Governance, Politics and Women’s Participation in Politics: Implications for Current and Future Leadership by Nigerian Women
Continued from January 26 blog
Respect
for good governance is not alien to Africans.
This is also demonstrable historically.
Again, I will use the example of the Yoruba who were so intolerant of
tyranny and absolutism that they called upon tyrants to commit suicide by
presenting any such ruler with a calabash into which his/her head is expected
to be placed in short order. This is of
course, extreme and inhumane, but it may be boiled down to the essential
philosophy of rejecting tyranny and absolutism, and thus, refashioned and
re-cast as a fundamental commitment to good governance-the rule of law, due
process, etc., and made a fundamental part of our emergent democracy instead of
the current situation when we speak democracy and act tyranny, or on the other
hand, we import any and everything that is faddish from the outside, with no consideration
fo rmaking such institutions acceptable and understandable to our people. Many of our leaders, female or male, fail to
realize that they must act in ways that enable them to capture the imagination
of the people, that they must sell themselves to the people instead of acting
in subversion of the system by buying votes, rigging elections, stealing ballot
boxes and using thugs to maim, intimidate and kill their opposition.
Beginning with the premise that a
constitution need not be written to exist, it is also obvious that many African
peoples had constitutional rule before colonialism and in contradistinction
with the present order where most people have no idea what the constitution
says about ANYTHING, those unwritten constitutions were better known and
understood by the people governed under those political systems. Does this call for equitable balance between
men and women imply that once we have a good constitution, a critical mass of
women in politics, respect for the rule of law and property rights, due process
and the like, we have a nirvana on earth?
Of course not. The rest of my
talk will focus on the implications of meaningful women’s participation for
good governance in Nigeria. But first,
how do we get more women into office?
There
have been many policy and numerous mechanisms and methods taught and otherwise
disseminated. According to experts, a
mixture of proportional-type representation and quotas (that may be temporary)
have worked in other countries, including some in Africa. Given these challenges, the recommendations on
tactics for women’s agency include public action, affirmative action in
legislative bodies, political party and electoral system reforms, action by
women’s organization, the establishment of alliances, consultation with role
models and targeting young women. [i] Discussing the use of role models as a
strategy, the argument is that the mass media plays a particularly crucial
role. There should be practical and
constant discourse by woman leaders and women’s lobbies and the news media to
draw attention to women’s leadership as well as to ensure that there are news
reports on programs and initiatives to address gender imbalance.[ii] Some electoral systems are believed to be
more amenable to enabling women’s inclusion in the candidate lists that
political parties draw up, and also enhance the possibility of electing
women. Nordic countries and other
African countries that have had significant increases in the number of elected
women to the legislature depend on proportional representation[iii]
rather than a first past the post type electoral system, as found in Nigeria.
Affirmative
Action is enshrined in the constitution of some countries, and combined with
methods that ensure that for each male candidate, a female candidate is also
presented by a political party (zebra strategy in South Africa and 50-50
strategy in some other countries).
Uganda, Norway, India, and Seychelles are just a few of he countries
that have used the Affirmative Action strategy, and all attest to its
effectiveness in guaranteeing an increase in the number of elected women. The chapter on gender justice in Nigeria’s
constitution recommended the achievement of a minimum of 30% of all political
appointments, as advocated in the Beijing Platform for Action in order to
redress the gender imbalances in the political systems of states members.[iv]
The desire to accomplish this goal of increased women’s political
participation has made both proportional representation and quotas attractive and popular. There is nothing wrong in this. However, do increased numbers of women change
the tone, nature, and character of politics?
Not necessarily. If we observe
that past instances of women’s participation in governance did not benefit
women as a group, we should be clear that this is not due to anything
pernicious about African culture but may be attributed to the isolated existence of these women in male
dominant political structures. Indeed,
some scholars base the recommendation of a 50/50 or 30% affirmative action
strategy on this situation, and give as rationale for their recommendations,
the need for a critical mass of women in politics, a situation that they expect
to generate changes in policymaking and implementation in developing countries
where elected women represent women’s interests (Thomars, 91, Byrne, 97).
The Research on Women’s Political Participation in the 2007 Elections
In
our research report, we observe the following conclusions by scholars of
women’s participation in politics: For Lovenduski
and Pippa Norris, women parliamentarians in the UK are believed to introduce a
new set of values “to issues affecting women’s equality in the workplace, home,
and public sphere” (4).
