30) belong to the youth category.
Table III: Respondents Marital Status
Single 36 60%
Married 24 40%
Total 60 100
The tables above display the marital status of the respondents which (60%) are unmarried
while (40%) are married. This indicates that those that are single are predominant in the population
and also shows that the lives of the people need to be improved economically.
Table IV: Educational Level of the Respondents
Primary 15 25%
Secondary 20 33.3%
Tertiary 25 41.6%
Total 60 100
The table above shows the educational background of the respondents in which (15) which
represent (25%) acquired primary education, (20) which represent (33.3%) were at SSCE level
and (25) which represent (41.6%) were at tertiary level (i.e. OND, NCE, HND, BSC, PHD etc).
This shows that majority of the information obtained are from tertiary level.
42
4.2.2 SECTION B: RESPONDENTS VIEW
Table V: Do the nature and character of democracy and political participation affected
democratic consolidation in Nigeria?

Strongly Agreed 22 36%
Agreed 12 28.3%
Undecided 17 20%
Disagreed 5 8.3%
Strongly Disagreed 4 6.7%
Total 60 100
The above table shows that out of the total number of respondents used for this study, (22) of the
respondents which represent (36%) strongly agreed that the nature and character of democracy and
political participation affected democratic consolidation in Nigeria. (12) of the respondents which
represent (28%) agreed that nature and character of democracy and political participation affected
democratic consolidation in Nigeria. (17) of the respondents which represent (20%) were
undecided. (5) of the respondents which represent (8.3%) disagreed that the nature and character
of democracy and political participation affected democratic consolidation in Nigeria and (4) of
the respondents which represent (6.7%) strongly disagreed that the nature and character of
democracy and political participation affected democratic consolidation in Nigeria.
Table VI: Does political participation promote democratic consolidation in Nigeria?
43
Agreed 12 20%
Undecided 9 15%
Disagreed 5 10.3%
Total 60 100
respondents which represent (45%) strongly agreed that political participation promote democratic
consolidation in Nigeria. (12) of the respondents which represent (20%) agreed that political
participation promote democratic consolidation in Nigeria. (9) of the respondents which represent
(15%) were undecided. (5) of the respondents which represent (10.3%) disagreed that political
participation promote democratic consolidation in Nigeria and (4) of the respondents which
represent (9.7%) strongly disagreed that political participation promote democratic consolidation
in Nigeria.
Table VII: Do political, socio-cultural and bureaucratic constraints promote political

Agreed 12 28.3%
Undecided 17 20%
Disagreed 5 8.3%
Total 60 100
The table above shows that out of the total number of respondents used for this study, (22) of the
respondents which represent (36%) strongly agreed that political, socio-cultural and bureaucratic
constraints promote political participation in Nigeria. (12) of the respondents which represent
44
(28.3%) agreed that political, socio-cultural and bureaucratic constraints promote political
participation in Nigeria. (17) of the respondents which represent (20%) were undecided. (5) of the
respondents which represent (19.8%) disagreed that political, socio-cultural and bureaucratic
constraints promote political participation in Nigeria. (4) of the respondents which represent
(6.7%) strongly disagreed that political, socio-cultural and bureaucratic constraints promote
political participation in Nigeria.
Table VIII: Do you think there is a way forward as regards mitigation of political

