TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title Page – – – – – – – – i
Approval Page – – – – – – – – ii
Dedication – – – – – – – – iii
Acknowledgements – – – – – – – iv
Table of Contents – – – – – – – v
List of Tables and Figure – – – – – – vii
Abbreviations – – – – – – – – viii
Abstract – – – – – – – – x
CHAPTER ONE: Introduction – – – – – 1
- Background to the Study – – – – – 1
- Statement of the Problem – – – – – 5
- Objective of the Study – – – – – 7
- Significance of the Study – – – – 7
CHAPTER TWO: Literature Review – – – – 9
2.1 Literature Review – – – – – – 9
CHAPTER THREE: Methodology – – – – 39
3.1 Theoretical Framework – – – – – 39
3.2 Hypotheses – – – – – – – 44
3.3 Method of Data Collection – – – – – 44
3.4 Method of Data Analysis – – – – – 47
3.5 Logical Data Framework – – – – – 48
CHAPTER FOUR: Democratic Governance and Economic
Development in Nigeria, 1999 – 2007 – – – 49
4.1 Absence of Electoral Legitimacy and Underdevelopment
Of Nigeria’s Productive Forces – – – – 50
4.2 Lack of Transparency and Accountability in Governance
And Pervasive Public Sector Corruption in Nigeria – – 62
CHAPTER FIVE: Insecurity and Economic Development
In Nigeria, 1999 and 2007 – – – – – 85
5.1 Governance and Security Deficit in Nigeria since 1999 – 86
5.2 Insecurity and the standard of living of Nigerians – – 114
CHAPTER SIX: Summary, Conclusion and Recommendations – 131
6.1 Summary and Conclusion – – – – – 131
6.2 Recommendations – – – – – – 133
BIBLIOGRAPHY – – – – – – – 134
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURE
Table 3.1: Logical Data Framework (LDF) for the Study – – 48
Table 4.1: The Last Minute Award of Oil Block Bazaar During
Obasanjo’s Tenure (1999-2007) – – – – 73
Table 4.2: The Halliburton Scandal indicating the beneficiaries
And the amount – – – – – – 78
Table 4.3: Nigeria’s ranking in the CPI since 1996 – – – 79
Table 5.1 Democracy Index for Nigeria – – – – 99
Table 5.2: Summary of Reported Crime Cases in Nigeria 1994-2003 – 102
Fig 5.1: Graphic Representation of Reported Crime Cases in
Nigeria 1994-2003 – – – – – – 103
Table 5.3: Level of Crime from 2000 to 2008 – – – 113
Table 5.4: Nigeria and other West African Countries on the
Global Peace Index Ranking – – – – – 114
Table 5.5: Relative Poverty Headcount, 1980-2010 – – – 119
Table 5.6: Relative Poverty: Non-poor, Moderate poor and
The Extremely poor, 1980 – 2010 – – – – 120
Table 5.7: National Poverty Incidence 2003/2004 and 2009/2010 – 121
Table 5.8: National Unemployment Rates (2000 – 2009) – – 121
Table 5.9: Manufacturing Capacity Utilization (2000 – 2008) – 122
Table 5.10: Growth Rate of the Economy (2000 – 2009) – – 123
Table 5.11: Inflation Rate (2000 – 2009) – – – – 124
Table 5.12: Federal Government Capital Expenditure as Percentage
Of GDP (2000 – 2009) – – – – – 124
Table 5.13: A Chronological Presentation of Petroleum Product
Prices in Nigeria Since the 1970’s – – – – 127
Table 5.14: PMS Price per liter in OPEC countries (in Naira) – 128
Table 5.15: Showing the Net Enrolment in Primary Schools
1990 – 2009 – – – – – – – 129
ABBREVIATIONS
CAST Center for American Studies
CBN Central Bank of Nigeria
CHS Commission on Human Security
CM Chikoko Movement
COG Commonwealth Observer Group
COMA Coalition for Militant Action
CPI Corruption Perception Index
DFID Department for International Development
DPR Department of Petroleum Resources
EBA Egbesu Boys of Africa
ECOWAS Economic Community of West African States
EFCC Economic and Financial Crimes Commission
EIU Economic Intelligence Unit
ERC Electoral Reform Commission
EU-EOM European Union – Election Observation Mission
FDI Foreign Direct Investment
FNDIC Federated Niger Delta Ijaw Communities
FOI Freedom of Information
GCDD Ghana Center for Democratic Development
GDP Gross Domestic Product
GMD Group Managing Director
GNI Gross National Income
GNP Gross National Product
GPI Global Peace Index
HDR Human Development Report
HIV/AIDS Human Immunodeficiency Virus /Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome
HRW Human Rights Watch
HSU Human Security Unit
ICG International Crisis Group
ICPC Independent Corrupt Practices and Other related Offences Commission
IDPs Internally Displaced Persons
IGA Itsekiri General Assembly
IMF International Monetary Fund
INEC Independent National Electoral Commission
IRI International Republican Institute
IYC Ijaw Youth Council
JRC Joint Revolution Council
LDCs Less Developed Countries
LNG Liquefied Natural Gas
MB Martyrs Brigade
MD Managing Director
MEND Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta
MOSIEND Movement for the Survival of the Ijaw Ethnic Nationality in the Niger Delta
MOSOP Movement for the Survival of the Ogoni People
NBS National Bureau of Statistics
NDDC Niger Delta Development Commission
NDI National Democratic Institute
NDLA Niger Delta Liberation Army
NDPVF Niger Delta People Volunteer Force
