Nigeria's Voice: Pressuring Government for Change

Full Transcript: 

Hello and welcome to the Rules of the Game podcast where it is my job to discuss democratic institutions. 

Nigeria’s youth is creative, vibrant and energetic. Nigeria’s youth has tremendous potential and wants to thrive, yet people across Nigeria face political obstacles. With my guest Greg Anyaegbudike, I discuss how Nigeria’s grass-roots political movements try to build pressure on political institutions and how the local government level could be key for a more inclusive development. More transparency, accountability and most importantly better representation are crucial to making Nigeria’s democracy flourish and work for the Nigerian population at large. 

Greg Anyaegbudike is a Citizen Engagement Consultant at the World Bank, and was previously an Advisor and Team Leader at the Partnership to Engage, Reform & Learn for Engaged Citizens (PERL-ECP) funded by the Foreign, Commonwealth, and Development Office of the UK government. Before he was also a State Team Leader of the State Accountability and Voice Initiative in Anambra State. Greg holds a Master’s in Information Science of the University of Nigeria in Nsukka. 

I met Greg in 2018 when I visited Abuja. We had a great discussion around local governance related to my research that I did on the topic. We kept in touch ever since and I thought it would be great to have him on the podcast, and I think his perspective and insights into Nigerian local politics are very interesting. 

I am your host, Stephan Kyburz, and this is the tenth episode of my podcast The Rules of the Game. I am a political economist with a PhD in Economics from the University of Bern in Switzerland. And I previously held positions at the London School of Economics and Political Science and the Center for Global Development.

Due to the long distance recording, there are a few glitches in the sound, hope it doesn’t bother too much. You find a full transcript of the conversation on my website rulesofthegame.blog. Anyway please enjoy this wide ranging conversation with Greg Anyaegbudike.

Interview: 

Stephan Kyburz: Greg Anyaegbudike, welcome to the Rules of the Game podcast. Very happy to have you on the show.

Greg Anyaegbudike: Thank you very much, Stephan. Glad to be on the show. 

Stephan Kyburz: So let’s start with the first question that I ask all my guests on the podcast: What is your first memory of Democracy?

Greg Anyaegbudike: My first memory of democracy was some time in 1993, when Nigeria was about to transit from military rule to civilian rule. So we had this democracy, I was able to vote then, and all of a sudden there seemed to be very high tension in the country. People that are living in the North who are of Southern origin, were trying to move to the South, and people of northern origin were moving up to the North. The country was separating. There was tension. There were cries of war. And all of a sudden, after the voting, there was an announcement that the election had been annulled. But what struck me very strongly was the fact that what the president then, General Babangida, was making an announcement and tried to explain to Nigerians what happened. He said that democracy can be like to eating a Jollof Rice, saying that put that to Thabo Mbeki that, first of all Babangida said that no one democracies is the same in the whole world, but that they have their different niches and parts, but they are still all democracies. So Thabo Mbeki took up that point to say that democracy I can be liking it a Jollof Rice. Some put it in their mouth and swallow it. Some put it in their mouth and chop it into two and swallow it. Some chew it, you know, chew it before swallowing it. So democracy is like putting rice from the mouth to the stomach. The manner, the way how it goes from the mouth to the stomach is different across the world. So for me, this is what struck me so much about democracy.

Stephan Kyburz: Yeah, that’s a very interesting, very interesting comparison. And also that the notion, kind of, that democracy works a little differently all around the world, in different countries. And did that kind of motivate you, you know, these first memories of democracy, or when did you become active or decide to work on policy, on local democracy? 

