NIGERIAN JOURNAL OF SOCIAL STUDIES, VOL.

XXIII (1) APRIL, 2020

IMPEDIMENTS TO DEMOCRACY IN NIGERIA

AND THE WAY FORWARD

Akeem Tunde Adelekan & D. E. Ashibi

Department of Social Studies, Adeyemi College of Education, Ondo

Abstract
Democracy is a system of government through which
the people choose their leaders and hold their leaders
accountable for their policies and their conduct in office.
The people decide who will represent them in parliament,
and who will head the government at the national and
local levels. They do so by choosing between competing
parties in regular, free and fair elections. It is also
designed to allow all citizen irrespective of their social
status, religion, ethnic or gender status to have a voice
in decision making, thereby promoting good
governance and enhance the socio-economic
development of the country. The question is; what are
the impediments to democracy in Nigeria? The
researcher argues that issues such as corruption,
rigging, vote-buying, judiciary abracadabra, lack of
observance of rule of law, honesty and are some of the
impediments to democracy in Nigeria. The research
therefore, suggests that for democracy to thrive in Nigeria
as a parameter for achieving rapid socio-economic
development, the system must observe the rule of law,
transparency and accountability, promote free, fair and
credible election. The government should also provide
260 Akeem Tunde Adelekan & D. E. Ashibi

quality and functional education and ensure economic

restructuring etc.

Keywords: Impediment, Democracy, Government, Nigeria

Introduction
A major issue about democracy in Nigeria is that as long as elections
are being conducted and ostensible winners and losers are
emerging, particularly at the Presidential level, and power is being
handed over from one regime to another, then democracy is on
course. Under Nigeria’s military regimes, such luxuries were not
contemplated. In fact, in military regimes, they simply take over.
They detest handover. To hand over therefore, is highly democratic.
Thus, to understand democracy in Nigeria, it is not the credibility
of the electoral process that is germane, we look at where we are
coming from and agree that to have handed over as and when
due, are profoundly democratic feats. Hence, defining democracy
may ordinarily be a difficult endeavour in other environments.
Democracy is understandably practised as the government of the
people, by the people and for the people.
The central element of the democratic process is exclusion.
Its most portent manifestation is the solemn exercise of handing
over. What has become the most notable dividend of democracy
therefore is the cycle of elections in which the citizens are highly
privileged to be participants? Hence in the Nigerian orthodoxy,
democracy is monumentally translatable to electoral democracy.
According to Kukah (2012), evidence suggests that countries in
transition remain quite prone to backsliding and failure. He
contends that this is why it must not be taken for granted in Nigeria
that democracy is secure (Kukah, 2012). In any case, it is
immediately obvious that Kukah, who is actually the Bishop of the
Catholic Diocese of Sokoto in Nigeria, belongs to that class of
Nigerians who think that they must express an opinion on every
subject matter, including democracy. As further evidence of the
distractions that Kukah and his school of thought cause for
democracy in Nigeria, he claims: We may pride ourselves with
having survived four back-to-back elections and create the illusion
 Impediments to Democracy in Nigeria and the... 261

that our democracy has been strengthened. This is misleading

because first, the elections are still massively fraudulent and our
level of success is not measured by international best practices as
such. Secondly, with very little evidence of changes in the lives of
our people, our democracy remains risky, volatile and vulnerable
to internal and external shocks.
One of the basic conditions for democratic rule anywhere in
the world according to Gurumka, Nengak and Ajayi (2014), is the
acceptance of constitutionally infused limits to the holding of
elective office. As many political philosophers have argued over
the ages, such limitations are necessary in order to safeguard the
sovereignty of the people by constantly reminding, those who offer
themselves for public service that they are servants of the people,
not masters. Democracy in Africa has faced many challenges.
These challenges are the reluctance of political leaders to share
powers, to build consensus and show respect to those who challenge
them. African leaders are guilty of centralization of power and
inability to build legitimacy by promoting the principle that
emphasizes that “the people participation must find expression in
the political process. (Mohammed, 2006).
Democracy is a system of government based on the acquisition
of authority from the people, the institutionalization of the rule of
law, the emphasis on the legitimacy of rulers, the availability of
choices and cherished values including freedom, transparency and
accountability.
Governments therefore exist to achieve these objectives.
Western democracy insists that “good governance” entails the
existence of democratic institutions and values. Thus, the principles
of good governance include participation, equity, the rule of law,
transparency and accountability, as well as the effectiveness and
efficiency in the delivery of public goods and services (Gurumka,
et. al., 2014). Therefore, this paper examined the weaknesses of
Nigeria democracy and the way forward. Specifically, it
conceptualized democracy and the rule of law and explored the
nature of Nigeria’s democracy before proffering the way out. These
weere done as follows:
262 Akeem Tunde Adelekan & D. E. Ashibi

