Political Parties in Nigeria Essay

unsophisticated no dubiety is the instaurations current new bride. To the cessation that every iodin Politicians, Journalists, aversmen and unconstipated laymen c entirely themselves democrats musical composition those who wish to defend a regime no matter its record c every it commonwealth (Williams 199565), one could aptly evidence the homo is in the age of democracy. But as democracy is gaining bullion the world oer, it emergency be express that the Institution of insurance- reservation ships comp all charges the lubri behindt of the current elective wave. This is because, policy-making segmenties performs as vehicle for expressing incalculable of world views held by citizens as well as an instrument to garnering the conscious and active participation of the citizens in the governmental execute which constitutes the trademark of any parliamentary practice. As no(prenominal)d by Hague and Harrop (1987141-142), society competition is the hallmark of liberal democracy because it is the device which nonpluss policy-making relations responsive to the electo browses by providing voters with some excerpt epoch simultaneously restricting that choice to a few across-the-board alternatives. In some other(a) words, the greater the number of parties and / or the latitude of freedom, the a lot parliamentary the policy-making organisation is or travels while the the more than(prenominal) they argon conscripted, the lesser the ilklihood of a parliamentary policy-making dodging.This view was in addition shargond by Anifowoshe (2004 59) when he noned that the condition of the policy-making parties in a governmental system is the trump give a itinerary possible evidence of the nature of any participatory regime. It must however be severalized that while parties constitute the piston in the engine of democracy, the nature and activities of policy-making parties themselves whitethorn constitute a stumbling b lock in the way of democratic emergence and upkeep. This has been the paradox of fellowship government in Africa where the institution has remained largely underdeveloped. Instances erupt where activities of parties take a leak been a major(ip) accom junkimentor in the dec bourne of democratic authorities or proscribedright termination of democratic administrations and their ensuant backup by armament authoritarian regimes. In this context, the Nigerian state is a reference point.Nigeria became independent in 1960 after years of colonial rule. license ushered in a multi caller democracy under a Westminster parliamentary model. However, due to a number of circumstances including intra and inter troupe niggle and, semi semi policy-making excesses of parties and their leading among others, the introductory democratic nation was truncated in January 1966 following a bloody coup detat championed by the five Majors. The garbled termination of the first republic in lik e manner ushered in a thirteen-year grand array rule that lasted till October 1, 1979. Nigeria had another taste of multi caller democracy amidst October 1979 and 30-first celestial latitude 1983. However, like most of the parties of this period themselves, the problems of the first republic reincarnated to m atomic number 18 the democratic sufficees, culminating in the military coup of declination 31st 1983 and the beginning of a second phase of military rule in the push throughlandish.Indeed, the second phase of military rule in Nigeria which lasted between December 1983 and May 29, 1999 was the most dramatic and traumatic in the history of the country. It was a period mostly referenceized by serial publication of coups and counter coups, political maneuverings and supra all, endless transition to civil rule programmes or what Diamond et al (1997) has aptly dubbed Transition with discover End. But while the political embroilment of that period cannot be blamed out- justi fiedly on the excesses of political parties and their leaders, the fatality to stave off such was always advanced(a) as a defensive appliance for sustained tinkering with the then transition fulfill. For instance, reasons for dissolution of the 13 political connectors that first prelude the trey republic and their consequent re headment by government created SDP and NRC and, annulment of the June 12, 1993 presidential pick that unconstipatedtually calumniated in the abortion of the third republic were c arfully crafted under the need to avoid repeat of mistakes of the quondam(prenominal) republics. Detailed work on this has been through with(p) by scholars and need not be recounted here (See, Diamond et al 1997).However, what must be accented here is that, Nigerias current democratic experience was the end harvesting of a foresightful and tortuous journey through the woods of military autocracy. Although the decade of the 90s oecumenically was characterized by ex ternal thrusts for democratisation around the world, the resilience and perceptions (rightly or wrongly) by Nigerians that democracy holds prospect for a better life was also a major performer that uphold the struggle. Also, possibly, in acknowledgment of the sanctity of the troupe institution to democratic concentrate, the country has continued to operate a growing multi fellowship democracy since 1999.Thus, from one-third parties in 1999, it currently has over thirty political parties with prospects of more to be registered. Against this gigantic background, this paper seeks to examine the sh ar of parties in sustaining Nigerias democracy. Further to this be To what extent do Nigerian political parties conform to their expect role