The 2015 poster controversy

It may have appeared very trivial, inconsequential and unimportant to an ordinary observer of events, but to the gladiators in the race for 2015, the events which led to the controversies generated by the campaign posters of President Goodluck Jonathan which appeared suddenly in Abuja speak volumes about issues driving politicians.
The action portends serious implications. But after days of politicking over what should have been regarded as harmless posters, the message and the purpose for the controversies may have been achieved, depending on what those behind the action wanted. Meanwhile, that development has raised some tough questions about the relevance of this to our political institutions.
A visitor, during the period the debate lasted, would have laughed at us as a people, particularly at the politicians who, at every opportunity, want to make a mountain out of a molehill. While some may erroneously think that the politicians are not serious minded individuals, it is the other way round.
The posters, which the Presidency stoutly denied, however, sent a clear message to Nigerians, particularly those who had been nursing the ambition of contesting for the State House.
The message in this regard is very clear to those in office now, that you not only wish to remain in office, but also strive to strategise for the next phase of the political dispensation. If the essence of politics as it has so far manifested among the Nigerian elite, is the struggle for power, the gladiators would do anything to outwit one another in the battle ahead.
The voters, who ordinarily should be happy about this development, are not.
And it is doubtful if they will ever be, given the trauma of going through another round of electoral process while still groaning under the burden of the previous one which has failed to deliver their expectations of a secured future for them and their children.
There are enough reasons to worry since those seeking power hardly understand that the purpose is for the benefit of the people who willingly gave the mandate in expectation that this democracy will deliver the dividends that will meet their yearnings collectively and individually.
Drawing lessons from recent elections with particular reference to the United States, there was no pretence about the readiness of President Barack Obama to seek another term, having creditably discharged his assignment in the first term.
Even within his own party, he was sure of the nomination ticket which gave him time to prepare against the opposition parties. In denying the controversial posters, the Presidency, however, did not say categorically that President Jonathan will not stand for reelection in 2015.
This is also consistent with the cases in court on the same matter where the Presidency has continued to emphasise the eligibility of Mr. President to stand for the next election if he so decides.
This should cause no distractions for the polity. In fact, it is better for the President to indicate interest in 2015 early enough for the people to examine the consistencies or otherwise of his policies and programmes as the basis for assessing the administration and to guide our choice of candidates in the next round of polls.
This approach will even work better for incumbents of political offices. The fact that you know you are being assessed makes the candidate work harder to convince voters.
To be persuaded to contest is abnormal and should be discouraged. The implication of this, over the years, has been the emergence of candidates ill prepared for the tasks expected since there was no adequate planning on how to make impact before the next elections.
If this practice has survived, it is due to the absence of vibrant opposition parties that can provide the electorate better alternatives. Rather than dissipate energy on posters and lose focus, the electorate would prefer a productive engagement on the policies and programme that have benefitted the people and what must be done for everyone to enjoy government.
On the other hand, opposition parties should demonstrate the willingness and the ability to do better by showcasing what they had done as proof of their seriousness of intentions.
But from the state and local government administrations, the parties have showed that they are birds of the same feather flocking together. In assessment, they are yet to live up to expectation.
Individual candidates want to impress the electorate by embarking on projects with lasting benefits to the society or complement the efforts of the government at the state or at the centre.
Very shortly, constituency projects may soon be reduced to the provision of loaves of bread and food items to woo voters when majority actually lacked the basic amenities such as water and electricity, particularly uninterrupted power supply which should be the major concern.
It is a common trend now for states to neglect federal roads no matter how dilapidated, ditto for the Federal Government, yet they want taxes paid by responsible citizens.
So, beyond the controversies should be the yardstick to measure the suitability of those to be entrusted with responsibility again in the future.