Agreed 17 28.3%
Undecided 12 20%
Disagreed 6 8.3%
Total 60 100
respondents which represent (36%) strongly agreed that there is a way forward as regards
mitigation of political participation in Nigeria. (17) of the respondents which represent (28.3%)
agreed that there is a way forward as regards mitigation of political participation in Nigeria. (12)
of the respondents which represent (20%) were undecided. (6) of the respondents which represent
(8.3%) disagreed that there is a way forward as regards mitigation of political participation in
Nigeria and (3) of the respondents which represent (6.7%) strongly disagreed that there is a way
forward as regards mitigation of political participation in Nigeria.
Table IX: Does political participation play the role of acting as building blocks of democratic
stability?
45
Agreed 15 28.3%
Undecided 10 20%
Disagreed 7 8.3%
Total 60 100
respondents which represent (36%) strongly agreed that political participation play the role of
acting as building blocks of democratic stability. (15) of the respondents which represent (28.3%)
agreed that political participation play the role of acting as building blocks of democratic stability.
(10) of the respondents which represent (20%) were undecided. (7) of the respondents which
represent (8.3%) disagreed that political participation play the role of acting as building blocks of
democratic stability and (2) of the respondents which represent (6.7%) strongly disagreed that
political participation play the role of acting as building blocks of democratic stability.
Table X: Does political participation contribute to national development through the
aggregation of political interests in Nigeria?

Agreed 13 28.3%
Undecided 4 8.3%
Disagreed 10 20%
Total 60 100
respondents which represent (36%) strongly agreed that political participation contribute to
46
national development through the aggregation of political interests in Nigeria. (13) of the
respondents which represent (28.3%) agreed political participation contribute to national
development through the aggregation of political interests in Nigeria. (14) of the respondents
which represent (8.3%) were undecided. (10) of the respondents which represent (20%) disagreed
that political participation contribute to national development through the aggregation of political
interests in Nigeria and (3) of the respondents which represent (6.7%) strongly disagreed that
political participation contribute to national development through the aggregation of political
interests in Nigeria.
Table XI: Does political participation positively influence democratic consolidation in

Nigeria?
Agreed 15 28.3%
Undecided 3 8.3%
Disagreed 5 20%
Total 60 100
respondents which represent (36%) strongly agreed that political participation positively influence
democratic consolidation in Nigeria. (15) of the respondents which represent (28.3%) agreed that
political participation positively influence democratic consolidation in Nigeria. (3) of the

47
respondents which represent (8.3%) were undecided. (5) of the respondents which represent (20%)
disagreed political participation positively influence democratic consolidation in Nigeria and (2)
of the respondents which represent (6.7%) strongly disagreed that political participation positively
influence democratic consolidation in Nigeria.
TABLE XII: Does political participation have a lot of roles to play in Nigerian political
system?

Agreed 19 28.3%
Undecided 3 8.3%
Disagreed 6 20%
Total 60 100

respondents which represent (36%) strongly agreed that political participation have a lot of roles
to play in Nigerian political system. (19) of the respondents which represent (28.3%) agreed that
there political participation have a lot of roles to play in Nigerian political system. (3) of the
respondents which represent (8.3%) were undecided. (6) of the respondents which represent (20%)
disagreed political participation have a lot of roles to play in Nigerian political system and (1) of
the respondents which represent (6.7%) strongly disagreed that political participation have a lot of
roles to play in Nigerian political system.
Table XIII: Does people have become recipients of development as if development is
something outside their realms of experience and right respectively?

Agreed 20 28.3%
Undecided 5 8.3%
48
Disagreed 6 20%
Total 60 100
respondents which represent (36%) strongly agreed that people have become recipients of
respectively. (20) of the respondents which represent (28.3%) agreed that people have become
recipients of development as if development is something outside their realms of experience and
right respectively. (5) of the respondents which represent (8.3%) were undecided. (6) of the
respondents which represent (20%) disagreed that people have become recipients of development
as if development is something outside their realms of experience and right respectively and (4) of
the respondents which represent (6.7%) strongly disagreed that people have become recipients of
respectively.
Table XIV: Do the citizens have trust and confidence in their political leaders?

Agreed 2 6.7%
Undecided 5 8.3%
Disagreed 29 36%
Total 60 100
respondents which represent (20%) strongly agreed that citizens have trust and confidence in their
49
political leaders. (2) of the respondents which represent (6.7%) agreed that citizens have trust and
confidence in their political leaders. (5) of the respondents which represent (8.3%) were undecided.
(29) of the respondents which represent (36%) disagreed that citizens have trust and confidence in
their political leaders. and (17) of the respondents which represent (28.3%) strongly disagreed that
citizens have trust and confidence in their political leaders.
Table XV: Can you suggest three (3) ways of improving political participation in Nigeria
democracy?