in the political system or in sustaining democracy? What ar the encumbrances (if any) on their performance in Nigeria? What is / atomic number 18 to be done to place Nigerian political parties on the part of vibrancy vis--vis democratic care? Unraveling these problematic calls for rigorous inquiry. But to start with, situating the role of parties in a universal context is indispensable. governmental Parties and Democracy Theoretical FrameworkPolitical company is one of the genuses of intermediary groups in a political system. Others entangle interest groups and pressure groups. Thus, the relationship between viable political society and democratic governance is no doubt axiomatic. Political parties are the lubricant of democracy and without which, democracy motifd on the westmostern model cannot piece (Adele 200135). This is essentially because it digests a credible means of harnessing the variety of public opinions essential in sustaining a democratic society. While democracy rests on the certain and active participation of the people, political troupe is a viable woodpecker in this regard. This perspective is shared by political scientists. As Anifowoshe (200459) remarked Democracy dwells where the pri ncipal leaders of a political system are selected by competitive preferences in which the bulk of the population prolong the opportunity to participate. As a matter of fact, the condition of the parties, in a political system, is the crush possible evidence of the nature of any democratic regime.Implicit in the above statement is that a callers level of institutionalization, viscidness and favorable base, gibes the extent of its viability and the extent to which it could be said to be performing its functions in a democracy. In other words, viable political parties hold to democratic issue much as unviable ones may result in democratic regression. Although in that respect are multitudinous of expositions on what constitutes a political party, even off so they all revolve around electioneering and the control of government. For instance, political parties has been conceived as an instrument for contesting elections for the purpose of selecting candidates and party(ies) to exercise political force-out (Yaqub 2002122). This definition is in consonance with that which sees political party as an governing, which is principally, absolutely and actively involved, in the electoral move, in a democracy, with the major intent of lovely political power and controlling the government (Onuoha 2003137). The import of these definitions is that the major finis of political party is to capture and control governmental powers. This it does through participation in electoral bear upon in which it fields candidates to contest for sundry(a) posts. Yet, it must be stated that while the major goal of a political party is to capture and oblige control over force-out and policies of government, such at magazines may endure to be done in coalition with other party(ies).This is curiously the case where electoral triumph is not based on first past the post system or where a single party could not win the tokenish electoral seats unavoidable for it to constitut e a government. However, beyond field candidates for elections and controlling governmental apparatuses, political parties also perform other functions which on the one hand set them aside from other organizations such as interest groups and more importantly on the other hand, makes them sine qua non for democratic development. These include the labor of political recruitment and training, teaching method, kindlyization, breeding consensus, providing alternative world views and political communication among others (see Okoosi-simbine 200485-86 Yaqub 2002112 Aina 200210-12, Onuoha 2003137). It is the extent to which parties are able to discharge these functions that determine the extent of democratic growth in the country. Important in carrying out the above functions is that parties especially in ethnically variegated societies such as Nigeria must eschew those intervening variables that are likely to mar programmes and policies of the party such as salience of ethnic, ghostlike or other sectional interests.Where this is not avoided, the tendency is that a party leave alone find it advantageously hard-fought in harnessing or mobilizing mass backup man for democratic growth. The ferocity here is that parties are formed not scarce to promote policies solely also to secure social interests. It in that locationfore follows that parties must establish wide-cut social bases in found to be able to aggregate interests preferably than articulation of specific sectional ones. Also central to democratic growth through the party system is party institutionalization. That is, the surgical operation by which parties arrest established and acquires value and enduring stability (Huttington, 1965394). Although the extent of party institutionalization varies with party systems the world over, it is ordinarily measured based on some factors such as party age, count of splits and mergers, electoral stability, legislative stability and lead change (Janda, 19931 67). Of equal importance is party coherence, which has been defined as the distri providedor point of congruence in the attitudes and behaviour of party members (Janda 1980118 1993173).There is no gainsaying the fact that the degree of coherence among party members bears direct relevance to party force and stability. This is because a strong and coherent party in terms of membership and structure is usually stronger and coordinated both in articulating view and garnering