NEEDS National Economic Empowerment Development Strategy
NEITI Nigerian Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative
NGOs Non-Governmental Organisations
NIPP National Independent Power Project
NNPC Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation
NPEB National Poverty Eradication Blueprint
NSPMC Nigerian Security Printing and Minting Company
ODI Overseas Development Institute
OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
OMPADEC Oil Mineral Producing Areas Development Commission
OPEC Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries
PDI People’s Democratic Institute
PDP People’s Democratic Party
PLASIEC Plateau State Independent Electoral Commission
PMS Premium Motor Spirit
PPMC Pipeline and Products Marketing Company
PPP Purchasing Power Parity
RMAFC Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission
SALW Small Arms and Light Weapons
TAM Turn-Around Maintenance
TI Transparency International
UN United Nations
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
UNN University of Nigeria, Nsukka
UU Urhobo
Union
ABSTRACT
Democracy and development are
both highly contested concepts. Similarly, the interface between both concepts
is also a subject of contestation. On the one hand are neoliberal theorists who
believe that liberal democracy is essential, in fact a desideratum for economic
development and human security and therefore an ideal form to which all nations
of the earth must aspire. On the other are what may be termed neo-Marxist
theorists who interpret liberal democracy as an ideological fig wig for masking
the mindless exploitation and atrocious inequality that characterizes the
global capitalist system, particularly the peripheral states. In line with the
former position which has been on the ascendancy since the end of the cold war,
the restoration of democratic rule in Nigeria in 1999 elicited high
expectations among the citizenry that it would usher in an era of economic
prosperity and security of lives and property both of which had been eroded
under prolonged military rule. This study empirically examines the impact of
the first eight years of democratic experiment in Nigeria on economic
development and human security. Specifically, it examines the impact of
democratic governance on economic development and the implication of the high
level of insecurity witnessed during the period on the standard of living of
the citizens. The study made use of qualitative descriptive method of
collecting secondary data and employed content analysis in the analysis of the
data. The theory of the postcolonial state was adopted as its framework of
analysis. The study found that the democratic rule as implemented in Nigeria
between 1999 and 2007 did not translate to economic development or increased
security of lives and property and that the high rate of insecurity as
witnessed during the period adversely impacted on the standard of living of the
citizens. The study therefore recommends among other things the bridging of the
high level of inequality in Nigeria and the opening up of the democratic space
to make for greater citizen participation and which would in turn ignite their
creative energy for national development.
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the Study
Democracy is a contested concept. In its liberal conception, democracy is the political form through which political power is said to reside in the people. This political power could be directly exercised by the people especially in modern times through their decisions on sensitive matters expressed in form of plebiscite or referendum; or indirectly through their representatives in government (Magstadt, 2009). The import of this notion therefore is that democracy is a process and indeed a developmental process which encompasses the people. In other words, the people are so central to democracy in that when the people develop politically, then the democratic process is bound to transform to maturity stage (Omodia, 2013: 569). This, he said, implies that democracy is a dynamic process that is expected to bring about the growth and evolution of a society and that democracy, if fairly practiced, should bring about a reduction in poverty, socio-economic empowerment and other quantitative and qualitative indices of development of man and the society he lives in.
In Africa, the need for democratization especially as witnessed in most nation-states in the 1990’s is based on the conception that democratic governance constitutes a major tool for socio-economic and institutional transformation or development (Olagunju et.al 1993; Omodia 2007; Johari 2011; Omodia 2012a). Thus, the pattern of democratization was majorly anchored on the transition from either one-partyism to competitive party democracy or from military rule to competitive party democracy.