Agreed 16 28.3%
Undecided 5 8.3%
Disagreed 7 20%
Total 60 100
respondents which represent (36%) strongly agreed to suggest three (3) ways of improving
political participation in Nigeria democracy. (16) of the respondents which represent (28.3%)
agreed to suggest three (3) ways of improving political participation in Nigeria democracy. (5) of
the respondents which represent (8.3%) were undecided. (7) of the respondents which represent
(20%) disagreed to suggest three (3) ways of improving political participation in Nigeria
democracy and (2) of the respondents which represent (6.7%) strongly disagreed to suggest three
(3) ways of improving political participation in Nigeria democracy.
4.3 FINDINGS
50
This study set out to evaluate ‘’Democracy and Political Participation in Nigeria (A Case Study of
Wukari Local Government Area). After a deep study on democracy and political participation, the
researcher made the following findings:
(i) Political participation contributes to national development through the aggregation of
political interests in Nigeria’s democracy.
(ii) Political participation play the role of acting as building blocks of democratic stability
in Nigeria
(iii) Political participation positively influence democratic consolidation in Nigeria
(iv) There is low level of political participation in Nigeria. Many Nigerians are not
committed to the electoral process and other political engagements. This study revealed
that the Nigerian political system and act of governance do not encourage mass
participation. This is because of the political culture of violence, intimidation,
manipulation, sentiments, money politics, ignorance, corruption, deception and apathy
that characterize the political system. There is marginal involvement of the Nigerian
women in the political process. Cultural issues, domestic responsibilities, financial
constraints and political indifference are some of the factors preventing women
participation in politics.
(v) From the above, it seems that in characterizing democracy and the rule of law, the
problem of participation is occasioned partly by the issues of values and representation,
which viewed in a formal or minimalist sense, excludes the bulk of the citizens. At one
level this situation raises distinct issues about the meaning of responsibility of political
authority to the common good. The democratic society aims at its own notion of
responsiveness through the creation of access to greater opportunities for citizens’
republican attitudes that justify interest in matters that concern everyone, the desire to
engage in public service without discrimination, access to mechanisms of redress,