electoral support than are fragmented one. It is also the factor of coherence that change parties to effectively discharge the function of interior(a) integration which they are pass judgment to perform especially in plural societies. It must be hard-pressed that, while parties in the advanced countries of Europe and America, are observed to ease up attained the status described above, those in the developing countries tend to be a little out-of-the-way(prenominal) from it.In other words, political parties in the developing countries cannot be ranked on equal scale with those of the advanced countries in terms of viability of the institution. Hence, it could be reasoned that the difference between the both worlds accounts for the different levels of democratic growth between them (e.g. Nigeria and USA). Although Nigeria has returned to democratic practice since 1999, yet in that location is a growing concern over the hold of its democracy. These concerns plain owe their origin to the nature of political parties and party politics or activities in the country. Issues surrounding this dilemma are examined near but forrader this, description of the character and general tendencies of current political parties is essential.Roles and Functions of Political PartiesFrom some(prenominal)(a) literature on political party, it is evident that democracy, especially the liberal majoritarian strain would be practically impossible without the institution of political party. This no doubt is anchored on the expected roles of political parties in deepening the democratic form. unrivaled major role expected of any political party is the t occupy of political recruitment and education. The centrality of this function lie is the fact that it is directly machine-accessible with fulfillment of the common aim of all parties. That is, the aim of fielding candidates for election and capturing or exercising political power either singly or in cooperation with other parties (see, Yaqub 2002164 Ball 198873). In other words, in the process of trying to capture political power, political parties serves as a major instrument/platform through which candidates for public offices are recruited at all levels. This is the case in both socialist as well as competitive liberal democracies.According to Ball (19877), in such political systems where parties are absent (such as in zero party situation) or weak, political elites are usually recruited from traditional elites or through appa ritional and military organizations. However, such sources of recruitment usually relieve oneself implications for stability of the regime because they wishing the more popular base of political parties. In other words, the institution of political party provides an avenue for recruiting politically ambitious persons into the political elite class. In this, we can also accommodate parties role as a credible means of political eon. This is because parties would make narrowed overpower the number of competitors for a particular office to what it considered the best choice at the material time. This process help reduce pressures on the political system as well as streamline citizens choice. In addition, in the process of campaigns for elections, parties inform and educate the public on important state policies and follow outs much as they do while in power. Even for parties out of power, they provide a constant source of critique of government policies which attimes help to chang e, spay or improve the quality of policies and programmes.Related to the task of recruitment and education is the role of parties as socializing agents. Generally speaking, most conceptions of socialization concur that it is a process by which respective(prenominal)s incorporate into their take attitudinal and behavioural patterns, the way of their respective social groups and society (Babawale, 1999218). If this is true, it follows that in the course of preparing candidates for elections, campaigns and other political activities, the individual deep down the society is acquiring some attitudinal or behavioural patterns necessary to make a politically vibrant individual. In addition, familiarity most political institutions and processes are acquired and interiorized by the individual. Perhaps, this informed why political socialization have been conceived as all formal and informal explicitly or nominal political learning at every order of the life circle that affects politi cal behaviour, such as learning of politically relevant social attitudes and the acquisition of politically relevant own(prenominal)ity characteristics (Greenstein, quoted in Babawale 1999219). some other major role of political parties in any political system is in the area of serving as radio link between rulers and the ruled through what is known as political communication. That is, parties provide a means of expression and teaching flow, both upward and downward, in any political system. Although, the flow of information is crucial to the survival of any political system, the perplexity of information flow however varies. For instance, in a liberalized multiparty system, there is tendency for information flow to be tilted more in favour of upward flow. This would allow the ruling party to feel the jiffy of the populace as well as respond positively to policy demands.But even for parties out of power, it has a tendency to reinforce incarnate consciousness of party members a nd strengthen the level of attachment to the party. On the other hand, where there is a single party, the tendency is that information flow give be more from the top to the crumb. For