, PLEASE USE THIS DOCUMENT AS A GUIDE TO ANSWER YOUR ASSIGNMENT
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”.
Title: Military Culture and Political Leadership in Nigeria’s Democracy: A Critical Reflection
Introduction
The assertion by Onwutuebe (2002) that “problems of democratic infractions are prevalent in the
current political system largely due to the persisting influence of military culture of political
leadership” presents a compelling analysis of Nigeria’s post-independence political trajectory. Since
gaining independence in 1960, Nigeria’s political landscape has been characterized by numerous
military coups and the reemergence of military rulers in civilian roles. This essay critically discusses
how military culture continues to influence the Nigerian political system, emphasizing the
persistence of undemocratic practices, the erosion of democratic institutions, and the challenges
faced by civilian administrations post-1999.
Historical Context of Military Influence in Nigeria's Politics
To understand the persistence of military culture, it is essential to trace the historical context of
military involvement in Nigerian politics. From the first military coup in 1966 to the transition to
civilian rule in 1999, the military played a dominant role in governance. The long years of military
rule laid the foundation for a governance culture characterized by hierarchy, centralized authority,
and an emphasis on control over dialogue and negotiation. These practices were antithetical to the
principles of democracy, which emphasize pluralism, accountability, and participation.
The Military Culture of Governance: Command and Control
The Nigerian military is historically grounded in principles of hierarchy, strict obedience, and
command-and-control systems, which contrast sharply with the participatory and consultative nature
of democratic governance. As Onwutuebe (2022) explains, the military’s internal organizational
structure and the nature of its operations often foster a culture of absolutism and repression, which is
incompatible with democratic norms (Finer, 1962). In the military, decisions are made top-down,
with little room for dissent or negotiation. This authoritarian style of governance, developed during
Nigeria’s military rule, is deeply ingrained in former military leaders who transition into civilian
politics.
Military Transition to Civilian Rule: The Case of Obasanjo and Buhari
Two key examples of military leaders transitioning into civilian governance are former Presidents
Olusegun Obasanjo (1999–2007) and Muhammadu Buhari (2015–2023). Both former military heads
of state carried over significant elements of military culture into their civilian administrations.
Despite their claims of democratic transformation, their leadership styles have often mirrored
military practices, marked by authoritarianism, limited tolerance for opposition, and frequent
democratic infractions.
, Obasanjo's presidency, for example, exhibited a continued use of military tactics in governance, such
as the suppression of opposition, attacks on press freedom, and disregard for the rule of law, as
demonstrated by the military actions in Odi (1999) and Zaki Biam (2001) (Onwutuebe, 2022).
Similarly, Buhari’s administration has been criticized for its intolerance of dissent, use of the
military to suppress peaceful protests like the #EndSARS movement, and the disregard for judicial
rulings, exemplified in the detention of political opponents and journalists (Campbell, 2020).
The Impact of Military Culture on Democratic Governance
The pervasive influence of military culture has had several detrimental effects on Nigeria’s
democracy. First, the centralization of power in the executive branch, often seen in military regimes,
undermines the separation of powers essential for a functional democracy. For example, under
Obasanjo and Buhari, both presidents often bypassed legislative processes to implement policies,
undermining the constitutional checks and balances (Ajayi, 2013). Additionally, military-style
control over security forces, exemplified in extrajudicial killings and suppression of protests, reflects
a militarized approach to governance that stifles democratic freedoms and the protection of human
rights.
Challenges to Civilian Administration: The Struggle for Democratic Transformation
The transition from military to civilian rule has not been as smooth as anticipated. Despite Nigeria’s
return to civilian governance in 1999, the influence of military culture remains a significant barrier to
the full realization of democracy. As Onwutuebe (2022) argues, the military's unwillingness to
relinquish its control over state institutions and its tendency to impose undemocratic measures have
contributed to political instability and weakened democratic institutions. The absence of
comprehensive programs to reorient former military leaders into civilian political roles exacerbates
the problem, as these individuals often struggle to adapt to the more flexible and consultative
demands of democratic governance (Alonge, 2005).
The Role of Political Institutions in Overcoming Military Culture
To move beyond the military culture that pervades Nigerian politics, it is crucial to strengthen
democratic institutions. This includes promoting the independence of the judiciary, enhancing the
role of the legislature, and ensuring a free press. Civil society organizations must also play an active
role in advocating for political reforms and holding the government accountable. In line with
Onwutuebe’s (2002) recommendations, a concerted effort must be made to demilitarize Nigeria's
political system by encouraging political leaders to embrace the democratic ethos of dialogue,
transparency, and accountability.
Conclusion
Onwutuebe's assertion that the persistence of military culture in Nigeria’s political leadership has
contributed to ongoing democratic infractions is well-founded. The enduring influence of military
governance is evident in the leadership styles of former military heads of state who have transitioned
into civilian roles. To ensure the consolidation of democracy in Nigeria, there must be a deliberate
effort to reorient political leaders, strengthen democratic institutions, and foster a political culture
based on inclusion, respect for the rule of law, and accountability. Only through these efforts can
Nigeria hope to overcome the entrenched legacy of military rule and build a sustainable democratic
system.