51
equitable provision of social amenities for the citizens so as to guarantee human dignity
and well being.
4.4 DISCUSSIONS ON FINDINGS
The study dwelt extensively on democracy and political participation in Nigeria. While
juxtaposing democracy and political participation, it concluded that the crisis in one would
inextricably lead to the crisis in the other. It is evident, therefore, that the crisis of democracy and
political participation in Nigeria in the last decade is myriad and complex. The bulk of which was
created by leadership ineptitude arising from electoral frauds.
Democracy and political participation encourages the citizens to participate in deciding
who should hold what office at regular intervals. There is, therefore close relationship between
democracy and political participation. Since the return of democracy in Nigeria, 2012-2015 there
has been a steady decline in electoral participation due largely to non-democratic processes-
imposition of candidates at all elective positions, election rigging, corruption, violence during and
after elections and politics of exclusion and victory is viewed as a must, according former president
Obasanjo “do or die affair”. Electoral victory ensures material benefits to the victors. The
irregularities and the level of violence discourage an average Nigerian from taking part in politics
including voting during elections. There is a weak political institution in the country and this
contributes to the problem. The political parties lack ideologies and wallow in ideological
confusion. There is high level of inequality, poverty and massive youth unemployment.
Democracy in Nigeria since independence is practiced with regard to subjective factors and
primordial loyalty to one’s place of birth, social connection and group affinity. Consequently,
voting pattern has been ethnic-based. Democratization is always directed towards consolidation of
ethnicism. Campaigns are not issue-based and election victory is a function of level of
intimidation, thuggery and rigging. Sub national consideration has displaced national interest and
52
mediocrity took preference over merit and competence in the election of national leaders. The
unfolding events in Nigeria evidently point to a departure from the guides of democratic ethos and
ethics.
Politics in Nigeria has been described as sectional politics where denial of rights takes
priority in the distribution of and access to national resources. The segregated politics of the
governments at all levels create primordial ethnic loyalties where groups jostle for the “national
cake” in a way that could inhibit the continuity of the Nigerian State. Ajayi (1995) recaptures this
assertion when he opines that “politics and political parties were ethno-centrically based. Sub
national considerations overshadowed national interest. Primordial politics and the syndrome of
the ‘son of the soil’ took preference over merit and competence in the choice of national leaders.
53
CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 SUMMARY
This research work has ‘’Democracy and Political Participation in Nigeria (A case study
of Wukari Local Government Area 2012-2015)’ as its topic. Chapter one of this work present brief
introduction to the concept of the topic present, the statement of the problem, research questions,
objectives of the study, hypotheses of the study, significance of the study, scope and limitation
and end up with the definition of the key concept. In chapter two, some related literatures were
reviewed on the concepts under study, it was noted that democracy and political participation in
general have no single definition satisfactory to all scholars, and ‘’Elite Theory’’ is employed as
the theoretical framework. Chapter three focused on the research methodology which includes:
research design, area of the study, method of data collection, sources of data collection, population
of the study, sample and sampling technique and finally method of data analysis.
Chapter four, focused on the presentation and analysis which include data presentation,
data analysis of findings and discussion of findings in which data are obtained from the field survey
via the administered questionnaire, it gives a clear picture of the total numbers of respondent their
age range, sex distribution, level of education, marital status, occupation and their views on
democracy and political participation in Nigeria. This chapter concluded with the testing of the
research assumptions which was verified by the majority of the respondent that Political
54
participation contributes to national development through the aggregation of political interests in
Nigeria’s democracy. Finally, chapter five which contained the summary, conclusion and
recommendation.
5.2 CONCLUSION
The major theme of this work is to examine the ’Democracy and Political Participation in
Nigeria (A case study of Wukari Local Government Area 2012-2015)’ and the respondent were
analyzed as research finding. Judging from the findings of this research work, with particular
reference to some of the tables respectively, the results revealed that democracy and political
participation to a large extent impact positively to the economic development of Nigeria.
However, Democracy is government by consent of the people; this consent is obtained
through reconciliation between varying interests and ideologies of different groups. When there is
a free competition between more than one political parties for power, the people get opportunity
to consider various alternatives policies, programmes and personalities to exercise their choice.
This choice can only be made possible through periodic elections. There is therefore, symbiotic
relationship between democracy and political participation. In Nigeria, there is steady decline in
political participation since the return to democratic rule. This is as a result of irregularities inherent
in the political process in Nigeria.
The experience with citizens’ participation in electoral politics in Nigeria generally and
Taraba state in particular has not been encouraging. Even where development of local participation
is an important tool of rural development and where political education in mass participation is a
key element of the development strategy, programmes have not developed genuine participation
and responsibility among the people. The people have become recipients of development as if
development is something outside their realms of experience and right respectively. There are
political, socio-cultural and bureaucratic constraints to political participation.