instance, Hague and Harrop (1987 140) had noted that in Stalins Russia, the democratic expression of opinion from the grass resolutionages of the Communist fellowship was negligible compared with the centralistic flow of directive from the top. This notwithstanding, what is important is that, irrespective of the strength or direction of information flow, political parties have the onerous role of serving as a two-way communication process between the government and the people.The look and implementation of collective goals is yet another major function of parties. This is because in the process of seeking to capture power, they formulate programmes and policies either through conventions, meetings and even manifestoes which they hope to implement while in office. Some of these issues eventually c onstitute the collective goals of the society. Related to this is the militarization role of parties. Indeed, parties are known to have been in the vanguard of mobilizing the citizens.This they do through mass rallies and other forms of boasting of unity that emphasizes identification between the individual and the party. Hague and Harrop (1987140) noted that, parties have been the height movers in the revolutionary upheaval of the modern age. They alluded that the enormous transformations of Russia and Chinese societies in the last century were led by vanguard communist parties connected to radical social changes. So also were the depicted objectist parties of the third world who played critical role in the attainment of independence and the subsequent attempt to weld new nations out of traditional societies (Hague and Harrop 1987140-141).In the process of developing collective goals, parties also serve as important agents of articulating and aggregating the myriad of groups a nd individual interests in the society. Although this is not an exclusive function of political parties as it is also performed by interest groups, but parties are able to do this on a wider and / or home(a) scale. Indeed, all parties have social base that cuts across ethnic, religious, occupational and class divides. It thus serves as a platform through which the diverse interest base are provide and aggregated to form coherent whole. The underlying assumption here is that parties are able to synthesize and reconcile the multitude of competing interests into a broad national value. It must however be stated that this function of political parties, though important, need not be stressed too far. This is because, most often, parties principally respond to interests and demands that are consistent with their political orientation or in line with controlling interests in the party. In this context, parties are important agencies in determine which interests are represented in polit ics and which ones are left out.From discussions so far, it is apparent that the relationship between political parties and democratic sustenance is axiomatic. Indeed, the dissimilar roles performed by political parties in the political system are expected to strengthen the democratic processes. This demand also implies that political parties and political leaders must in themselves be democratic. What this translates to is that the extent to which individuals within the party and the party organization itself assimilate democratic tenets to a large extent affects the extent to which they are able to discharge the above roles as well as the quality of democratic growth in the political system. In other words, having democrats is precondition for democracy to take root. How these intricacies of party politics and democratic sustenance have played themselves out in Nigeria will be our next focus after a preview of political parties in the countrys current fourth republic.Parties in N igerias Fourth majority rulePolitical parties in Nigerias fourth republic emerged against the background of a military managed transition prograamme which began in 1998 and reached its climax on May 29, 1999 when a new civilian administration was ushered in (see Momoh and Thoeveni 2001). Before this experience, Nigeria has had forward democratic republics between 1st October 1960 when it gained political independence from Britain and January 1966 when it was rudely terminated in a military coup another one was between October 1, 1979 and December 31, 1983 while a third one was not allowed to take root in the early 1990s because it was eventually truncated by its own architect. What is remarkable about all the republics is that, with the exception of the aborted third republic which had wholly two parties dejure, all others were characterized by multiparty system. Extensive work on anterior republics have been done by Coleman (1971) Joseph 1991 Diamond et al 1997 Ujo 2000 and Yaq ub 2002).To begin with, parties in Nigerias current fourth republic have been characterized by what could be described as a seesaw numerical transition. This was because, at stemma of political activities in 1998, several political associations were registered (though provisionally) as political parties but was ulterior prone down to terzetto before the 1999 elections and by 2003, several others came back on the stage. This numerical transition deserves extensive comment.Upon commencement of political activities in 1998, close to fifty political associations sprang up but at the close of nominations, single when twenty-four of them had use for registration with INEC. After radical scrutiny, only nine of these parties were formally registered (provisional) by INEC according to its guidelines. These are bond certificate for Democracy (AD), All Peoples