Diane Sainsbury
considers that since 45% of MPs in Sweden are women, there has been a
redefinition of women’s issues “as a demand for gender equality,” leading to
the transformation of women’s issues from small, special minority issues to
“major party issues.” Therefore, there
are now changed conditions for substantive women’s representation.
Gendered demand
for increased democracy produces the strategic conversion of political women
from a small minority within each party to majority of citizens. This is a potential boon for better
representation (4).
Shettima tells
us that it is quite possible for women to be politically enfranchised and for
them to still suffer de facto disfranchisement through the use of unfair
qualifying conditions, discriminatory administrative rules, and through the
mobilization of bias – where by virtue of the ability to set the agenda, men
monopolize power and exclude women from decision-making.
Bearing
in mind the scholarly analysis above, it becomes important to answer the
following questions:
- What does women’s political participation mean?
- What happened in the precolonial period with regard to women’s political participation?
- What happened in the postcolonial period? A diachronic analysis of six phases in Nigeria’s political history:
For ease of
analysis, it is necessary to divide Nigerian history into the following
phases. However, this cannot be done
right now.
- 1950s to 1966 – Nigeria’s first republic and budding political participation in Western democratic institutions: Nationalism and the struggle for inclusion.
- 1966-1979 – Military rule
- 1979-1983 – 2nd republic
- 1983-2000 – Military rule
- 2000-2007 – 3rd republic
- 2003: first post-authoritarian election
- 2007: second post-authoritarian election + first civilian-to-civilian transition
The point of
drawing upon Nigeria’s precolonial history as done previously is to underline
and foreground Nigerian women’s political participation as a historical and
well-documented fact. This being
said: it is important to stress that
colonialism created a radical break in the sense that whatever political and
social advantages women had under the old order were either eroded or totally
eliminated. Let me hasten to say that
men were by no means better off, since they too were otherized, excluded from
power and emasculated. The process of
gaining the rights of citizenship under the new “modern” political system was
attended by the sweat, blood and tears of those that defied the new
overlords. As Frantz Fanon astutely put
it: the colonial world was a Manichaean
world, and while its Janus-faced state turned its kind, gentle and humane face
to the white colonial minority, its harsh, brutal and punitive face was
inclined toward the colonized African majority.
Worse still, this was constructed as a “civilizing mission” and it is a
marker of its success that the great majority of us postcolonial Nigerians are
still firm believers in the superiority of the West. We crave all things western – the clothes,
language, education, culture, religion, name it…
As
Ngugi wa Thiong’o put it, our minds have been colonized. Once again, Fanon is relevant. He told us that the colonial condition is a
“Nervous Condition”. We still manifest
elements of that selfsame nervousness today.
We have little self confidence, no pride in our rich culture, no
understanding of our place in history.
Let me once again, quote Fanon – “Each generation must out of
relative obscurity discover its mission, fulfill it or betray it.” What is the mission of this generation of
Nigerians? What is the mission of this group
of women leaders? What grand narrative
have we constructed to give meaning
to our existence? To what end? Now let us switch gears again. We ought to celebrate. As flawed as it is in its original design,
Nigeria is now 47 years old. This is not
a minor achievement. In three years,
we’ll be fifty years old as a nation. As
we celebrate, we should also ponder – what do we have to show for the 47
years? What have we contributed that
will stand the test of time? How will
posterity remember us?
NDI
and WRAPA undertook a study of women’s political participation in Nigeria. Our findings constitute part of the situation
as seen by women from 12 states, two from each geopolitical zone. In the first place, the report demonstrates
that even in the difficult days of colonialism, Nigerian women forced the
colonial state to reckon with them. The
Aba women’s war is legendary, although many of us still use the colonial
language and call it the “Aba riots”.
The women in Abeokuta wre mobilized by Funmilayo Ransome Kuti to fight
against the combined forces of Alake Ademola and British colonial
government. These women essentially
demanded inclusion and participation where there was none.
