Atiku & co: Opposition is not a begging business — by Kayode Adebiyi

Some Nigerian politicians behave as though they are the first generation of politicians to ever find themselves in the opposition camp. Their complaints, accusations and constant search for excuses would make anyone believe that opposition politics in Nigeria began the day Bola Ahmed Tinubu became President.

For goodness’ sake, the incumbent President, Bola Ahmed Tinubu, and the political movement that eventually produced the All Progressives Congress (APC) spent 16 years confronting a PDP-controlled Federal Government. They know what it means to be in opposition. They experienced political intimidation, manoeuvres, harassment and the deployment of federal institutions against opposition interests.

Yet they organised, strategised, built alliances, negotiated differences and prepared themselves to take over power. They did not surrender their political ambition because the PDP controlled the Federal Government. They did not spend all their time looking for excuses for their organisational shortcomings. They understood one fundamental principle of democratic politics: if you want to take power, you must first organise yourselves into a credible alternative capable of earning the confidence of the electorate.

Let us take a walk down memory lane because a lot of Nigerians suffer from political amnesia.

2003: The political takeover of the South-West
In the 2003 general elections, the PDP, under President Olusegun Obasanjo, made a remarkable political inroad into the South-West, which had largely been the stronghold of the Alliance for Democracy (AD). The PDP “won” five of the six governorship seats in the region, leaving Lagos as the only state retained by the AD under Bola Tinubu. Akanbi no gree for Obasanjo to rig him out.

The AD lost its grip on virtually the entire South-West, its traditional political stronghold. This was not an ordinary electoral setback. It was a demonstration of how far a ruling party could go in deploying the advantages of incumbency against its political opponents.

And yet, the opposition did not disappear.

On 21 September 2011, the Federal Government under President Goodluck Jonathan initiated proceedings against Bola Ahmed Tinubu, then a leading figure in the opposition Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN).
Tinubu was accused of operating foreign bank accounts while serving as Lagos State governor. The matter was brought before the Code of Conduct Tribunal in Abuja. Tinubu did not wail or whine, he fought the case at the tribunal which subsequently dismissed the charges on 1 December 2011, ruling that they were legally defective.

This was the same Bola Tinubu who would eventually become President of Nigeria. At the time, he was an opposition politician confronting a Federal Government controlled by the PDP.

Perhaps the most instructive lesson from that period was how the opposition responded to its political circumstances.

Rather than simply complain about PDP like Atiku and his ADC jesters and online supporters are doing now about the APC’s control of the Federal Government, the opposition began the painstaking process of building a political alternative.

The ACN, Congress for Progressive Change (CPC), All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP) and a faction of the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA) worked towards a merger. They did not hijack, nor moved all together into one of the 3 legacy political parties.

This was not an overnight arrangement. Different political interests had to negotiate, competing ambitions had to be managed, party structures had to be reconciled, and the necessary legal and institutional requirements had to be fulfilled.

The APC emerged in February 2013, with INEC subsequently recognising the merger.

The significance of this development cannot be overstated. It was a deliberate, calculated and methodical attempt to consolidate opposition forces into a political platform capable of challenging an entrenched ruling PDP party.

Even after the formation of the APC, the opposition was not spared further confrontation with federal security institutions.

On Saturday, 22 November 2014, DSS operatives, alongside soldiers attached to Operation MESA, invaded the APC membership registration data centre at 10 Bola Ajibola Street, off Allen Avenue, Ikeja, Lagos.

This happened just days after the APC had concluded its nationwide membership registration exercise.

The operation resulted in the seizure of computers, servers, hard drives and external storage devices. Thirty-one bags containing hard copies of membership registration data were also seized, while 25 APC data-processing staff were arrested.

The operatives returned on 1 December 2014 and removed another 30 bags of membership documents.

Whatever justification the Jonathan administration offered for that operation, the political implications were enormous. An opposition party’s membership data centre had been invaded, its equipment and records seized, and its personnel arrested, just months before a general election.

And yet, the APC did not abandon its ambition. It continued to organise, mobilise, campaign and prepare for the 2015 elections. They did not cry, ahhh they want to forge one-party state on Nigeria.

On 31 March 2015, President Goodluck Jonathan conceded defeat to Muhammadu Buhari, making history as the first incumbent Nigerian president to lose a presidential election and peacefully transfer power to an opposition party.

That, ladies and gentlemen, is what political organisation looks like. Not cry cry opoosition.

Now, compare this history with what we are witnessing today.

We have notable political figures, including a former Vice-President of Nigeria, Atiku Abubakar, and David Mark, a former two-term President of the Senate, who should ordinarily understand the intricacies of political organisation, party structures, coalition building and electoral preparedness.

These are not political novices. They are men who have occupied some of the highest political offices in the country. They understand the Nigerian political terrain. They understand the law governing political parties. They understand that political ambition, no matter how lofty, must be pursued within the established legal and institutional framework.

So, how does one explain the apparent failure to exercise basic due diligence before embarking on the process of building a political platform?

You cannot build something on nothing.