In the case of Nigeria, although under military governance, developmental strides at reducing poverty and strengthening national integration were intended through the adoption of various strategies (Aku et.al 1997; Omodia 2005; Omodia 2007b), it has been recorded that political development was quite minimal as a result of the nature of military governance which is not designed to be integrative of the people. This factor no doubt also negatively impacted on the success of poverty reduction and economic development strategies of military regimes. Thus, democratic governance especially in the mid 1990’s and late 1990’s in Nigeria was viewed as a functional mechanism that would bring about an enduring development to the Nigerian state.
Meanwhile, the concept of development is no less contested with the most pronounced contestation being that between the Liberal and Marxist perspectives. To the liberalists, development means change which results due to maximization of the growth of GNP through capital accumulation and industrialization. Todaro (1979), for instance, saw development as the capacity of a national economy, whose initial economic conditions have been more static, to generate and sustain an annual increase in its Gross National Product (GNP) at the rate of 5% or 7%. On the other hand, the Marxists view development differently. To them, development is above economic progress and encompasses multidimensional processes. It is beyond economic variables and focuses on man and his well-being. Taking a hard look at development, Rodney (1972) posited that development in human society is many sided process. At the level of individual, it implies increased skill and capacity, greater freedom, creativity, self-discipline, responsibility and material well-being, while at the level of the society, it implies an increasing capacity to regulate both internal and external relations. It is the Marxists opinion that development starts at the individual level of the society and therefore, for real development to emerge the Marxists advocate the following:
- Free, compulsory and universal basic education;
- Improvement in the education and training of the working population;
- Raising the standard of living of the people;
- Improvement in the health of the people, by all round provision of health facilities;
- Making sure that level of consumption of material, social and spiritual goods and services are raised.
They contend that if these conditions are met, it will engender all round individuals with the capacity to contribute to development.
Sanusi (2010:4) acknowledges that economic progress is merely a component of development and that development goes beyond pure economics. In an ultimate sense, he said, development must encompass more than the material and financial side of people’s lives. Development, according to him, is therefore a multidimensional process involving the reorganization and reorientation of the entire economic and social systems which, in addition to improvements in incomes and output, typically involves radical changes in institutional, social and administrative structures, as well as in popular attitudes and in many cases even customs and beliefs.
Mindful of these conceptual polemics, we take as our point of departure Dudley Seers’ injunction that the questions to ask about a country’s development are:
What has been happening to poverty? What has been happening to unemployment? What has been happening to inequality? If all of these have declined from high levels, then beyond doubt this has been a period of development for the country concerned. If one or two of these central problems have been growing worse, especially if all three have, it would be strange to call the result “development”, even if per capita income doubled. This applies of course to the future too. A “plan” which conveys no targets for reducing poverty, unemployment and inequality can hardly be considered a “development plan” (Seers 1972 cited in Oyugi, 2008: 1-2).
Meanwhile, the concept of democracy and its relationship with economic development has equally been an area of debate (Rodrik, 1997). The debate has revolved around whether or not democracy promotes economic development or, conversely, whether or not economic development produces an environment that allows democracy to thrive and be sustained in the longer term (Matlosa, Elklit and Chiroro, 2007). Going further back, the debate may however properly be situated within the classical liberal theory and its concern with the best form of government to promote economic development. The liberals believe that government is best which governs the least, and that the primary function of government, which comes into existence as a result of a social contract, is the maintenance of national security and the protection of private property. On the basis of the classical liberal theory, Immanuel Kant, several centuries ago wrote a book titled Perpetual Peace in which he argued that peace depended on the establishment of liberal democracies in all nation-states and the translation of the principles of liberal democracy into the international realm.
This has been further expounded and propagated by neo-liberal theorists notable among who is Francis Fukuyama. He argued, following the collapse of the Soviet Union, that liberal capitalism provides the best solution for national progress and international peace and that in it mankind has finally discovered the ideal state. Implicit in this liberal cum neo-liberal assumption is that the implementation of liberal capitalism along with its political correlate liberal democracy would lead, as if by automatism, to greater economic development and guarantee the security of lives and properties of the citizens of any given state. In this sense therefore, democracy has become widely recognized as prerequisites for sustainable economic development (Johnson 1982; White and Wade 1988) essentially because it fosters transparency, accountability, the rule of law, respect for human rights, civic participation, and civic inclusiveness; all of which are necessary for securing economic productivity, equitable distribution and state legitimacy (The Ghana Center for Democratic Development, 2001). With respect to Nigeria however, it would appear that the restoration of democratic rule neither stimulated economic growth nor did it guarantee greater security of lives and properties of the citizens.
It is against this backdrop therefore that this study examines the impact of Nigeria’s democratic experiment on the nation’s economic development between 1999 and 2007.
1.2 Statement of the Problem