Greg Anyaegbudike: Well, it made me curious. Because I think that democracy as a standard as it is taught at school, we were taught that democracy is government of the people, by the people, and for the people. And in the practical sense of it it seemed that democracy has been described in different forms for different people. It made me more curious. And I started to look at it, started listening to the news, understanding. I started looking and I have deeper insights into other countries’ democracies. Working to support and analyse and provide advisory for governor systems and electoral systems. Then that was when I started working in these institutions, on the democratic institutions, so to say so. Nigeria had interrupted democracy from 1999 up to now 2021. So all the time I’ve worked with development partners, which spreading up to two decades now. It had always been working on democracy. And the changes that have happened within that period are quite interesting for me. Maybe that discussion goes on, our I would try to bring up some of those changes. 

Stephan Kyburz: That’s great. That’s exactly what we’d like to talk about today. And in your role, as you know, you work in citizen engagement and local political movements or policies. What, we’re, kind of, the most successful stories, or where do you see the most, you know, where is democracy rooted in In Nigeria? 

Greg Anyaegbudike: Well, I see the most successful stories of democracy in the activities of the civil society. Now, if you take a trajectory of how society has fared, from 1999 to today. You see a massive and entrenching of democratic principles within the Nigerian system. So coming from the military era, a lot of things are shut, it is secrecy. Those who are ruling were very discretionary. People do not feel free to talk as much as they want to give opinion, or to give criticism to government policies. Everybody is meant to stand in line. And this military attitude sank much into the ruling civilian class then, because the military would be the head of state government or head of the federal government, but will appoint civilians, to be the ministers and to be the aides supporting the military administrators. So those military attitudes sank into a lot of the civilians. So maybe I could use the world of militarization of the democratic systems in Nigeria because that military rule, and attitude, especially the attitude, this psyche and the principals sank so much into the people in the ruling class then, that when the military handed over power in 1999, they were almost behaving like the military. They think you don’t have to speak, you just have to obey. They think you don’t have to air your views, so at first it became abnormal for them in the ruling class, maybe from 1999 to 2006, to see people challenge the authority, because of that rubbing of shoulders with the military. So you find out that the military have got that strong influence on the civilians and they carry that influence into the civilian administration. So then, voices were not very strong. Then, voices were sinners, a very strong affront on the authority. They were not accepted. Government documents, government activities were considered a secret. Government policies were not consultative, they were not inclusive. People will just sit in their offices and make policies that they think will be good for others. And this was the attitude that pervaded that period. A good example was that a couple of civil society organizations went to a government to say: we want to see your budget, within this period of 1999 to 2006. They want to see it, and the person that came to his office came out and said “Okay, fine. I’m coming”. After a little while policemen came and took out those people and arrested them. And that person said “Who are you? Why would you ever ever ask to see our budget documents?”. You find this attitude, you know, entrenched in this period. But from 2007 to 2015, you saw a lot of openings, because in 1999 in 2006, governments had to open up systems, there were laws that promoted civil liberties, laws that promoted voice and going on. So if you look at that trajectory from the point where voice is not a tolerated to the point where voice is tolerated and accepted. Up to this point, maybe between 2015 on now 2021, when the voice of civil society are becoming part of government decisions, government policies are becoming more inclusive. Government policies and the programs are becoming more participatory. So for me, that 21, or 22 years of uninterrupted democracy as of today, has seen a move for voice. From where it was to where it is now informing and becoming a part of governance. There are other aspects of governance, including service delivery, including civil rights, that I have not talked about. I just took it from the trajectory of voice. Let me stop here. 

Stephan Kyburz: Okay, but so you see, Do you think civil society has become stronger over time and especially in the recent few years? What developments do you see? And how does civil society engage with the government institutions, especially at the local level? So, can civil societies have influence at the local level, like the local government level? Because the local government level should be really the government level that is closest to the people, but I know that it’s, you know, elections at the local level have been held sometimes, but not not often and sometimes kind of caretaker committees have been appointed by the state governor. So, do you think civil society organizations can have influence at the local level? And if yes, yes, how do they work? What are their strategies? 

