ISTR Sixth International Conference Toronto, Canada / July 11-14, 2004 Contesting Citizenship and Civil Society in a Divided World

	Conference Homepage
	Abstracts

“To Be or Not to Be?”: Civil Society as “Insiders” in the New Democratic Politics in Nigeria
by
Babatunde Omilola
Doctoral Candidate, Graduate School of Social Sciences and Cultural Studies, University of Sussex, United Kingdom

Nigeria, Africa’s most populous country and one of the world’s largest oil producers, has gone through a chequered post-colonial history since attaining political independence from Britain in 1960, and it is reputed to be one of the most deeply divided countries in the world today. Since political independence, Nigeria has experienced more than twice as many years of military rule as civilian rule. In 1999, Nigeria embraced democratic pluralism after almost 30 years of military authoritarianism. Tragically, several forms of ethnic, political and socio-economic crises and conflict situations have co-existed in Nigeria’s post-independence political cycles of democratic constitutionalism and military authoritarianism. These situations and conflicts have generated deep-rooted problems for social relations among and between the complex mosaic of ethnicities in Nigeria, and have brought near-paralysis to Nigeria’s federal structure. Civil society emerged in Nigeria as a way of resisting authoritarian rule, asserting new moral order and establishing the values of individual freedom and autonomy. Civil society had thus achieved heroic victories during struggles against autocracy in Nigeria. But now that democratic transition had occurred in Nigeria and repeated attempts to sustain and consolidate Nigerian democratic systems and institutions have faltered, is it now time to thank civil society for its contribution and move on-to working with democratic government in Nigeria as “insiders” or political actors? Or should Nigerian civil society continue to play its traditional role of being outside the government/state by serving as a voice of reason and society’s conscience or as a reminder of ethics and moderation? This paper critically examines the role of civil society organizations in the new democratic politics in Nigeria, particularly in the context in which many civil society leaders in the country hurriedly floated political parties in the on-going democratic dispensation in Nigeria with the aim of turning themselves into political actors. The paper attempts to provide answers to the following critical questions: (1) What would civil society leaders in Nigeria hope to achieve as “politicians”? (2) Could civil society leaders in Nigeria achieve their goals better as “insiders” or “outsiders” of the political arena?

Within a wider literature, the role of civil society in new democracies is an unresolved issue. In recent times, civil society leaders have been appointed to strategic positions by democratic governments in the world, particularly in Southeast Asia.. More recently, civil society leaders have participated in the electoral process as candidates in new democracies in many developing countries (South Africa and Poland are examples). Even in some developed, Northern countries, we find representation of civil society members in direct democratic politics as in the green movement/green party. On the one hand, it is understandable that attempting to bring changes from outside the power structure is difficult and painfully frustrating. But on the other hand, there is a sense of unease that the priorities and harsh realities of democratic politics may detract and deter civil society leaders who turned “politicians” from their original goals and intentions. Using Nigeria as analytic lens, this paper argues that the participation of civil society leaders as political actors actively participating in the political process requires careful thought and definitely more critical debates in literature. My argument in this paper is that the transformation of key civil society leaders into political actors weakens civic associations and produces a non-vibrant civil society, which cannot confront corrupt governments in newly democratic systems, advocate respect for human rights, promote and defend democratic processes and institutions. The paper concludes that contrary to the popular opinion from many quarters, the role of civil society does not necessarily become more limited and ambiguous once new democracies are up and running.

Date received: October 9, 2003

Copyright © 2003 by the author(s). The author(s) of this document and the organizers of the conference have granted their consent to include this abstract in Atlas Conferences Inc. Document # camm-69.