party (ANPP), elective Alliance Movement (DAM), Peoples Democratic society (PDP), Peoples Redemption Party (PRP), unite Demo cratic Party (UDP), United Peoples Party (UPP) and Movement for Democracy and Justice (MDJ). However, the future and continuous human race of these parties was tied to passing the acid test. To continue to exist and function as a political party, a parting was expected to score at least, a minimum of five (initially ten) percent of the total votes in at least 24 states of the federation during the December 1998 local governments elections.Thus, of the nine parties, only the APP and PDP clearly met the criteria having scored at least five percent in over 24 states of the federation each. The AD was third with 5 percent of votes in 14 states of the federation. However, in addition to the APP and PDP, the AD was also registered partly to assuage the south westerners who were mute aggrieved by the June 12, 1993 election imbroglio and most importantly, because of viands of the electoral laws that the third best party would also be registered in the event of only two parties meeting t he recruitments. Consequently, based on the special criterion, the AD, APP and PDP were registered to contest the 1999 general elections.Following increase pressures for registration of more parties, three other associations, All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA), National Democratic Party (NDP) and United Nigeria Peoples Party (UNPP), were registered in June 2002 out of over twenty that applied for registration. The registration of these three parties however heightened agitations by those yet to be registered until they were lastly registered later in the year. Those factors that made their registration inevitable included perspicacious blackmail by other associations seeking registration, fragility and growing intra party deputes among existing parties and above all, the resort to litigation by those not registered among others (see, Anifowoshe 2004 63) Added to this was increasing factionalisation of existing parties. Indeed, the ruling by the Federal Appeal Court in Abuja, F CT, which favoured the registration of more parties, was a major and perhaps most probatory factor that prompted registration of more parties by INEC to the extent that about thirty political parties freely con well-tested the 2003 general elections.It must be stated that, although thirty political parties contested the 2003 general elections, the trio of PDP, ANPP and AD have remained dominant since 1999. While the PPD is currently controlling 27 states (previously 28 before the court order that awarded victory of Anambra state governorship election to the APGA candidate rather this year), the ANPP has seven states and AD, one state. They all however, have their men in the national parliament, though with varying strength.Also, there has been a growing rate of factionalization, crises of succession and internal bickering within the parties. This is with the consequence that more parties and political association have continued to emerge from them to the extent that Nigeria is cur rently having about 37 political parties with prospects of more to come. The new bride of parties include the ACD, MRDD, Action Alliance For instance, the rate of factionalization within the ruling PDP have gone to an extent that several factions have emerged as new parties on their own. This was the case with the MRDD spearheaded by a reason national chairman and other prominent members of the party.The same account could be read for the recently formed ACD which from all indications is spearheade by imcubent Vice chairman Atiku Abubakar. Indeed, the PDP is not alone in the troubled waters of dissent. Even notability members of the AD and ANPP are now either full members of one of the freshly registered parties or fraternizing with the intention of becoming one. This was the case with the incumbent protem National forwarding Secretary of ACD, Lai Mohammed, who was hitherto a strong member of the AD.Indeed, in the public figure up to 2007 general elections, there seem to be g eneral confusion among political parties in the country. While new parties have emerged after 2003 general elections, there is nothing to suggest that more will not initiation up before the next 2007 elections. But if the deepening or exoneration of democracy is a prime factor which politicians have always adduced for the junction and realignment of forces leading to formation of new parties, to what extent have Nigerian political parties with its increasing numbers satisfied this aspiration? Or better sedate to what extent have they fulfilled the expected roles of parties in a democracy necessary for deepening the process? This is our prime concern in the next section.Nigerian Parties and Democratic desegregationPerhaps a good way to access the impact of parties on democratic sustenance is to align our purpose in this direction with the expected roles of parties in a democracy. Indeed, Nigerian parties by whatever angle they are looked at are political parties powerful so c alled. At least, to the extent that the common aim, as parties elsewhere, is to capture political power and control machineries of government. By implication therefore, they are practically authoritative instruments in the recruitment of political leaders and political elites. In fact, viewed against previous experiences, one would observe an increasing sensitization and political education of Nigerians.However, one must be cautious in stressing this argument too far giving the contradictions inherent in the ways and practices of