55
It must be understood that political participation does not mean just voters turn out at the
polls. Participation implies breaking down standing barriers to enfranchisement, be it legal,
political or socio-economic and to dismantle the barriers inherit in our polity.
5.3 RECOMMENDATIONS
On the basis of the findings of this study it is recommended that:
i. There is urgent need for political education in Nigeria. Political education should not be
limited to the school system. Both formal and informal approaches should be adopted to
orientate the citizens on the need for active participation in the political system. There is
the need for mass political enlightenment through the media, adult education programme
and civil associations. The citizens should be conscious of the danger of their political
apathy.
ii. The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) should put in place machinery
that will ensure mass participation of the electorates during the Nigeria general elections.
INEC should be more transparent and impartial at every stage of the electioneering
process. The electoral process should be devoid of sentiment, favoritism, fraud, violence
and intimidation. Anyone who violates electoral procedure and policies should
immediately be brought to book. This will help to install sanity and confidence in the
electoral process and thereby enhance political participation in Nigeria.
iii. The youths of this country should be provided with jobs to avoid being used by disgruntled
politicians.
iv. There is urgent need to address the problem of inequality and poverty in the country.
v. The various political institutions should be strengthened to act as agent of change. Politics
is governed by rules and regulations, these rules and regulations should be respected by
the political actors.
56
vi. There is need for viable electoral reform. Reforming electoral processes in Nigeria will
accord the citizens sense of belonging and participation as their votes count and their
leaders emanate directly from them. Electoral frauds have also been discovered to be the
major impediments to development.
vii. Judiciary should be strengthened and be alive with its responsibility. Judiciary should be
bold enough to give verdict in favour of those who truly won elections.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Books
Adamolekun, L (1985) The fall of the second Republic. Ibadan: by spectrum Books Limited.
Adefemi V.I. (200)4 “Participatory Democracy and Good Governance in Nigeria”. Programme
on Ethnic
Adesiyan, E 2013 Electoral Engineering, Ethnicity and Presidential elections in Nigeria (1979 –
2007)
AdewaleAdemoyga (1981) Why we Struck; The story of the First Nigerian Coup. by Evans
Brothers (Nigeria Publishers) Limited.
Ajayi, K. (1995), “The 1993 Presidential Election and Nation-Building in Nigeria” in Mimiko,
57
N.O. (Ed.), Crises and Contradictions in Nigeria’s Democratization Programme, 1986-
1993. Stebak, Akure, pp. 180-189.
Akande L.F (2014) Public Opinion and Democratic Decision Making in Nigeria.
Public Policy
Akande L.F. 1999 “Military Rule and Leadership style, a case study of General SanniAbacha”.
Unpublished
Press.
Auya, O. Anya (2003) “Leadership Education and the challenge of Development in the 21st
Century”.
Badmos (2014) “Ethnicity, Reglision and Resource Conflicts Peace and Conflicts studies”.
Institude of African.
Bass, B.M. and AroLio, B.J. (1993) Transformational Leadership and organizational Culture:
Publicadministration Quarterly.
Cheema, S.G. and Maguire, L. (2004), “Democracy, Governance and Development: A
Conceptual Framework”, United Nations Development Programme, New York.
Diamond, L. (1999), Developing Democracy: Toward Consolidation, The Johns Hopkins
University Press, Baltimore.
Diamond, L. (2005), Democracy, Development and Good Governance: The Inseparable Links. A
Paper Delivered at the Maiden Annual Democracy and Governance, Ghana, March 1,
Lecture of the Ghana centre for Democratic Development (CDD).
DipoIrele (1993) In the tracks of African Predicament; philosophy and contemporary Socio-
Economic
Dowse, R. and Hughes, J. (1983), Political Sociology, John Wiley and Sons, New York.
Falade, D.A. (2008) Questions and Answers on Concepts, Methods, Issues and Problems in
58
Social Studies. Lagos, Novec’ kol.
Federal Studies (PEFS) Department of Political Science. University of Ibadan.
Fiedier, Fred E (1960) A. Theory of Leadership Effectiveness New York MC Graw – Hill Book
Company.
Jussey – Bass (2001) The Leadership pipeline : How to Build the leaders powered company: A
Wiley company 989 market – street San Francisci, C.A. 94103 – 1741: John Wiley and
Son. Inc.lecture at 1200-seater Hall, LAUTECH Ogbomoso.
Linz, J.J. and Stephan, A. (1999), Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation, The
Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore. Long Essay University of Ibadan