Greg Anyaegbudike: Thank you very much, Stephan. Still taking it from the point of voice and going about what has happened, how are they influencing local government and whether they can be more effective at the local government. So I mentioned that between 1999 going forward to 2015 and then 2021, you find government making rules, like freedom of information acts. Outside the federal level, and some states have domesticated it. That’s the act that helps civil society to access government information, you have like the open government partnership, which the government signed in 2015. You have the fiscal responsibility law, which also enables citizens participation and access to government information. These are some of the things that made civil society stronger. And the open government partnership, if you get to a higher level, where citizens and government are considered as equal partners, supporting governors and taking decisions. So, with these and some other laws like, the fiscal transparency laws, like public procurement laws, like audit law, which has been championed now. So you find out that these are some of the anchors through which civil society became stronger in voice. And then one of the major developments that has made civil society voice to be strong. At the national level are the advancements made in science and technology, especially through ICT, the social media. So it now gave people more voice and encouragement and got more citizens involved in government. Now coming down to the local government system. Yes, the local government system is not as advanced and developed as the state and federal system in Nigeria. So you see a lot of local governments annexed under the state government, and you don’t find that kind of independence that the constitution tries to grant the local government system to operate. So you find that the local government system continues to be managed and controlled by the states. Although some do elections, most others do appointments of the local government chairman. And again the money from federal allocation used to go to the states before going to the local government. So the state has a lot of control over local government allocation. So most concentration of civil society are towards those places where there are reforms that open spaces for voice, open space for access to information, and open spaces for citizen participation in governance, which is more at the federal level than at the state level, and very less at the local level. However, the federal government in the quest to open up more space in 2021, in 2019, sorry, gave out on executive order, executive order number 10 in Nigeria mandates the accountant general of the federation to ensure that the local government money hits directly into local government accounts, so that at the point the local government can be more autonomous, they can have more access and control over the resources for them. However, because of other extant rules and laws, it is not allowing this local government to still have that control over local government funds and local governments activities. So you have some clauses in the financial control and the financial regulations at the state and local government where it gives the state the mandate to directly control the development plans of local governments. So based on that you have a strong hold on the local government system. So you don’t find more civil society organizations working strongly at the local government system. But you find them working more at the state and stronger at the federal level. Even when the order number 10, the order number 10 was signed, there was still somewhere where the state and local government are joined, and that still gives control for the government to the set. That committee is called Joint Account Allocation Committee, where state and local governments sit down to talk about these development plans I am talking about and also to ensure that they are in sync with what the state is doing. So based on that, even when the executive order number 10 was signed and the money keeps directly to the local governments. Local government chairmen still have allegiance to the state and the states still control it through joint projects, joint state local government projects. So through that, the local governments still sign off their money into a project that is inter-local government, like that is more than one local government. These projects are controlled by the states. And you see the states they’re having a strong hand in the local government system and this is all tied around the electoral system. The electoral system that breeds the local government is still very, very at the control of the state governments. So you find out that on paper these two tiers of government are separated, but in practice, a lot of this have convoluted it, even in institutions, even in finances, and even in service delivery. 

Stephan Kyburz: Essentially, the constitution doesn’t allow the local governments to work independently, right? So would you agree that, like a strengthening of the local government level would benefit the people and the service delivery at the local level?

Greg Anyaegbudike: A citizen in a local community to travel all the way to Abuja to go and advocate for a project is very, very tough. You have to buy a ticket for the train or for a flight, you have to book a hotel. You have to do all of this and it may not end just in a day, you may have to visit a couple of days, so it’s a lot of money. But if some of these activities and some of these engagements are done at the local level, the cost of going to local government headquarters is so small to the point that to go there to see the local government chairman or even the local government chairman, being from your locality, you can go to his house. You don’t even need to transport yourself. So if local government systems is strengthened and it will actually bring a lot of development to the grass-roots, it will help people to get more involved. It will help local government also know what exactly are the people’s issues. And as leaders of the higher tiers of government to ensure that those service delivery needs are met. But right now every eye is on the state government and at the federal government, everybody is seemed to be snubbing in goods, snubbing to local governments, because the resources are not controlled there. So the activities of civil society at the local level is much, much lower and less effective than at the state and federal level. 