Democracy and the Rule of Law

There is no consensus among scholars on the exact definition of
democracy. The Athenians of ancient Greece defined democracy
as the government of the people by the people for the people. This
simply means the government people freely put up to serve them
without any discrimination on the basis of social status. For
Rousseau, democracy is the government of the people for the
general will of the people. To provide the general will of the people,
the government must give liberty under the law, must create a
system of public education by which children are accustomed to
regard their individuality only in its relation to the body of the state,
(Sabine & Thorson 1973).
In what he described as democratic centralism, Lenin (1983),
defines democracy as the government of the peasants and the
proliferates, which subordinates the minority to the majority
through a strong party structure that cedes its decision-making
power to higher party bodies. Under this democratic centralism,
argues Lenin, no opposition, criticisms and demand for personal
liberty are brooked from the people. Despite the seemingly divergent
views on democracy, there are some basic principles that are
common to them. These include supremacy of the law, equality of
all citizens before the law, personal liberty, general will of the people,
equitable distribution of resources in the society and equal
opportunity for all citizens, among others.
On attainment of independence on October 1, 1960 the post
independent government of Nigeria adopted a democratic rule,
which was interrupted by military interregnum from 1966 through
1979. The country was returned to civil rule in 1979, which lasted
till December 31, 1983 when the military struck again and sacked
major democratic structures and institutions. Democratic rule was
restored in the country on May 29, 1999, and, since then democracy
has been on experimentation in Nigeria. Ogundiya (2010) has
argued that the return of the country to electoral democracy in
1999 has not made any significant impact on the economy and
general wellbeing of the people because of the manipulating nature
and character of the national elite.
 Impediments to Democracy in Nigeria and the... 263

The rule of law presupposes the supremacy of law in the state.

This means that law, and nothing else, counts in the society, as
everything, everybody is subject to the same law. Both the ruler
and the ruled, or the ruler and the subjects, are not only subject to
the rule of law, but are also equal before the law. The rule of law
promotes and protects the liberty, freedom and the gamut of the
fundamental human rights of the citizens. Writing on individual
freedom, Rousseau notes that though the social contract gives the
body politic absolute power over all its citizens, the sovereign cannot
impose on its subjects any fetters that are useless to the community.
He remarks further thus: We can see from this that the sovereign
power, absolute, sacred, and inviolable as it does not and cannot
exceed the limits of general conventions and that every man may
dispose at will of such goods and liberty as these conventions leave
him (Malan, 2015).
Rousseau’s concept of absolute power is even controversial.
Both Hobbes and Locke have argued that the power granted to
the sovereign, that is the state, is limited and not absolute. However,
our concern here is that whether absolute or not, individual liberties
and freedom are guaranteed in a democratic state where the rule
of law is supreme.
According to Malan (2015), the rule of law thrives in a state
when there is a separation of powers among the main organs of
government, namely, the legislature, the executives and the
judiciary, so that the powers of law making, execution and
adjudication are not concentrated in one person or a group of
persons. Absolute power, argues Lord Acton, corrupts absolutely.
To avoid tyranny and oppression of the citizens, he argues, the
rule of law should equally embody the separation of powers, so
that each organ or arms of government shall be a check on the
excesses of the other arms. It is on this premise that democracy
can thrive in a state.
Kelly (2013), shares the above view when he explains that the
framers of the American constitution applied the concept of
separation of powers when they decided that the three branches
of government: executive, legislative and judicial should be distinct
264 Akeem Tunde Adelekan & D. E. Ashibi

and have checks and balances on each other, so that no one branch
can gain absolute power or abuse the power they are given.
A functional separation of powers will guarantee checks and
balances among the executives, the legislature and the judiciary,
making sure that none of the organs appropriates the powers of
the other organs. In countries, such as, Nigeria where this
functional separation of powers is lacking, checks and balances
will be difficult, hence authoritarianism may be the order of the
day. Under this condition, promotion and protection of the
fundamental human rights of the citizens will be difficult.