It
is less well known that after the Abeokuta women’s Union was founded, again, by
Funmilayo Ransome Kuti, a Nigerian Women’s Union was created which made the
following proclamation: This assembly
shall be known as the Federation of Nigerian Women’s Societies [FNWS], where
the voice of all Nigerian women will be heard and known” Mrs. Ransome Kuti and Mrs. Margaret Ekpo were
part of the 400 women (who represented Nigerian women’s organizations in 15
provinces) who participated in a “parliamentary” conference in 1953. the significance of this goes back to my
previous statement that those who do not learn the lesson of history are doomed
to repeat it. I also find the saying
relevant that history often replays itself, once as tragedy, and then as
farce. Although the NWU claimed to be
non-political, it expressed distinctly political goals.
(1) Achievement
of the franchise for women.
(2) The
abolition of electoral colleges
(3) The
allocation of a definite proportion of representation to women with women being
allowed to nominate their own representatives on the local council, which
should not be headed by traditional rulers.[v]
In 1952, Elizabeth Adekogbe founded
the Women’s Movement in Ibadan. Nigerian
women also participated in most of the indigenous pressure groups and political
parties formed in the nationalist era: the Nigerian National Democratic Party
(NNDP), Action Group, National Council of Nigeria and the Cameroons (NCNC), the
Nigerian Youth Movement (NYM). Prior to
this, Nigerian women formed
western-style political pressure groups early in the 1900s. Indigenous women’s groups such as the Lagos
Women’s Market Association, led by Madam Alimotu Pelewura, preceded these
western-style institutions.
The
Lagos Women’s League, which was founded in 1901, and led by Mrs. Charlotte
Obasa, was an example of the modern pressure groups. Their trailblazing efforts were developed in
the 1940s when under the leadership of Mrs. Kofoworola Abayomi; the Nigerian
Women’s Party was formed (on May 11, 1944).
The formation of the Nigerian Women’s Party in 1944 was a reaction to
women’s marginalization in the male dominated political parties, which for Mrs.
Oyinkan Abayomi others, had demonstrated that they were not interested in
women’s issues and allowed for no women in their leadership.[vi] Similarly, Mrs. Funmilayo Ransome Kuti
founded the Abeokuta Women’s Union (AWU) in 1949, and the organization became
the Nigerian Women’s Union (NWU) later that year.
If we are determined to learn the
lessons of history, we would know the goals and objectives of these women’s
organizations intimately, so that at the very least, we would not thing that we
are reinventing the wheel, and we can calmly and deliberately build upon the
legacies of those who went before us.
The larger lesson here, I think, is that we should always insist on our
rights, as I am happy that many of the women here gathered have done. When we insist on our rights, we should not
only do so gently, but loudly and contentiously if need be. I like Frederick Douglass’ saying: that power is never conceded. As women interested in political power, we
must always bear this in mind.
How
does one struggle loudly and contentiously for the inclusion of women in this
day and age? In the first place, by
insisting on government, political party and society’s commitment to creating a
critical mass of women in elected and appointive positions. Negotiations, memorializing and
demonstrations should be undertaken to accomplish this agenda-setting
initiative. If anything should galvanize
and unite the women of Nigeria and compel them to cross party, ethnic,
religious and class lines to fight for a common cause, this is as good an issue
as one can find. However, once we demand
increased participation, what do we do with it?
The question of whether or not elected women represent women and promote
women’s interests is not a frivolous one.
If women legislators purport to represent women, is this unfair to the
male members of their constituencies?
What policies devolve from this representation that positively impacts
upon women as they live their lives?
What is the impact of women in politics upon the poor and marginalized,
whom I do not have to tell you are the majority of Nigerians? What relationship exists between women’s
activist organizations and elected and appointed women? What commitment has either group demonstrated
to the well-being of Nigerians?
The
point I am making here is that if indeed women politicians and appointed
officials want to claim that they are different from our run of the mill
politicians in Nigeria they must proactively set an agenda that reinforces such
a political stance. This is important
for many reasons. In the first place,
many ordinary Nigerians are cynical and skeptical when it comes to government
of any branch. They have experienced
many atrocities and have come to expect more of the same, whether it be from
women or men. How do we inspire such
people to once again, have confidence in the government? To women already engaged in politics, I say: to the extent that we have had and still have
women of honor and valor who have contributed so much to our politics, their
trailblazing efforts should not have been in vain. They should have women dedicated to living by
their example.