Stephan Kyburz: Okay, Yeah, that’s very interesting. And, um, I have done some research right on local governments in Nigeria and I kind of see the same from a more let’s say, like from a brother perspective in research terms. So what rule or what kind of institution? Or how would you change the institution in your personal opinion to improve the local government how they’re working? Do you have, like, specific suggestions, or would you just say in general they need more independence? 

Greg Anyaegbudike: My first actions around the local government independence, it’s about the leadership recruitment process. It has to be inclusive. Just like the National Assembly this week authorized the use of electronic transfer of results as they are looking at the electoral act. That’s a kind of reform need not just happen at the federal and state government, they also need to happen at the local government, because it is when you have good leaders, a leader that came in through the masses of support of the people that inclusion will be stronger, that the quest for service delivery will be stronger. Otherwise, so long as the control of the leadership recruitment process is still under the states, and it is more descrationary than being electionary, then you find less effectiveness in the local government system. The other thing is that the local government system, even in the way it is now, some state structures, it’s not entirely bad, some state structures are also supporting the local government, for example, in terms of waste management, like in terms of a basic education in tears, like in terms of primary healthcare, in terms of industrialization, you find out that the local government are still getting what they should get. However, they are not performing as they should perform. For example, take the case of the primary health. The money for the taking care of the primary health workers in local government still is a local government responsibility. But in the states, you have an agency called primary health care development agency, which is like a buffer between the federal government, and the local government. And they have all these mandates to ensure that there’s primary healthcare. So coordination is one big issue, coordination. So why has the state set up structures? One other institution that we want to establish very strongly for proper working of the local government, is a coordination institution and a coordination mechanism. Because if the teachers go to school, where does the supervisor of the teacher come from? From the state or from the local government? If the supervisor is there, who validates what the supervisor does? Is it the local government or is it the state? So you find that this lack of coordination has also affected the local government system. So you have the primary health care development authority pay for the local health care workers, pay for the nurses, pay for the doctors, pay for the health care facilities. But who is the health inspector? If the health inspector is at the local government, how are they coordinating with the people that provide the incentives from the state or provide the services from the state? How are they monitored? Are they making sure that the teacher who is asked to go to the class to teach is teaching? So it’s very difficult for someone of the state government to go from the state capital to every local government to monitor. So how effective are the local government systems monitoring those facilities and resources that are deployed at the primary health centers and primary schools, and waste management systems within the communities. So still find out that they are not working as they are supposed to do. So they are not performing as fit for purpose, they are underperforming and all this is about leadership. It’s also about coordination. Sometimes they want to work, but the coordination mechanism is not giving them the leverage to work. So these are the things I want to strengthen if I want the local government system to work very well. 

Stephan Kyburz: So do you think the local government councils they are not a very good representation of the people or they are, they’re really only accountable more to the state governments than to the people. Is that right? 

Greg Anyaegbudike: The local government council is more like rent seeking. It is more like rent seeking and patronage. That’ is the main thing. They are accountable to whoever gives them the patronage. That’s how it works now, 

Stephan Kyburz: Right, and like if someone you know, let’s assume, someone would form a new party, obviously there are many, many political parties in Nigeria. But few of them have real power, because the big parties control most of the resources, they are installed in state governments. And so the electoral law at the local level is well where you have single-seat district’s where usually the bigger parties are favoured. Would you say the electoral law is also not really helping political competition, so that the main parties always win the local government seats? 

