APC3703
Assignment 1
Due 2025
,SECTION A: WEST AFRICA
Question 1
Since Nigeria gained independence in 1960, a recurring political trend has emerged
where former military leaders frequently return as civilian presidents. Onwutuebe (2002)
attributes this pattern to Nigeria’s democratic system being heavily influenced by
political norms and structures inherited from years of military rule. The authoritarian
practices, centralized power, and hierarchical decision-making that characterized
military regimes have continued to shape civilian governance, weakening democratic
accountability.
The collapse of Nigeria’s First Republic in 1966 marked the beginning of prolonged
military dominance, with only brief interruptions by civilian administrations. Between
1966 and 1999, leaders such as Yakubu Gowon, Murtala Mohammed, Muhammadu
Buhari, Ibrahim Babangida, and Sani Abacha consolidated executive control, ruled
primarily through decrees, and repressed dissent. Even after the transition to civilian
rule in 1999, former military rulers like Olusegun Obasanjo (1999–2007) and
Muhammadu Buhari (2015–2023) occupied the presidency, often exhibiting leadership
styles reminiscent of military command structures rather than participatory democratic
ideals.
According to Onwutuebe (2002), the military era left several enduring legacies. Political
authority remains highly centralized in the presidency, limiting the autonomy of other
arms of government such as the legislature and judiciary. Opposition voices frequently
face suppression through security crackdowns, intimidation of critics, and electoral
manipulation. Clientelism and rent distribution — practices entrenched under military
regimes — continue to dominate Nigerian politics, fostering systemic corruption and
policy inconsistency. Moreover, the personalization of power during military rule
contributed to institutional fragility that persists today.
These dynamics give rise to what Onwutuebe refers to as “democratic infractions,”
including electoral manipulation, disregard for judicial decisions, abuse of constitutional
,provisions, and the politicization of anti-corruption agencies. This reflects a military
mindset that prioritizes discipline, control, and loyalty over democratic values such as
transparency, negotiation, and accountability.
Nonetheless, Nigeria’s democratic challenges cannot be explained solely by its military
past. Structural issues, such as deep ethnic and religious divisions, heavy reliance on
oil revenues, pervasive poverty, and weak internal democracy within political parties,
also undermine democratic consolidation. Despite these obstacles, progress has been
recorded since 1999. Notable developments include the peaceful power transition in
2015, stronger judicial intervention in electoral disputes, and the rise of a vibrant media
sector — indicators that military influence can gradually be diluted.
In conclusion, while Onwutuebe convincingly demonstrates the enduring impact of
military traditions on Nigeria’s democratic system — particularly in entrenching
executive dominance and institutional weakness — a full explanation of Nigeria’s
democratic deficits must also account for broader structural and socio-economic factors.
Question 2
Ghana is widely regarded as one of West Africa’s most stable democracies; however,
Sefa-Nyarko (2022) argues that the country has yet to achieve full democratic
consolidation. He emphasizes that a strong, independent, and active civil society
remains the most effective safeguard against executive overreach and abuse of power.
Although Ghana’s constitutional framework provides for separation of powers and
checks and balances, these mechanisms are frequently undermined by partisan
influence and political interference. Institutional capture — particularly within the
judiciary, legislature, and regulatory agencies — compromises their ability to act as
effective checks on the executive branch. In this environment, civil society organizations
(CSOs) play a critical role through advocacy, public education, investigative journalism,
and policy engagement, all of which help hold leaders accountable and enhance
transparency.
, and mobilisation of citizens — play a crucial role in constraining state power and
promoting democratic accountability.
In essence, Sefa-Nyarko (2022) highlights that Ghana’s democracy remains vulnerable
when formal institutions are compromised, and that civil society’s vibrancy is essential in
ensuring transparency, defending rights, and deepening democratic practice.
Assignment 1
Due 2025
,SECTION A: WEST AFRICA
Question 1
Since Nigeria gained independence in 1960, a recurring political trend has emerged
where former military leaders frequently return as civilian presidents. Onwutuebe (2002)
attributes this pattern to Nigeria’s democratic system being heavily influenced by
political norms and structures inherited from years of military rule. The authoritarian
practices, centralized power, and hierarchical decision-making that characterized
military regimes have continued to shape civilian governance, weakening democratic
accountability.
The collapse of Nigeria’s First Republic in 1966 marked the beginning of prolonged
military dominance, with only brief interruptions by civilian administrations. Between
1966 and 1999, leaders such as Yakubu Gowon, Murtala Mohammed, Muhammadu
Buhari, Ibrahim Babangida, and Sani Abacha consolidated executive control, ruled
primarily through decrees, and repressed dissent. Even after the transition to civilian
rule in 1999, former military rulers like Olusegun Obasanjo (1999–2007) and
Muhammadu Buhari (2015–2023) occupied the presidency, often exhibiting leadership
styles reminiscent of military command structures rather than participatory democratic
ideals.
According to Onwutuebe (2002), the military era left several enduring legacies. Political
authority remains highly centralized in the presidency, limiting the autonomy of other
arms of government such as the legislature and judiciary. Opposition voices frequently
face suppression through security crackdowns, intimidation of critics, and electoral
manipulation. Clientelism and rent distribution — practices entrenched under military
regimes — continue to dominate Nigerian politics, fostering systemic corruption and
policy inconsistency. Moreover, the personalization of power during military rule
contributed to institutional fragility that persists today.
These dynamics give rise to what Onwutuebe refers to as “democratic infractions,”
including electoral manipulation, disregard for judicial decisions, abuse of constitutional
,provisions, and the politicization of anti-corruption agencies. This reflects a military
mindset that prioritizes discipline, control, and loyalty over democratic values such as
transparency, negotiation, and accountability.
Nonetheless, Nigeria’s democratic challenges cannot be explained solely by its military
past. Structural issues, such as deep ethnic and religious divisions, heavy reliance on
oil revenues, pervasive poverty, and weak internal democracy within political parties,
also undermine democratic consolidation. Despite these obstacles, progress has been
recorded since 1999. Notable developments include the peaceful power transition in
2015, stronger judicial intervention in electoral disputes, and the rise of a vibrant media
sector — indicators that military influence can gradually be diluted.
In conclusion, while Onwutuebe convincingly demonstrates the enduring impact of
military traditions on Nigeria’s democratic system — particularly in entrenching
executive dominance and institutional weakness — a full explanation of Nigeria’s
democratic deficits must also account for broader structural and socio-economic factors.
Question 2
Ghana is widely regarded as one of West Africa’s most stable democracies; however,
Sefa-Nyarko (2022) argues that the country has yet to achieve full democratic
consolidation. He emphasizes that a strong, independent, and active civil society
remains the most effective safeguard against executive overreach and abuse of power.
Although Ghana’s constitutional framework provides for separation of powers and
checks and balances, these mechanisms are frequently undermined by partisan
influence and political interference. Institutional capture — particularly within the
judiciary, legislature, and regulatory agencies — compromises their ability to act as
effective checks on the executive branch. In this environment, civil society organizations
(CSOs) play a critical role through advocacy, public education, investigative journalism,
and policy engagement, all of which help hold leaders accountable and enhance
transparency.
, and mobilisation of citizens — play a crucial role in constraining state power and
promoting democratic accountability.
In essence, Sefa-Nyarko (2022) highlights that Ghana’s democracy remains vulnerable
when formal institutions are compromised, and that civil society’s vibrancy is essential in
ensuring transparency, defending rights, and deepening democratic practice.