You cannot take over an existing political party without properly investigating its ownership, internal constitution, leadership structure, outstanding disputes, pending litigation and legal standing. You cannot inherit a house already riddled with internal disputes, refuse to inspect its foundations, rush in because you are desperate to occupy it, and then blame the landlord when the roof eventually collapses.

If you are in a hurry to dislodge an incumbent government, that urgency should make you more meticulous, not less careful.

Political desperation is not a substitute for political intelligence.

If the party you intend to use has internal leadership disputes, unresolved factions, competing claims to its leadership and multiple court cases hanging over its existence, why would experienced politicians fail to anticipate that these complications could threaten their electoral ambitions?

And when the consequences of those decisions begin to manifest, suddenly, the Federal Government becomes the villain. The APC becomes the culprit. The President is accused of deliberately frustrating the opposition and preventing Nigerians from having an alternative.

What a convenient escape route! Balderdash!

Of course, I am not suggesting that the Federal Government should be above scrutiny or that security agencies should never be questioned when their actions appear politically motivated. But the fact here is that the APC led FG has never used security apparatus to hound these folks and their hijacked party like it was done to Tinubu and his party.

Also, I am not suggesting that the APC-led government should be given a free pass if there is evidence of interference in opposition activities. The fact is, there is none!

Every government must be held accountable for its conduct. The right to organise politically, associate freely and participate in elections must be protected regardless of who occupies Aso Rock.

But there is a fundamental difference between a government deliberately obstructing an opposition party and an opposition party creating its own problems through poor planning, inadequate legal preparation and organisational incompetence.

We must be able to distinguish between the two.

Not every legal setback is political persecution. Not every internal party dispute is an APC conspiracy. Not every court judgment against an opposition political arrangement is evidence that the President is afraid of electoral competition.

Sometimes, the problem is simply that those who want to govern have failed to put their own house in order. Period!

Let me make this abundantly clear, an opposition party seeking to replace an incumbent government must be one of the most disciplined, organised and strategically prepared political institutions in the country.

It must have competent legal advisers who understand electoral laws. It must have a properly constituted leadership structure. It must have an effective national secretariat, a functional grassroots network, credible membership records, transparent financial administration and a clear mechanism for resolving internal disagreements.

Above all, it must anticipate problems before they arise.

That was precisely what the coalition that produced the APC set out to achieve. The process was methodical. Different political interests were brought together, competing ambitions were negotiated and the necessary institutional arrangements were pursued.

It was not perfect, and the APC has certainly had its own internal crises since then. But the coalition demonstrated that political parties could overcome their differences and build a formidable electoral platform capable of defeating an incumbent Federal Government.

That is the lesson.

Atiku Abubakar and David Mark should know better. Their political experience should make them understand that building an opposition platform requires far more than bringing together prominent angry politicians, announcing a new political direction and expecting Nigerians to rally behind them.

You need structure. You need discipline. You need legal clarity. You need organisational capacity. You need people who understand that elections are won long before ballot papers are printed.

And, most importantly, you need to understand that the law does not suspend itself simply because you are desperate to remove an incumbent President.

What I find particularly disturbing is the chorus of voices from certain political commentators who present themselves as neutral observers, independent analysts and defenders of democracy, yet seem incapable of acknowledging the responsibility of the opposition for its own organisational failures.

Every mistake becomes the fault of the APC. Every legal complication becomes an alleged conspiracy. Every internal disagreement is attributed to the President’s determination to eliminate political competition.

This is intellectually lazy.

If you want to challenge the APC, challenge it. If you believe Tinubu’s government is deliberately frustrating opposition politics, provide the evidence and make your case. But do not turn every avoidable mistake made by opposition politicians into an indictment of the Federal Government.

There is a reason political parties conduct congresses, conventions, membership registration, leadership elections and legal documentation. These are not ceremonial exercises. They are the foundations upon which political institutions are built.

You cannot disregard those foundations and then complain when the structure begins to wobble.

The opposition must understand that the responsibility for building a credible alternative rest primarily with them. It is not the responsibility of the incumbent President to organise his opponents, resolve their internal disputes or protect them from the consequences of their own administrative negligence.

If you cannot organise yourselves into a functional political party, on what basis should Nigerians trust you to organise a country as complex as Nigeria?

This is the question that should be troubling every serious-minded Nigerian.

The APC did not arrive in power through the generosity of the PDP. It fought its way there through years of political organisation, coalition building, negotiation, resilience and electoral mobilisation. Its leaders endured difficult circumstances, but they did not abandon the responsibility of preparing themselves to govern.

Those seeking to replace the APC should learn from that history.

Opposition is not a begging business. It is not a permanent excuse-making exercise. It is a serious political responsibility that demands discipline, competence, foresight and strategic thinking.

If you want to govern Nigeria, demonstrate first that you have the organisational capacity to govern yourselves.

And if you fail to do that, have the intellectual honesty to accept responsibility rather than looking for scapegoats to hang your shoddiness, tardiness and unforced errors on.

You cannot blame the incumbent President for every battle you lose before you even get to the polling station.

• Adebiyi, a global PR practitioner wrote from London, UK.