Greg Anyaegbudike: Absolutely yes! The electoral law is not helping the political system. That is why the electoral law has been amended at the federal level now and some of the reforms there is that results will be transmitted from the point of voting and no longer going to where there it is subject to manipulations, doctoring of figures. So this one new reform that Nigerians are welcoming that the National Assembly has done. But the issue is, with the president signed that reform, because the big parties, for example, the opposition party took over six years ago. This big parties came because they came on the mantra of change. They want to change the system. But have they really changed the system? My answer is No, because some of these reforms on the electoral law happened before the 2019 election. But they are more interested in leaving the status quo, so that they can manipulate their way into their next tenure. So now is coming up the 2023 (election). They are trying to open again by this reform of electoral transmission of votes. There are also other reforms like one more fundamental reform  is no electronic accreditation, no voting. Because in 2015 they put up a policy that says that if the electronic accreditation cannot capture you, you can fill an instant form and vote. So that instant form became the order of the day. But now they have pronounced that “no electronic accreditation, no voting”. So if that no electronic accreditation, no voting is there, and electronic transmission of votes, even in the litigation process, it makes it simpler, because everything will now be electronic. So yes, the reforms are coming now. Better late than never. However, the big parties are not making any difference. They continue to cross cap it. So now the All Progressive Congress is the ruling party, a lot of the people of the old ruling party have all in droves migrated into the new party. What has changed is just the name, the contents are the same. Same old people, same old recycled politicians, same old individuals. Just changing their garb and still perpetrating the same things, still blocking reforms, still wanting the status quo of things not working well, they prevail, and you have some more ethnic sentiments. So the parties do not have ideologies. We have 91 or more political parties in Nigeria, but it is the same people, the ideologies are the same. So for me, let’s strengthen our institutions for now and see how individuals come into the institutions.

Stephan Kyburz: Thanks for sharing all these thoughts. Let’s start wrapping up the discussion and I’d like to know from you, looking forward to the next presidential election, but also in general, what is kind of your biggest hope and what is your biggest fear in terms of democracy in Nigeria?

Greg Anyaegbudike: My biggest hope is that the reforms in the electoral acts start taking practice. That’s my biggest hope. I also hope that some of the reforms in the petroleum industry, some of the reforms in the audit industry, because auditing is a very strong institution of government that promotes checks and balances. So these reforms in the audit, those reforms in the petroleum industry, those reforms that promote inclusion. My hope is that if they are further strengthened, there will be better days ahead for Nigeria. But my biggest fear is whether the ruling class are happy to see these reforms happen. For example, since 2007, various development partners, civil society organizations, groups and individuals are pushing for reform in the audit law in Nigeria. It may interest you to know that in 2021, Nigeria is still using the 1956 audit ordinance. In the 21st century, 2021. So that ordinance they are using, is not in any way fit for purpose for the reforms that have happened in the fiscal and monetary systems in Nigeria. And in the governance systems, bureaucracy and governance systems in Nigeria. There has been a lot of reforms in the public finance management, but there has not been corresponding reform in auditing. So that audit law, if it is passed. But the government does not demonstrate interest in it. Since 2007 they’ve been pushing it up and down, up and down. And it is going to the presidency and coming back. At first, it sat there for a long time in the National Assembly. The National Assembly passed it the first time, it wasn’t passed, they repassed it again. It has still not been attended to by the government. But look at the petroleum industry act. There the government demonstrated the will to see it passed. It was passed by the National Assembly, and the president signed it off immediately. Then sent it back to the National Assembly for some amendments. So you can see how fast bills can move if the government has the political will to do it. But you can see how slow and stalled the audit bill has been, which is one main instrument of accountability and to promote good governance in Nigeria. But it is stalled! So that’s the kind of thing I’m saying, the parties may be there, but the political will to bring reforms is one of my greatest challenges and dismay about Nigeria moving forward. 

Stephan Kyburz: Thanks a lot for that. Do you have any books or any articles that you would like to share with the audience? 