Ojo, O.M. (2014). Electoral Security and Democratic Consolidation in Nigeria. In Ikuejube, G
and Olupayimo, D.Z. (eds) Nigeria’s Internal Security Challenges: Strategies for
Sustainable Development, Ibadan, John Archers. 1-28.
Oke, L. (2010), “Democracy and Governance in Nigeria’s Fourth Republic” in Agagu, A.A.,
Arowolo, D., Afinotan, L.A. and Lawal, T. eds Public Administration in Nigeria, Alabi-
Eyo & Co. Ltd, Akure, pp. 312-322.
Olisa. M.O, Okoli, E. and Nwabufo .E. (1991), Government for Senior Secondary Schools.
Awka: Africana-FEP Publishers Ltd. Book House Trust.
Oloyede, I. (2009) Public Policy and Gender Politics in Nigeria. In Akinboye, S.O. (ed) Paradox
of Gender Equality in Nigerian Politics. Lagos, Concept Publication Limited.
Olufemi M.J. (2012) Leadership in the New World Economy.
Onaolapo Soleye (2005) “Democratic Sustenance in Nigeria and the challenges of retired
Generals”.
Onyeoziri, F. (2002), Alternative Policy Options for Managing the National Question in Nigeria,
John Archers Publishers Ltd, Ibadan.
Osaghae, E.G. (1998) Crippled Giant: Nigeria since Independence (London: C Hurst)
59
Schumpeter, J. (1942), Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy London: Allen and Unwin.
Sidney and Verba (1972:2). Participation and Political equality: Cambridge, Eng.; New York:
Cambridge University Press,
Journals
Aibieyi and Oghator 2007 Leadership styles: it impact on Humon resource management. Nigeria
Journals
Arowolo, D. and Aluko, F. (2010), “Globalisation, Democracy and Good Governance: The
Interface”, Academic Leadership Journal, Vol. 8 No 3, pp. 1-9.
Arowolo, D. and Aluko, F.S. (2010) Women and Political Participation in Nigeria. European
Journal of Social Sciences 14 (4), 581-593.
Arowolo, D. and Lawal, T. (2010), “Political Violence and Democratisation in Nigeria (2003-
2007)”. Journal of Contemporary Politics: UNAD, Ado Ekiti, Vol. 2 No 1, pp. 174-181.
Babatunde O. (2010) “Democracy without capacity, the Nigerian Experience” journal of
Development
Chuku, G. (2009) Igbo Women and Political Participation in Nigeria. International Journal of
African Historical Studies. http// findarticles.com. Retrieved in February, 2011
Falade, D.A. (2007). The Role of Social Studies Education in Inculcating Democratic Ideals in
Nigeria Ife Journal of Theory and Research in Education 10 (1) 16-23.
Magazines
Adebanjo, A. (2003) Spoiling the PDP Broth. Tell Magazine, May 5, 2003
Adeyemo, W. (2011). The Task Before Jonathan. Tell Magazine, No 17, May 2, 2011.
Administration Vols 1:127 Lead City University: Published by
College press and Publisher Ltd.
Agbaje, A. 1997 “mobilizing for a pre law Political culture’s” in Larry Diamond A. Kirk –
Greene
60
Audu N. (2006) Godfatherism and Electoral Politics in Nigerian Money, Politics and corruption
Magazine.
Newspapers
Adekunle, Y. (2007) A Win or Rig or Die Affair. Tell:Nigeria’s Independent Weekly, No 19
May 7, 2007. p.20
Adelakun, A. (2011). For First Time Voters, Change in Motivation. The Punch Tuesday 19th
April, 2011. 3
Agbo, A. (2011). Laying Ambush for Credible Polls. Tell: Nigeria’s Independent Weekly, No 9,
March, 2011. p. 47
Ake, C. (1991), “For Africa, the way forward”. The Guardian, 13 November, Lagos, pp. 2-3.
and Administration Research . ISSN (Paper)2224 – 5731.
Fabiyi, O. (2009) Aparthy of Nigerian Voters Worrisome- Iwu. The Thursday Punch 17(20) 583.
Okeke, C. (2011). European Union Observers Condemn Gov Poll, Saturday Tribune, 30 th April,
2011. 4
Okpi, A. (2011). Despite Polls Success, Violent Hands Continue to Strike. The Punch, Thursday
14 th April 2011.
Oluwatoyin, O. (2007), “Leadership and Followership: The Nigerian Experience”, The Nation,
August 26, pp. 23.
Paper Presentations
Dahl, R. (1989), Democracy and its Critics, Yale University Press, New Haven. delivere at the
3rd Emeritus Professor Ijalaye Lecture series held at the Obafemi Awolowo University,
Ile-Ife.
Falade, D.A. and Orungbemi, O. (2010) Democratic Governance and Political Education in
Africa. Being a Paper Presentation at the 3rd
Ikelegbe, A.O. (1994), Public Policy Making and Analysis, Uri Publishing Ltd, London.
61
International Conference on Forgotten Africa and African Renaissance at the
Treasureland Conferene Centre, Kumasi-Ghana from 12th to 16th October, 2010
Odofin, A. 1999 “Towards resolving Ethnic and Nationality Question in Nigeria”. A sectional
paper organized of The Social Sciences at the University of Ibadan on Thursday, 12
March, 1991.
Internet Source
Fred Luthans (2002) 9th Edition; organizational Behaviour New York NC Graw – Hill Higher
Education 573 –633.http://www. whink. Com/indonclark/leader/leads H. htmi
Idowu,A.A. (1998). Effective Realisation of Enduring Democracy, Good Governance and
Protection of Human Rights in Nigeria: Why, How and When? In Aguda, A.S.(Ed)
Governance, Democracy and Civic Society. Ile-Ife, Faculty of Social Sciences, O.A.U.
265.http://www.oau.effective.org.
APPENDIX I
Department of Political Science and International

