Evaluating the model of democracy of Nigeria
Arend Lijphart’s insights about the democratic systems have been reviewed severally and the contributions to other nations have been evidently seen in the patterns of democracy that he detailed in his book. Comparing Lijphart’s typology bases its system on consensus and the majoritarian systems which have refined and grouped or categorized the other forms of democracies and though it has not successfully adopted by all countries, some have established the pattern. It was first used in UK and the British spread its influence to the neighboring countries and those it was able to colonize. The democratic system of Lijphart has in many ways been embraced by the African countries among which Nigeria exists. The Westminster Model of Democracy in Nigeria will be evaluated to see how far this typology was able to reach (Lijphart, 1999).
To begin with, Nigerian government is centralized just as that of the United Kingdom is centralized. This is one of the characteristics of the Westminster Model of Democracy whereby the president is the head of state. The Nigerian government is influenced by the Westminster Model whereby its management and composition of the lower and the upper houses of bicameral legislature (Lijphart, 1999). The uppermost arm in the Nigeria’s government is the Supreme Court of Nigeria from which all judicial power is exercised.
Westminster Model is also characterized by the interest group pluralism. This is where the power is in the hands of the majority which is exercised through free and fair voting. From how Arend Lijphart defines democracy, it is government by and for the people and not the vice versa. Nigeria has been using the majority rule which is coded in section 299 of CAMA (Nwabueze, 1982).
The Nigerian cabinet is the dominant and the executive branch in the government of Nigeria just as the cabinet dominates that of the UK. The cabinet members are chosen by the head of state who is the president and also they are supposed to report to him also. The cabinet of the government is composed of the majority and so they dominance is felt.
The multiparty system of government is also borrowed from the consensus system of Arend Lijphart’s typology. This is a system that allows different multiple parties to have a capacity of gaining a control of the government. This can be individual parties or through the coalition. The new approach of party politics was restored in 1999 whereby parties were liberalized. This allowed crowd partaking in political actions in the country. There are 50 or more registered parties in Nigeria with few dominating the political system (Nwabueze, 1982).
The other characteristic of the Consensus model is the executive legislation balance of power. Just as how the government of Swiss uses the formal separation of powers to make the executive and the legislature to be independent, Nigeria’s is the same. In the government of Nigeria, the executive power is vested on the president but there is separation of powers among the three arms of the government.
The democratic system of government also holds strongly the issue of bicameralism. As the1999 constitution of Nigeria provides, the National Assembly is consisted of a house with 360 members who are representatives. There are also 109 members of the senate and all these are headed by the president.
Nigeria has been greatly swallowed up by the Arend Lijphart’s insights on a democratic system in many other ways. This is as a result of the colonial influence by the British (Nwabueze, 1982). With the many changes it has brought, there are also problems such as limited choice for the competent ministers. The system has also been focusing more on the government and legislature hence diverting the focus that should be there for other sectors. This system has brought fusion between the legislative and the executive powers among other shortcomings.
References
Lijphart A., (1999) Patterns of Democracy Yale University press
Top of Form
Nwabueze, B. O. (1982). A constitutional history of Nigeria. London: Hurst.
Bottom of Form