Natures of Nigeria’s Electoral Democracy

Okeke (2014) states the following as the tendencies of electoral
democratic practices in Nigeria:
i. Democracy by Proxy: The Nigerian brand of democracy is
seen as democracy by proxy. It is quite distinct from
representative democracy and is also quite different from
participatory democracy. Under democracy by proxy, hundreds
of thousands of citizens would participate in the final
campaign rally of a candidate for an election that is taking
place in the following twenty four hours. During the voting
proper, only about 20% of that number would actually cast
their votes. This scenario is not strictly classifiable as voter
apathy. Its roots are embedded in a belief that those citizens
who would go out to vote will actually vote for “my candidate”.
He has campaigned for his preferred candidate in commuter
buses, in schools, in beer parlours, in his own home, using
the social media and at every forum he was opportune to
campaign for this candidate. And when this candidate
eventually wins, he will also genuinely be among the jubilant
crowd. Meanwhile, he did not go to cast his vote, despite being
a registered voter and a well-known supporter of this candidate
(Okeke, 2014).
On the other hand, the large gathering of citizens at
the campaign rally was actually made up of street vendors,
unemployed graduates that do or do not have voters’ cards,
fans of the invited musicians and professional praise singers
 Impediments to Democracy in Nigeria and the... 265

who have been paid in advance to attend the campaign rally. It

is this same set of “party faithful” that appeared at the rally of
the opposition candidate. They attend these carnivals to listen
to their favorite musicians, playing at the event. They know
that the political parties have no manifestoes. Whoever cares
can vote on their behalf on the day of the election.

ii. Rigging as Opposition Blame Game: In the Nigerian

brand of electoral democracy, only the ruling candidates rig
the election. Election rigging is among the core problems of
the electoral process in Nigeria. Citing Kurfi (2005), Awopeju
(2011) opines that rigging is almost synonymous with Nigerian
elections. Yet, both the ruling and opposition candidate rigs
the election. If the opposition candidate wins, it can only be
because he rigged the election same thing with the ruling
candidate. The only time the election is adjudged free and
fair is when i win or when my candidate or the political party
to which i belong wins, a case study of Buhari verse Atiku’s
fans. In the Nigerian brand of democracy therefore, elections
are not won, they are rigged.

iii. Electoral Democracy of Elite Contradiction: The elite

are undoubtedly the prime beneficiaries of the prevalent
electoral malfeasance in Nigeria. But the elite in Nigeria
hardly go out to cast their votes on Election Day except the
newsworthy political elite whose voting would make headline
news. The typical Nigerian elite would consider it demeaning
to stand in the queue, and wait for his turn to cast his vote.
The contradiction is that it is also the elite that are standing
for the election. But they will not cast a vote for their own
election. So they wait for the artisans, peasants, the
unemployed, the disabled, the aged, under aged voters and
indeed the very wretched of the earth, to do the ostensible
voting, then the elite would manipulate the process to their
inevitable advantage.
266 Akeem Tunde Adelekan & D. E. Ashibi

iv. A Culture of Democratic Judicial Abracadabra: Once

elections are over in Nigeria, the losers move to the courts to
contend that they were supposed to be the winners. In the
process, an individual who did not stand for election, was
fielded and subsequently replaced by his political party, could
be declared by the courts, as the winner of an election in
which he absolutely did not participate. He did not make a
single campaign speech. Mr Rotimi Amaechi became Governor
of Rivers State, under this setting, following the 2007 elections
(Ogunye, 2013). Kukah (2012) also argues: The failure of
our electoral system has thrown up a lucrative culture of
electoral tribunals which have now become the latest cash
cows in our democracy. Many lawyers and judges are now
making fortunes from our electoral failure in the same way
that the coffin maker benefits from death. The case of APC
Zamfara also come to mind where all APC candidates in 2019
election were disqualified hence PDP candidates declared
winners of all election conducted in the states (Premium times,
2019).

v. A Culture of the Losers Tongue-in-Cheek Talk:

Nigerian elections are constitutionally party based elections.
There are no rooms for independent candidates. In the past,
the loser usually rejected the results and headed for the courts.
Currently however, he would first make his tongue-in-cheek
statement, congratulating the winner and thanking his
supporters for their support. The news would thus spread that
he has accepted the results of the election. In his next
statement, he declares that he did not precisely accept the
results, even where he congratulated the winner, that he has
decided as the candidate not to head for the courts but that
his party’s lawyers are however studying the results,
preparatory to contesting the outcome of the election in court.
Dr Kayode Fayemi was a recent casualty of the tongue-
in-cheek culture. After paying his dues as a Nigerian pro-
democracy activist during Nigeria’s military autarchy, he
became Governor of Ekiti State in October 2010, but he was
 Impediments to Democracy in Nigeria and the... 267

defeated at the polls in 2014 by the former Governor of the

State, Ayo Fayose. To the admiration of both detractors and
fans, Dr Fayemi immediately made a state-wide broadcast,
congratulating the winner and also commenced handing over
discussions with Fayose. However, the ovation was still in
circulation for the erstwhile politically stylish Fayemi, who
courageously accepted defeat at the polls, before he began
singing new songs; that the text of his broadcast, never
suggested the acceptance of defeat and that his party was
studying the results. In other words, they were preparing to
move to the election tribunal (Thomas, 2014). By this, it has
shown that the Nigerian political elite have no consistent.

vi. Election as Democracy’s Equivalent of Warfare: This

resort to militarization of the electoral process in Nigeria. After
the former President Olusegun Obasanjo described the
imminent 2007 elections in Nigeria, as a do or die affair. Ex-
President Obasanjo made this declaration on the 10th of
February 2007, while addressing a PDP stakeholders meeting
in Abeokuta, Ogun State (Tenuche, 2010). The ex- President’s
most quoted dictum that this election is a do or die affair for
me and the PDP (Peoples Democratic Party), this election is
a matter of life and death for the PDP and Nigeria, depicts
his perception of politics and electoral competition as a
continuation of warfare by some other means (Tenuche,
2010). Obasanjo’s successors in the PDP hierarchy have since
continued to profess this faith in electoral democracy as
warfare. Governorship elections were held in Ekiti and Osun
States of Nigeria, on June 21 and August 9, 2014 respectively.
The PDP’s national campaign committees for the two
governorship elections were headed by Vice President
Namadi Sambo. As leader of the campaign teams, Nigeria’s
Vice President Sambo declared at the inauguration of the
committees in Abuja on Wednesday April, 16 that the ruling
party in Nigeria (PDP) was going to war in the two states, to
recover its stolen mandates (Aminu, 2014; Okocha, 2014).
The party was victorious in Ekiti State. They lost in Osun
268 Akeem Tunde Adelekan & D. E. Ashibi

State. The Osun State debacle therefore reminded the party

warlords that there may be other issues that count in elections
other than conceiving it as warfare.
One week before the election, the Inspector General of
Police (IGP), Mohammed Abubakar, deployed three
helicopters for surveillance in the three senatorial districts in
the state with one Assistant Inspector General of Police and
four commissioners of Police for effective coordination of
security operations. Abubakar confessed that the number of
troops, armoured tanks and helicopters deployed in Ekiti was
the highest ever to be deployed in a state, saying it was part of
the resolve of the police to do anything humanly possible to
provide security for election materials and personnel of INEC
(Independent National Electoral Commission). Like a war
zone, the troops took their positions. Almost every 100 meters
from the entry point of the state, police officers and soldiers
mounted various check points, with blood-hound dogs sniffing
for any likely breach of peace by supporters of the various
political parties. On the eve of the election, there was tension..
Hence, the foregoing fully illustrates the importance of
democracy to Nigerians, as democracy remains on course in
the Nigerian State. However, at the same time that Nigerian
troops were demonstrating democratic doggedness in Ekiti
State, Boko Haram insurgents were daily being reported to
be delivering devastating blows on some of us, “we the people”,
and some democracy-rejected military personnel in the North-
Eastern part of the same Nigeria. But democracy must be
safeguarded first, and then we return to insurgency. The
democratic war must be won as prelude to the battle against
Boko Haram.

vii. The Phenomenon of Vote Buying: Ojo (2008) describes

vote buying as a political malady that is pervasive in Nigeria.
The Nigerian masses are rather likely to disagree with Ojo
(2008) and view the balancing act of vote buying which is
vote selling, as one of the beauties of democracy, as the time
of vote trading is usually when the greedy political elite,
 Impediments to Democracy in Nigeria and the... 269

democratically “share the money” to reach the masses. Ojo

(2008) further describes vote buying as follows:

“Vote buying, in its literal sense, is a simple economic

exchange. Candidates ‘buy’ and citizens/electorates ‘sell’
votes, as they buy and sell apples, shoes, or television
sets. The act of vote buying by this view is a contract, or
perhaps an auction in which voters sell their votes to
the highest bidder.”