Greg Anyaegbudike: Well, they may not be books. But there may be articles. There’s been reviews of the public financial management in Nigeria. People can look at a document called PEFA, public expenditure and financial accounting in Nigeria. So there is a PEFA secretary, it shows you comprehensively the depth level of accountability in Nigeria. The other book, I would actually encourage people to read, I would actually encourage people to read, which is not particularly a Nigerian book, but it is a book that can actually if implemented in Nigeria would help out. It’s called “Start-up Nation”. I don’t know whether you know the book. Start-up nation is a book about how Israel is using start-ups to develop their economy and the media economy boosts were. Israel is flourishing today, we can take that pattern. The Tony Elumelu Foundation is actually taking that pattern where they run programs that make people to compete with start-up businesses. And these are some of the places where Nigeria can be looking at in terms of getting the youths to be part of development and helping the potential of the youth. A lot of the youth are doing very well now, in IT, in using the emerging technologies, in the financial industry, in emerging technologies and artificial intelligence to promote economies. And these are the areas that I really want people to look at, especially as it pertains to Nigeria.

Stephan Kyburz:  Yeah, I will be happy to include those resources, those books in the show notes and I see it exactly the same. There is so much potential in the youth. There is so much creativity and hopefully the government will not, you know, like stop all that energy and the creativity on the way. So I really, really hope that, you know, some of the institutional changes can be made to strengthen the local governments and also what we haven’t talked about yet. This is really the oil revenues that also have a huge influence obviously at all government levels, that have a huge influence on political dynamics, I would say. Okay, Greg. So thanks a lot for all these thoughts and sharing your opinion on what could make a difference at the local government level. Do you have any final thoughts that you want to share with the audience? 

Greg Anyaegbudike: Yes, there’s a very big hope in Nigeria. The citizens are very optimistic and they are eager to be part of government. So it’s an array of hope that with the trajectory of push for citizens that is happening now, things can actually get better. For example, at the first instance, the National Assembly did not want to approve electronic transmission of results. But after about one month of constant citizens’ pressure, there were talks, there were pressures, the voices were rising around it. They finally succumbed to pressure and added electronic transmission of results during voting. So that is also a hope that voice can do a lot, voice can actually achieve a lot in Nigeria. And I believe that with some of the concerted efforts of development partners, efforts of even some government key change agents, efforts of the civil society and some other key individuals in the society, and even the support and the leverage they’re getting from the new media. Despite the fact that the Nigerian government banned Twitter and they’re working very hard to see how voices can be constrained or compressed in NIgeria, the hope still remains that citizens voices are getting stronger, and government is gradually beginning to accept that the citizens are part of governance, and not just the elected or the appointed officials. Everybody is part of governance. So that interest and the principle of voice in Nigeria is actually a ray of hope, and I’m happy about it and we continue to sustain that voice, not just at the national level, even at the local level. Right now there are so many “Whatsapp” groups at the local level where even the Chairmen and aides and appointees are there to answer people’s questions. They are beginning to respond. They are beginning to know that citizens are no longer looking the other way, that there’s a searchlight on the activities and they are working very hard to do it. And if this is joined up with the reforms in the electoral process, then I think there is very strong hope for Nigeria. 

Stephan Kyburz: Yes, so let’s really hope and work for, that the voices will be heard and the voices are getting stronger and stronger to have a bigger say in all levels of governance in Nigeria. So, Greg, thanks a lot for this interesting discussion and I wish you all the best with your work, with citizens’ engagement, and grassroots local democratic movements. So thanks a lot, Greg. And hopefully we’ll have another discussion.

Greg Anyaegbudike: I am actually delighted and look forward to more discussions in the future. 

Stephan Kyburz: Okay. Cool. Yes, me to Thanks a lot, Greg. Bye bye.

Greg Anyaegbudike: Thank you. Bye bye.

Outro:

Thanks for listening to this episode. If you liked it, please share it with friends or on social media, or leave a review. It really helps my podcast and my message to be heard. On my website rulesofthegame.blog, you find a form to give feedback directly back to me, or just send me an email to [email protected]. I would love to hear your comments or suggestions for upcoming episodes. Take care.