We should quickly go back to Adedeji
and Ayo’s six principles of good governance:
1. Putting the people first/ENGENDERING POPULAR PARTICIPATION
If the people came first, they would
not be “marginalized, alienated, and excluded.
The vulnerable and the impoverished, the uprooted and the ravaged,
women, children and youth, the disabled and the aged, the poor and the urban
poor …[would not be] treated as the ‘invisible’ informal sector,” that is: they would not be considered “economically
and politically invisible, [since] a divided society where the less fortunate…
are hurt, damaged, and discounted by public policies which jettison social
justice and sacrifice the common good cannot lay claim to being a true
democracy.” As well, government is
totally meaningless if it’s not “rooted in the tradition and culture of the
society so as to ensure community empowerment and development (2).
2. Insulation of the bureaucracy from partisan politics;
In essence, this is a call for rational
decision making that derives from making decisions based on the merit of given
options, and with some thought to the development of the nation, rather than
based on personal or sectional gain. It
goes without saying then that the bureaucracy must be composed of “educated,
[experienced], knowledgeable and skilled personnel.” Integrity, dedication, transparency, and
accountability are also important (238).
As legislators, women must insist on the very highest standards for
recruitment of personnel into all levels of the executive branch. Since they demand the best from others, it
goes without saying that they too must be excellent in all respects.
3. Preserving the coherence and organic nature of local
government areas;
The design of the political structure
is fundamentally important, and there is need to pay attention to “the
tradition, culture and community solidarity of local government areas. The rationale for this is to better ground
our democracy and ensure that they are rationally designed, efficient, and are
served by committed and dedicated personnel.
This would reduce the apathetic response of the populace to politics as
well as reduce conflict.
4. Strict observance of the principles of fiscal responsibility
and accountability;
Internal generation of revenues are a
crucial aspect of this requirement.
Also, there should be no place for corruption and graft in governance
5.
Encouraging
and promoting innovation and inventiveness in grassroots governance;
In a federal system, there is no need
for total uniformity. Instead, we should
take seriously the motto: “unity in
diversity” and also realize that “governance begins at the community, village
or town level (239). Development through
the formulation of plans, mobilization and allocation of resources; and
representation, accountability and empowerment – meaning that the right
(authorized) persons must take decisions, and they must do so in a transparent,
rational manner, and by following due process.
The participation of the people is also a crucial requirement, thus, the
traditions and culture are very important grounding or foundational elements to
effective governance that includes the grassroots. Since traditions and cultures may vary,
there should be room for diversity. This
fosters innovation and inventiveness (243-244).
6.
Restituting
the traditions of partnership in governance.
The focus here is to create a
connection between the people and their government by considering the
challenges of development and nation building as a collective effort to which
all can contribute (246). There is no
use in a system where the state apparatus is suspended above society and
disconnected from it. People should be
able to bring their hopes, aspirations and dreams to the attention of the
government, and the government owes them the duty of responding in a rational,
effective manner.
Finally,
it is clear from the individual and collective experience of those here
gathered that leadership is extraordinarily difficult but greatly
rewarding. This being the case, Nigerian
women must engage past and present creatively and imaginatively to inform their
struggle to gain power from a political system that is not necessarily
committed to their advancement into meaningful public leadership
positions. They must realize that
without serving the common person, women and men included, they are not
realizing the promise of good governance in our move toward democratization in
Nigeria.
Resolution by 400 “parliamentarians”
representing Nigerian women’s organizations in 15 provinces at a 2-day
conference organized by the Nigerian Women’s Union in Abeokuta (August 5-7,
1953).[vii]
[i] Lina Hamadeh- Banerjee and Paul OQuist, pp. 4-13
[ii] ibid, p. 13
[iii] Karam, op cit., p. 23.
[iv] Jadesola Akande “Affirmative Action: Theory and
Practices in Nigeria” in Affirmative Action Strategies: Perspectives and
Lessons from Around the Globe. CIRDDOC Nigeria 2003, p. 47.
[v] Ibid, p. 101
[vi] Margaret Strobel,
African Women Signs, vol. 8 number 1, (Autumn 1982, pp. 109-131; Cheryl Johnson
Odim
[vii] Cheryl Johnson-Odim,
Nina Emma Mba, For Women and the Nation: Funmilayo Ransome-Kuti of Nigeria, p.
101.
Comments