According to Ojo (2008) in both historical and comparative

perspectives, vote buying as a phenomenon is neither system
specific nor space bound. It is common to all political systems, be it
advanced or developing, mediaeval or contemporary. It obtains in
all regions and climes; it only differs in magnitude and
manifestations from one polity to the other. We opine that this
may be true and wonder why it should be a pervasive phenomenon
in Nigeria. In every system and space also, vote buying is a
deprecatory phenomenon. It is one of the denigrating aspects of
Nigeria’s democracy. Vote buying takes place at various institutional
levels in the Nigerian polity (Sha, 2008). In the legislature, the
name of the malady is not vote-buying, it is called lobbying.
(Sha, 2008) further argues: The legislature is the law and
policy making institution in every democracy and this explains why
individuals and groups would normally want to illegally influence
its members to enact laws that would be in their favour. In the
Nigerian scenario therefore, we are witnessing the normalization
of illegality in vote buying, as the legislators at the different levels
of government did not go to their various legislative houses in the
State capitals, merely to make laws. However, Sha (2008) still
highlights that vote buying is largely illegal, criminal and therefore
unconstitutional. But in Nigeria, the ultimate subject matter is
democracy. It is neither criminality nor constitutionality. Whatever
that is done or left undone in the name of democracy is acceptable
to the blind elite (Okeke, 2014). Sha (2008) also argues that vote
buying in all its ramifications, violates democratic norms and
negatively affects the quality of political transition in Nigeria. At
270 Akeem Tunde Adelekan & D. E. Ashibi

the end of the day, it does no good to either the buyer or the seller as
it stymies democracy and transports collective self-deceit to a vicious
cycle. It is largely a method of sustaining democracy in Nigeria. We
agree with Walecki (2008) that money matters for democracy
because, much of democratic political activity simply could not occur
without it.
For instance, ballot papers are to be printed for elections and
ballot boxes are to be constructed or procured – all with money. In
Nigeria too, money has to be shared because the voter needs to
eat to be able to cast his vote. Casting of vote after all is critical
democratic political activity.

The Way Forward

Some of the suggested way forward for good democratic tenets in
Nigeria are as follows;
1. Promotion of regular, free, fair and credible elections in Nigeria
in order to elect credible and patriotic citizens into national
government, as well as encourage participatory democracy.
2. Restructuring of the judicial systems in order to improve the
checks and balances of the organs of government.
3. Embarking on electoral and bureaucratic reforms for improved
service delivery.
4. There is need for a planned programme of reform, re-
orientation and revitalization of the military to be primarily
conscious of their traditional responsibility of territorial
protection against external aggression and not incursion into
state politics.
5. It is recommended that all politicians, the electoral commission,
law enforcement agencies, all other government bodies and
private individuals should dispense their responsibilities within
the societal laws and accepted traditions towards the
achievement of a sustainable democracy.
6. All political office holders, particularly the ruling party should
imbibe the spirit of accepting opposing views.
 Impediments to Democracy in Nigeria and the... 271

7. Opposition should also learn the spirit of giving constructive

and objective criticism to the policies and programs of the ruling
party.
8. The three arms of government - legislative, executive and
judiciary should be fully independent, financially and
otherwise. This will enable proper execution of the principle
of checks and balances.

Conclusion
In Nigeria, democracy is not yet about the people in generic terms.
It is about my people, to the exclusion of their people. Democracy
in Nigeria is not yet about the masses. It is an elite denominated
democracy. In the Nigerian State, periodic election is curiously
counted as a dividend of democracy.
For democracy to thrive in Nigeria, the people must be vigilant
and demand accountability from the leaders. It has been proven
that the strength of a democracy is only as great as the will of the
people to uphold it. For all these to be possible the citizens must
be politically educated and mature. This would enable the future
leaders to make ethical decisions and for the people to begin to
make political office holders accountable while within and outside
office. According to Mahatma Gandhi, “politics without ethical
principles” is among the “social sins of humankind.” Nigeria has
the potential (human and material resources) to translate to a
great democracy if the politicians (the people) can change their
mind-sets and learn to play ethical politics that adds good value to
the system. This entails a paradigm shift in the manner in which
Nigeria is governed. As Albert Einstein has noted, “the specific
problems we face today cannot be solved at the same level of
thinking we were at when we created them.” The political leaders
should do more and talk less.
272 Akeem Tunde Adelekan & D. E. Ashibi

