,APC3703 MAY JUNE PORTFOLIO (ALL QUESTIONS
COMPLETE ANSWERS) Semester 1 2025 - DUE 29 May
2025;100% trusted ,comprehensive and complete reliable
solution with clear explanation
ALL QUESTIONS DONE
Section A: West Africa
1. Since independence in 1960, Nigeria has seen many military
rulers recycled as civilian rulers. With this in mind, critically
discuss the assertion by Onwutuebe (2002, e-reserve) that
“problems of democratic infractions are prevalent in the current
political system largely due to the persisting influence of
military culture of political leadership”.
[50]
Introduction
Since gaining independence from British colonial rule in 1960,
Nigeria has experienced a turbulent political evolution
characterized by a complex interplay between military and
civilian governance. In its early post-independence years,
Nigeria showed promise as a nascent democracy. However,
political instability, ethnic rivalries, and allegations of
corruption led to a series of military coups, beginning in 1966.
These coups ushered in over three decades of intermittent
military rule, during which the armed forces not only dominated
,political power but also deeply shaped the country’s governance
structures and political culture.
By the time democracy was officially restored in 1999, military
regimes had not only weakened democratic institutions but also
fostered an authoritarian culture of governance. Notably,
Nigeria’s democratic transition has been marked by the
emergence of former military leaders—such as Olusegun
Obasanjo and Muhammadu Buhari—rebranded as civilian
presidents. This recycling of military elites into civilian political
leadership raises critical questions about the depth and
authenticity of Nigeria's democratic consolidation.
It is within this context that Onwutuebe (2002) argues that
“problems of democratic infractions are prevalent in the current
political system largely due to the persisting influence of
military culture of political leadership.” This assertion points to
the continued dominance of authoritarian values, centralization
of power, and suppression of dissent, all of which are remnants
of Nigeria’s long-standing military rule.
This essay critically examines Onwutuebe’s claim by exploring
the characteristics of military culture that have been embedded
in Nigeria’s post-military democratic system. It also considers
how this culture contributes to ongoing democratic infractions
such as electoral malpractice, executive overreach, and the
erosion of institutional checks and balances. While
acknowledging the significant impact of military legacy, the
essay also evaluates other structural and socio-political factors
that hinder democratic development in Nigeria, thereby
providing a balanced and comprehensive analysis of the
challenges facing the country’s political system today.
, Understanding “Military Culture” in Nigerian Politics
Military culture, in its essence, is rooted in strict discipline,
centralized authority, and hierarchical obedience. It is designed
for efficiency in command execution, especially in combat and
emergency contexts, where quick decision-making and loyalty
to superiors are vital. However, when this organizational ethos is
transplanted into a civilian political system—where deliberation,
consensus-building, and checks and balances are essential—it
often results in tension and dysfunction. In Nigeria, decades of
military rule have entrenched a leadership style that continues to
influence the behavior of political elites, many of whom either
have direct military backgrounds or were politically socialized
during the military era.
This legacy manifests in several ways:
1. Authoritarianism
Many Nigerian political leaders, even in the democratic
dispensation, demonstrate an authoritarian style of governance
reminiscent of military rule. This includes intolerance of
opposition, restriction of press freedoms, and suppression of
civil society voices. Leaders often dismiss dissenting views as
threats to national unity or public order, a mindset carried over
from military regimes that viewed opposition as rebellion. For
instance, critical journalists, activists, and political opponents
are frequently arrested, harassed, or surveilled under ambiguous
national security laws. This suppression of dissent undermines
COMPLETE ANSWERS) Semester 1 2025 - DUE 29 May
2025;100% trusted ,comprehensive and complete reliable
solution with clear explanation
ALL QUESTIONS DONE
Section A: West Africa
1. Since independence in 1960, Nigeria has seen many military
rulers recycled as civilian rulers. With this in mind, critically
discuss the assertion by Onwutuebe (2002, e-reserve) that
“problems of democratic infractions are prevalent in the current
political system largely due to the persisting influence of
military culture of political leadership”.
[50]
Introduction
Since gaining independence from British colonial rule in 1960,
Nigeria has experienced a turbulent political evolution
characterized by a complex interplay between military and
civilian governance. In its early post-independence years,
Nigeria showed promise as a nascent democracy. However,
political instability, ethnic rivalries, and allegations of
corruption led to a series of military coups, beginning in 1966.
These coups ushered in over three decades of intermittent
military rule, during which the armed forces not only dominated
,political power but also deeply shaped the country’s governance
structures and political culture.
By the time democracy was officially restored in 1999, military
regimes had not only weakened democratic institutions but also
fostered an authoritarian culture of governance. Notably,
Nigeria’s democratic transition has been marked by the
emergence of former military leaders—such as Olusegun
Obasanjo and Muhammadu Buhari—rebranded as civilian
presidents. This recycling of military elites into civilian political
leadership raises critical questions about the depth and
authenticity of Nigeria's democratic consolidation.
It is within this context that Onwutuebe (2002) argues that
“problems of democratic infractions are prevalent in the current
political system largely due to the persisting influence of
military culture of political leadership.” This assertion points to
the continued dominance of authoritarian values, centralization
of power, and suppression of dissent, all of which are remnants
of Nigeria’s long-standing military rule.
This essay critically examines Onwutuebe’s claim by exploring
the characteristics of military culture that have been embedded
in Nigeria’s post-military democratic system. It also considers
how this culture contributes to ongoing democratic infractions
such as electoral malpractice, executive overreach, and the
erosion of institutional checks and balances. While
acknowledging the significant impact of military legacy, the
essay also evaluates other structural and socio-political factors
that hinder democratic development in Nigeria, thereby
providing a balanced and comprehensive analysis of the
challenges facing the country’s political system today.
, Understanding “Military Culture” in Nigerian Politics
Military culture, in its essence, is rooted in strict discipline,
centralized authority, and hierarchical obedience. It is designed
for efficiency in command execution, especially in combat and
emergency contexts, where quick decision-making and loyalty
to superiors are vital. However, when this organizational ethos is
transplanted into a civilian political system—where deliberation,
consensus-building, and checks and balances are essential—it
often results in tension and dysfunction. In Nigeria, decades of
military rule have entrenched a leadership style that continues to
influence the behavior of political elites, many of whom either
have direct military backgrounds or were politically socialized
during the military era.
This legacy manifests in several ways:
1. Authoritarianism
Many Nigerian political leaders, even in the democratic
dispensation, demonstrate an authoritarian style of governance
reminiscent of military rule. This includes intolerance of
opposition, restriction of press freedoms, and suppression of
civil society voices. Leaders often dismiss dissenting views as
threats to national unity or public order, a mindset carried over
from military regimes that viewed opposition as rebellion. For
instance, critical journalists, activists, and political opponents
are frequently arrested, harassed, or surveilled under ambiguous
national security laws. This suppression of dissent undermines