Relations
Faculty of Social and Management Sciences,
Taraba State University,
P.M.B 1167, Jalingo.
Taraba State
Dear Respondents,
RESEARCH QUESTIONNAIRE
62
I am a final year student of the above named institution undertaking a research study titled
“Democracy and Political Participation in Nigeria (A case study of Wukari Local Government
Area 2012-2015)’’. You will find attached to this letter a questionnaire seeking to elicit the
necessary data for the study. Please indicate your responses by filling in the space or by ticking
the box confidential and will be used for the purpose intended.
Thank you.
Useni Audu
APPENDIX II
QUESTIONNAIRE ADMINISTRATION
INSTRUCTION: Please ensure to complete the questionnaire by ticking the correct answer(s)
from the options where necessary.
SECTION A: Personal information/Date
1. GENDER
a) Male ( )
b) Female ( )
2. Age-Range
a) 15-20 ( )
b) 21-25 ( )
c) 26-30 ( )
d) 31-35 ( )
e) 36 Above ( )
3. Marital status
a) Single ( )
b) Married ( )
63
4. Educational background
a) Primary ( )
b) Secondary ( )
c) Tertiary ( )
SECTION B: RESPONDENTS VIEW

5. Do the nature and character of democracy and political participation affected democratic
consolidation in Nigeria?
a) Agreed ( )
b) Disagreed ( )
c) Strongly agreed ( )
d) Strongly disagreed ( )
e) Undecided ( )
6. Does political participation promote democratic consolidation in Nigeria?
a) Agreed ( )
b) Disagreed ( )
e) Undecided ( )
7. Do political, socio-cultural and bureaucratic constraints promote political participation in