References
Adetula, A.O (2008). Money and Politics in Nigeria.: An Overview.
In International Foundation for Electoral System Vote Buying
- IFES-Nigeria. Abuja: Petra Digital Press.
Aminu, A. (2014). PDP will Reclaim, Ekiti, Osun – Sambo. Annual
Report on the Human rights situation in Nigeria. Retrieved
from http://www.dailytimes.com.ng/article/pdp-will-reclaim-
ekiti-osun-sambo on 14/08/14
Awopeju, A. (2011). Election Rigging and the Problems of Electoral
Act in Nigeria. Afro Asian Journal of Social Sciences, 2(2), 1-
17
Gurumka J. B., Nengak G. J., & Ajayi J. O. (2014). Democracy and
Good Governance in Nigeria 1999-2012. Journal of Research
on Humanities and Social Sciences,4(18)
Kelly, M. (2013). Separation of Powers, Retrieved from https
www.About.com on 5th June, 2019.
Kukah, M. (2012). Nigeria as an Emerging Democracy: Dilemma
and Promise. http://www.thenationonlineng.net/2011/
index.php/law/. Accessed, 11/11/13.
Kurfi, A. (2009, September 4). The Nigerian Electoral Process and
the Imperative of Reform II, Weekly Trust, p.3.
Malan K. (2015). Deliberating the rule of Law and Constitutional
Supremacy from the perspective of the factual dimension of
Law. Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal 18(4).
Mohammed, S. A. (2006). The Lust for Power and its tragic
implications for Nigeria. Centre for Democratic Development
Research and Training (CEDDDERT). Hanwa Zaria. Kaduna:
Vanguard printers and Publishers Ltd.
Ogundiya, I. S. (2010). Democracy and Good Governance: Nigeria’s
Dilemma, African Journal of Political Science and International
Relations, 4.
Ogunye, J. (2013). Revisiting Amaechi’s 2007 sui generis mandate.
Retrieved from http://www.punchng.com/feature/the-law-you/
revisiting-amaechis-2007-
 Impediments to Democracy in Nigeria and the... 273

Okeke, R. (2014). Anatomy of the Nigerian Elite: Interrogating a

Blind Elite Model of the Elite Theory. European Scientific
Journal, 10(4), 320-336.
Okeke, R. C. (2014). Understanding Democracy in Nigeria: A
Satirical Thesis; Kuwait Chapter of Arabian Journal of Business
and Management Review, 4(2).
Okocha, C. (2014). We will recover our Stolen Mandate, in Ekiti,
Osun, Says Sambo. http://www.thisdaylive.com/articles/we-
will-recover-our-stolen-mandate-in-ekiti-osunsays-sambo/
176386/ Accessed, 14/08/19.
Premium Times (2014). Pro-Fayose Thugs Invade Ekiti Court,
Chase Away Judge, Beat up Litigants. https://
www.premiumtimesng.com/headlines/168500-pro-fayose-
thugs-invade-ekiticourt-chase-away-judge-beat-up-
litigants.html#sthash.TypC7FT6.Isonbv4m.dpuf. Accessed, 24/
09/2014
Premium Times (2019). Why Supreme Court ruled against APC in
Zamfara. https://www.premiumtimesng.com/headlines/
331517-why-supreme-couurt-ruled-against-apc-in-
zamfara.html
Sabine, G. H. & Thorson T. L. (1995). A History of political Theory.
Illinois, Dryden Press, Hinsdale.
Sha, D.P. (2008). Vote Buying and the Quality of Democracy. In
Adetula, O. A. (Ed.): Money and Politics in Nigeria. Abuja:
International Foundation for Electoral System.
Tenuche, M. (2010). Rhetoric of President Olusegun Obasanjo and
the 2007 General Elections in Nigeria. Journal of Sustainable
Development in Africa 12(1) 16-188
Thomas, D. (2014). “Interview: Kayode Fayemi: My Ekiti Election
Story. Retrieved from http://kayodefayemi.com.ng/2014/07/
interview-kayode-fayemi-my-ekiti-electionstory
Walecki, M. (2008). Political Money and Corruption: Limiting
Corruption in Political Finance. In Adetula, O. A. (Ed.): Money
and Politics in Nigeria. Abuja: International Foundation for
Electoral System.