As it did in 2014, with stomach infrastructure, Ekiti, with its out-of-season gubernatorial election cycle, has set a new trend for elections with ‘see and buy’.
These new names for an old practice where voters and candidates trade food and money for votes and control of governance signals an evolution of the practice that indicates an entrenchment of this ideology. For some, Nigeria’s democracy is currently caught between weaponised poverty and the hardness of hunger and if anyone is wondering this is not a favourable position. For others, the selling and buying of votes is merely our version of transactional voting – only instead of trading promises (false), and track records for accountable governance and collective development, voters prefer to trade for immediate, personal fulfilment.
The arguments in favour of stomach infrastructure are mixed. One is that voters’ experience says politicians will not deliver on their promises (since they never have) and what voters trade for their votes is their only assurance from participating in elections. On the back of this, a second argument is that all Nigerians are in various transactional relationships with government and all sell something in exchange for financial reward that comes in the form of patronage, contracts and government appointments etc. and as such it is only fair that voters sell too. There is also the daddy oyoyo culture argument that people expect gifts from those who come calling or want something and as such exchanging cash and food for votes is expected and not harmful. Besides, proponents rationalise, ‘if stomach infrastructure played a determining role in winning elections, there would be no need to rig elections’.
On the other spectrum there is acceptance that stomach infrastructure is merely upgraded terminology for an old practice but the argument insists this practice has helped keep us underdeveloped. If voters were hungry in the Sixties and the answer then was ‘give food’ in return for votes and voters are still hungry and jaded in 2018 and the answer is still to ‘share food’ then we must be doing something wrong. What makes the continuation of this ideology – which only benefits a small group of politicians with the cash to execute it –particularly ruinous is that Nigeria of the Sixties is not Nigeria of today. Today, we are one of the fastest growing populations in the world furiously recruiting more voters into belly politics ideology. Climate change and environmental degradation have reduced our ability to fend for ourselves and raised tensions between competing interests and spread insecurity that further impoverishes us all. We have millions out of school and unemployed increasing the pressure to survive and instead of spending money on development;we spend unconscionable amounts of public money on elections and buying votes. Another argument against stomach infrastructure is the responsibility factor i.e., who is leads the belly politics dance? Voters or politicians? If it is logical that voters sell their votes because they get nothing from governance then it is logical that politicians who pay for votes owe citizens nothing more than what they have paid for their votes.
Maybe Richard Sklar was right in deducing that there is an unproven assumption that the ‘political elite is relatively free to introduce any form of government it deems fit.’ The successful politician is not free to govern because of voters’demand for immediate gratification, the cost of winning elections and maintaining a patronage system that afflicts every aspect of governance.Who will change the terms of this comfortable but non-productive, self-destructive symbiotic partnership?
While we wait for who blinks first, transactional voting is evolving. It is no longer valid to advise voters ‘take the money and vote your conscience’ (apparently vote sellers don’t like to cheat vote buyers) because ‘see and buy’ is now in operation and vote sellers have to show how they voted before they get paid. The opportunities to reverse this hardening of belly politics lie with the Independent National Electoral Commission – starting with ensuring secrecy of the ballot – which must be sacrosanct. Next INEC needs to prosecute vote sellers and buyers to send the message that it will no longer be condoned. The legitimacy of our elections need to improve to counter another excuse for vote selling which is that votes do not count and people might as well get something. The public messages about transactional voting must be more creative because the mind set shift required to get voters to trust the process and have faith in politicians will take acknowledging the depth of the challenge, the complicity of all stakeholders and their responsibility in ending belly politics ideology.
Finally – we need more voters who are not jaded by unfulfilled promises and as a country with predominantly young people; we have a large reservoir of young voters to dilute belly politics voters. Young voters should be actively recruited and encouraged to provide an initial trust deposit in the electoral process and vote for promise, and the possibility of a different future. Young people have the most to lose from continuing with belly politics and if they would only dare to take a different path from the one we have been on for years we just might have the numbers to relegate vote buying and selling and force those who run for office to earn their positions with the hard work of building for the collective benefit of Nigeria and its citizens.
Osori is a Nigerian lawyer, author, international development consultant, journalist and politician known for her work on good governance, gender equality, women’s economic and political participation and ending violence against women in Nigeria
END
Be the first to comment