the parties. This is because, at the facial level, parties may have been recruiting candidates for various elective posts, but beneath we may ask what is the quality of candidates being recreated? Are the parties democratic in their recruitment process? Obviously, answers to these questions are shun. To anchor this further, we may begin on the premise that to have (or sustain) democracy, first, there must be democrats either as individuals or party organi zations.It is obvious that at inception of the current democratic administration in 1999,and with exception of the PDP then which had a consensus candidate in Chief Olusegun Obasonjo, all other two parties were not particularly democratic in selecting their presidential aspirants. For instance, the decision of the A D under the influence of Afenifere, a pan Yoruba socio-cultural organization to select chief Olu Falae as the partys presidential flagbearer at a meeting held in Ibadan by party elders without allowing strait-laced democratic contest between him and Chief Bola Ige cannot be described as democratic. In fact, the undemocratic nature of what is now the De Rovans Hotel chronological sequence has been adjudged as a major factor in the crises that has been rocking the party since 1999 (see National Interest June 18 200618).So also was the case with the APP between Dr. Olushol Saraki and . The later was eventually selected in a rather spurious manner. Expectedly this action s tired statement within the parties leading to factionalization in the case of the AD and protest votes against the party by Dr Saraki and his supporters in the APP in the 1999 presidential elections. In addition, some(prenominal) of the three parties aspirants for other posts were either hand picked or selected in a sneaky arrangement.Indeed preparations for the 2003 elections witnessed an almost complete disregard of democratic tenets in the process of recruiting candidates for elective offices. Although many of the parties attempted to pick their aspirants, especially presidential nominees, through national conventions, but unfolding events and protests by other aspirants after the conventions smacks of fluidity of the process. The implications of all the above is the increasing factionalization of the parties and rising level of intra party crises. disturbing as these situations appear, there is nothing yet to suggest advances in democratic direction by the parties even for t he 2007 elections. The recent convention of the PDP in which it was headstrong (or maneuvered) against the wishes of some other members that its candidates for elections will be by affirmation is a pointer in this direction. Also is the case of the NDP which has already adopted a candidate, Rtd.General Babangida, as its presidential flag bearer for the 2007 election without safekeeping a convention. What we can derive from the above analysis are two fold. First is that a faulty premise cannot produce a well-grounded conclusion. A party whose internal machinery is undemocratic cannot nurture democracy in a larger societal context. abet is that the candidates so recruited have not gone through any democratic training within the party nor tested democratically to ascertain their level of subscription to democratic tenets. In this case, such candidates while in office will likely be rigid to opposition and above all, perpetuated through undemocratic tendencies. Current unfolding oc currences in the country manifesting in succession crises, third term agenda etc. tend to confirm all the above assertions. In other words, the bottom line remains that, neither Nigerian political parties nor politicians could be regarded as democrats thus cannot effectively and sufficiently give to maintaining the system.In terms of political communication and serving as link between the government and the people, Nigerian parties grossly parade a deficit balance in this regard. This is because none of the parties has a functional formal communication channel. The reality is that most of the parties structures especially at the grassroots are only vibrant at the cuddle of elections. After this, they fade away while the party continue to exist only at National and state headquarters. Indeed, the critical ingredients and means of political communication necessary for a vibrant democracy are conspicuously absent in the parties. These include avenues for expression of opinions by c itizens, free information flow (upward or downward) among others. These elements help strengthen attachment and loyalty to the party thereby holding prospect for increased political participation. However, Nigerian parties are not forthcoming in this regard. What is apparent is that relations within the parties are more of client-patronage relation.Party leaders and elected officers most often perplex alienated from other party members and even the electorates immediately after election. For the parties in power, the only relation that there from exist between party elites and other members usually is occasional distribution of patronage in order to bring through members support and loyalty while those out of power fizzled away only to re emerge at the approach of another election. For this reasons, harnessing citizens initiative or sustaining a vibrant political participation of members becomes difficult with the result of docility in party activities. Indeed, communication is th e life wire of any organization the lack of which may result in the organizations eventual death. The party organization and therefore the political system is no exemption in this regard. Perhaps, we can make bold