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”.
Title: Military Culture and Political Leadership in Nigeria’s Democracy: A Critical Reflection
Introduction
The assertion by Onwutuebe (2002) that “problems of democratic infractions are prevalent in the
current political system largely due to the persisting influence of military culture of political
leadership” presents a compelling analysis of Nigeria’s post-independence political trajectory. Since
gaining independence in 1960, Nigeria’s political landscape has been characterized by numerous
military coups and the reemergence of military rulers in civilian roles. This essay critically discusses
how military culture continues to influence the Nigerian political system, emphasizing the
persistence of undemocratic practices, the erosion of democratic institutions, and the challenges
faced by civilian administrations post-1999.
Historical Context of Military Influence in Nigeria's Politics
To understand the persistence of military culture, it is essential to trace the historical context of
military involvement in Nigerian politics. From the first military coup in 1966 to the transition to
civilian rule in 1999, the military played a dominant role in governance. The long years of military
rule laid the foundation for a governance culture characterized by hierarchy, centralized authority,
and an emphasis on control over dialogue and negotiation. These practices were antithetical to the
principles of democracy, which emphasize pluralism, accountability, and participation.
The Military Culture of Governance: Command and Control
The Nigerian military is historically grounded in principles of hierarchy, strict obedience, and
command-and-control systems, which contrast sharply with the participatory and consultative nature
of democratic governance. As Onwutuebe (2022) explains, the military’s internal organizational
structure and the nature of its operations often foster a culture of absolutism and repression, which is
incompatible with democratic norms (Finer, 1962). In the military, decisions are made top-down,
with little room for dissent or negotiation. This authoritarian style of governance, developed during
Nigeria’s military rule, is deeply ingrained in former military leaders who transition into civilian
politics.
Military Transition to Civilian Rule: The Case of Obasanjo and Buhari
Two key examples of military leaders transitioning into civilian governance are former Presidents
Olusegun Obasanjo (1999–2007) and Muhammadu Buhari (2015–2023). Both former military heads
of state carried over significant elements of military culture into their civilian administrations.
Despite their claims of democratic transformation, their leadership styles have often mirrored
military practices, marked by authoritarianism, limited tolerance for opposition, and frequent
democratic infractions.
, Obasanjo's presidency, for example, exhibited a continued use of military tactics in governance, such
as the suppression of opposition, attacks on press freedom, and disregard for the rule of law, as
demonstrated by the military actions in Odi (1999) and Zaki Biam (2001) (Onwutuebe, 2022).
Similarly, Buhari’s administration has been criticized for its intolerance of dissent, use of the
military to suppress peaceful protests like the #EndSARS movement, and the disregard for judicial
rulings, exemplified in the detention of political opponents and journalists (Campbell, 2020).
The Impact of Military Culture on Democratic Governance
The pervasive influence of military culture has had several detrimental effects on Nigeria’s
democracy. First, the centralization of power in the executive branch, often seen in military regimes,
undermines the separation of powers essential for a functional democracy. For example, under
Obasanjo and Buhari, both presidents often bypassed legislative processes to implement policies,
undermining the constitutional checks and balances (Ajayi, 2013). Additionally, military-style
control over security forces, exemplified in extrajudicial killings and suppression of protests, reflects
a militarized approach to governance that stifles democratic freedoms and the protection of human
rights.
Challenges to Civilian Administration: The Struggle for Democratic Transformation
The transition from military to civilian rule has not been as smooth as anticipated. Despite Nigeria’s
return to civilian governance in 1999, the influence of military culture remains a significant barrier to
the full realization of democracy. As Onwutuebe (2022) argues, the military's unwillingness to
relinquish its control over state institutions and its tendency to impose undemocratic measures have
contributed to political instability and weakened democratic institutions. The absence of
comprehensive programs to reorient former military leaders into civilian political roles exacerbates
the problem, as these individuals often struggle to adapt to the more flexible and consultative
demands of democratic governance (Alonge, 2005).
The Role of Political Institutions in Overcoming Military Culture
To move beyond the military culture that pervades Nigerian politics, it is crucial to strengthen
democratic institutions. This includes promoting the independence of the judiciary, enhancing the
role of the legislature, and ensuring a free press. Civil society organizations must also play an active
role in advocating for political reforms and holding the government accountable. In line with
Onwutuebe’s (2002) recommendations, a concerted effort must be made to demilitarize Nigeria's
political system by encouraging political leaders to embrace the democratic ethos of dialogue,
transparency, and accountability.
Conclusion
Onwutuebe's assertion that the persistence of military culture in Nigeria’s political leadership has
contributed to ongoing democratic infractions is well-founded. The enduring influence of military
governance is evident in the leadership styles of former military heads of state who have transitioned
into civilian roles. To ensure the consolidation of democracy in Nigeria, there must be a deliberate
effort to reorient political leaders, strengthen democratic institutions, and foster a political culture
based on inclusion, respect for the rule of law, and accountability. Only through these efforts can
Nigeria hope to overcome the entrenched legacy of military rule and build a sustainable democratic
system.