Nigeria?
a) Agreed ( )
b) Disagreed ( )
e) Undecided ( )
8. Do you think there is a way forward as regards mitigation of political participation in Nigeria?
a) Agreed ( )
b) Disagreed ( )
e) Undecided ( )
9. Does political participation play the role of acting as building blocks of democratic stability?
a) Agreed ( )
b) Disagreed ( )
e) Undecided ( )
10. Does political participation contribute to national development through the aggregation of
political interests in Nigeria?
64
a) Agreed ( )
b) Disagreed ( )
e) Undecided ( )
11. Does political participation positively influence democratic consolidation in Nigeria?
a) Agreed ( )
b) Disagreed ( )
e) Undecided ( )
12. Does political participation have a lot of roles to play in Nigerian political system?
a) Agreed ( )
b) Disagreed ( )
e) Undecided ( )
13. Does people have become recipients of development as if development is something outside
their realms of experience and right respectively?
a) Agreed ( )
b) Disagreed ( )
e) Undecided ( )
14. Do the citizens have trust and confidence in their political leaders?
a) Agreed ( )
b) Disagreed ( )
e) Undecided ( )
15. Can you suggest three (3) ways of improving political participation in Nigeria democracy?
i. …………………………………………………………………………………………
ii. …………………………………………..…………………………………………….
iii. ………………………………………………………………………………………..
65
66

Audu Complete Project

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Audu Complete Project

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

DEMOCRACY AND POLITICAL PARTICIPATION IN NIGERIA:

A STUDY OF WUKARI LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA, TARABA STATE.

BEING A RESEARCH PROJECT SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF

POLITICAL SCIENCE AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, FACULTY OF SOCIAL

AND MANAGEMENT SCIENCE,

IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT FIR THE AWARD OF BACHELOR OF SCIENCE (B.Sc)

POLITICAL SCIENCE AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

TARABA STATE UNIVERSITY, JALINGO.

1.1 BACKGROUND OF STUDY

to dim light on democratic progress.

deception, violence and uncertainties that characterize the political system.

during the polls (Odebode, 2011).

process and mass participation of the electorates.

practice has proved difficult.

reaching influence on the outcome of policy choices.

According to Oke (2010) democracy involves the opportunity to participate in decision

of choice between alternative programmes, consensus on fundamental issues, as well as essentially

in decision making by all.

to democratic process cannot be over-emphasized, democracy is not wholly centered on election.

competition, popular and meaningful participation, responsiveness, transparency and

accountability. Freedom to organize, freedom to protest anti-people policies and freedom to

fundamental condition for development: responsible government that is government that is

officials and their families and their cronies”.

1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

to the democratic challenges witnessed.

The experience with citizens’ participation in electoral politics in Nigeria generally

development as if development is something outside their realms of experience and right

respectively. There are political, socio-cultural and bureaucratic constraints to political

1.3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

objectives of this project work:

democratic consolidation in Nigeria?

ii. How political participation promote democratic consolidation in Nigeria?

iii. How political, socio-cultural and bureaucratic constraints promote political

1.4 OBJECTIVES OF STUDY

The objectives of the study are to:

democratic consolidation in Nigeria

ii. To identify how political participation promote democratic consolidation in Nigeria

iv. To proffer a solution as regards mitigation of political participation in Nigeria

1.5 RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS

participation. Therefore, the research hypotheses are:

1.6 SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY

the elite theory to contemporary political analysis.

1.7 SCOPE AND LIMITATION OF THE STUDY

researcher was confronted with, the challenges are as follows:-

prepare for the final year examinations.

1.8 DEFINITION OF KEY TERMS

DEMOCRACY; Appadorai (2004) described democracy as a system of government under which

POLITICAL PARTICIPATION; Akamare (2003) political participation is an aspect of political

it is an “institutional arrangement”, as a means of filling public offices by a competitive struggle

offices or other private positions.

and Administration Research . ISSN (Paper)2224 – 5731

Lecture of the Ghana center for Democratic Development (CDD).

University Press, Baltimore.

Alabi-Eyo & Co. Ltd, Akure, pp. 312-322.

Nigeria” in Olufayo, O.O. (Ed.) Perspective on Globalization and Africa Development.

Cambridge University Press,

LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

research work adopt elite theory as a theoretical framework.

2.2 LITERATURE REVIEW

sovereign power is indirectly exercised by the people through a system of representation.

Consequently, political participation, particularly in the electoral process, is a fundamental

speech and freedom from arbitrary arrest.

and many parts of Africa. The political culture in

be unwise in a democracy to enforce laws not approved by the people”.