to say that the near zero communication level of Nigerian political parties is a major factor in their unfitness to station or function effectively as lubricant of the democratic project.As already noted in this text, parties also play mobilization roles as well as articulate and aggregate the myriad of opinions held by individual and groups within the society. This no doubt facilitates development of collective goals. A on the lookout observation of the Nigerian experience however reveal parties as vie contradictory roles to the above. First, mobilization of citizens has often been special(a) to periods of electoral campaigns. For Nigerian parties and politicians, election periods are periods to galvanize the people and exhume powerful oratory remarks. The total poli tician is always willing to visit the nooks and crannies to mobilize and solicit support for the party and candidates. But while this is part of the mobilization function of parties, it need not be confirmed solely to an election period routine.Rather, it is a process that must continue in order to bring out the best from the citizens in terms of input into policies and programmes of the government. But given the learning ability of the Nigerian politician and their end-means orientation of politics which is to acquire political power in order to secure economic resources, citizen contribution / input into policies and programmes is of unimportant effect. This crave for economic security at whatever cost by the political elites could therefore be adduced as a contributing factor to continued non alignment of policies with realities confronting the Nigerian electorates.Another dimension of the faulty mobilization function of parties in Nigeria is that even where they, as elsewhere, have wider social base of support, political maneuverings often create a situation whereby parties resort to politics of ethnic and/or religious mobilization. Indeed, mobilization politics along the lines of ethnic, religious or some other forms of cleavages have been a major character of party politics since independence. For instance most parties of the first republic use divisive mobilization politics to garner electoral support. So also were parties of the second republic. With the exception of AD which is rooted in the south west and maintains affinity with Afenifere, a socio cultural organization in the region, all other parties of the current era could not be said to have their support base restricted to a particular region.However, in the process of electioneering campaigns, many members wittingly or unwittingly often whip ethno-religious sentiments as strategies to mobilize support. Consequently in the prelude to the 2003 general elections, the mood of many Nigerians was th at, Religion will play a prominent role in their choice of leaders. Muslim- Christian rivalry was so intense that none of the 30 political parties in the country has managed to develop a firmly national support base. Muslims consider Obasanjos ruling peoples Democratic Party (PDP) as a Christian party. The all Nigerian peoples party (ANPP) of his nearby rival, Muhammad Buhari is considered by Christians to be a Muslim party (Marahatha Christian Journal, 2003).The wildness therefore is that, where mobilization is carried on, on a faulty premise, it becomes extremely difficult to articulate and aggregate programmes and policies that serves the national interest. In this context, programmes and policies often articulated are those that are in consistent with that of the dominant interests within the party, be it socio, cultural or economic.In terms of political socialization, it may be argued that there is a tendency for negative socialization among Nigerian political parties. Socia lization, conceived in terms of the process by which the individuals incorporate the ways of their respective social groups and society into their individual patterns and behaviour, is expected to be facilitated by political parties through campaigns, rallies and other political activities. In Nigeria, however, this has a negative content arising from series of violence and atmosphere of insecurity that often mare electoral processes in Nigeria. Nigerian parties and politician alike have a penchant for recruiting and making use of political thugs mostly recruited among motor garage boys, unemployed Youths and even Students at moments of campaigns and elections. Such behaviours and orientations which are antithetical to civic culture on the face of it are imbibed by younger generations.The consequence is that this erodes democratic senses of bargaining and via media and instead creates the impression that force and crude militancy are the best ways to live and achieve political goa ls. The negative impacts of the socialization process is already being exhibited at other levels of politics below the state such unionism, especially student unionism. Indeed, student unionism at the third level is expected to evince civic and enlightened qualities by justice of the place of tertiary institutions in the country. However, a common observable trend in most tertiary institutions in Nigeria is that campus politics has often time been characterized by intolerance, maneuverings, money politics and a host of other negative traits exhibited by Nigerian political parties to the extent that institutions authorities may at times impose sanctions or outright ban on campus political activities. Situations like this no doubt have implications for their future political engagements and by extension, democratic growth in Nigeria.Our endeavour so for has been to trace whether there is an alignment between the expected roles and functions of political parties in sustaining democrat ic process and the activities of political parties in Nigeria. For one, while the role of parties in democratic sustenance is in controvertible, the Nigerian political parties have not been seen contend these roles. wherefore is this so is our focus next. Observed Weaknesses of parties in NigeriaFrom discussions so far, it can be gleaned that the indispensability of political parties to democratic sustenance is not in doubt. What is perhaps worrisome is the ability of Nigerian political parties to function effectively as catalyst for democratic growth. Gleaned from a number of observable trends, some factors serve to explain this unfortunate mess. First we may note ideological emptiness of the parties. Conceived as a set of coherent ideas which guide and tailor behaviour, ideology is expected to fire and sustain inspirations of party members. According to Scruton (quoted in Okoosi-Simbine, 200524), parties ideology are moral systems that enshrine the sanctity of contract and prom ise between them and the electorate because they constitute the political doctrine from which a programme of political action emanates and upon which understructure citizens choose how they will like to be ruled. Essentially therefore, parties as organizations with diverse social base must be bounded by such set of common beliefs and ideas in order to help affect a vibrant democratic society.Unfortunately, Nigerian parties and politicians are merely playing survival game. Prime to them from observable trend is the desire to capture and maintain political power irrespective of what this takes. Consequently, this drive to capture power by all means possible tends to erode the performance of other functions necessary for democratic growth. The lack of ideology also serves as conduit for series of political vagrancies that characterized the political terrain. As observed by Aina (200219), Nigerian poiticians behave like political bats, changing affiliation in response to perceived for tunes or electoral advantage. Akin to the issue of ideology is what we may refer to as sufferingly digested manifesto of the parties. The manifesto is basis upon which contract between the rulers and citizens are sealed because it is the representation and/or expression of the political partys direction, purpose and how it hopes to achieve them while in government (Onuoha 2003141).It is the partys statement of intention about how it hopes to achieve good governance. It is therefore the basis upon which performance of an incumbent government can be assessed and balanced against the need for change. Unfortunately, manifestoes of Nigerian political parties have proved to be manifestations of emptiness, similar in content and providing no choice for the citizens. The only difference between them as observed by Okoosi-Simbine (200522) is the emphasis they give to the programmes articulated or in a few cases, the strategies for carrying out the objectives. In other words, their manifesto es are more a replica of the other. Again, this close similarity in manifestoes can be hinged on their inability to develop a coherent ideology. As onu0oha (2003145) rightly observed, any meaningful and functional manifesto must spring from a profound party ideology. Thus, a manifesto without a party ideology is like a body without a soul. In this context, rather than lube democracy, parties constitute more of a burden on democratic practice. preponderance of primordial sentiment may equaled be adduced as responsible for the inability of Nigerian parties to respond positively to the challenges of democratic sustenance.Indeed, the ability of a party to effectively perform its role especially in multi cultural settings is usually circumscribed by the socio-economic structure of the society. Therefore, since parties are institutions competing for spheres of influence in the socio-economic and political configuration of the society, there is every tendency that there activities will be likely be intertwined with prevalent socio-political sentiments of the society (Suleiman and Muhammad 2006). This is suggestive of current Nigerian parties. Indeed, post independent Nigeria has witnessed partys base being deeply rooted in ethno-regional and religious sentiments to the extent that the major parties of the first republic (AG, NPC and NCNC) and their second republic successors (especially NPN, NPP and UPN) are often regarded as ethnic pressure groups. While parties of the current fourth republic may not be so deeply rooted in a particular region, nonetheless, the continuous use, overtly or covertly, of ethnic and religious sentiments in party politics reinforces social divisions among the populace which in turn weakens party structure and organization. gratis(p) to stress that, a weak party in terms of internal structure cannot function optimally in deepening the democratic process. We can also speak of poor financial standing of the parties which made them hypersensi tized to hijack by money barons who eventually use them to achieve personal benefits. Politics generally is an expensive military action and the role of money in contemporary Nigerian politics is indeed overwhelming. Although the government, through INEC, is currently backing the parties, but considering the spending pattern of the parties, government finance is generally considered insufficient. Consequently, supernumerary funds are sourced through party financiers that include influential blood line men, party members in government and so on. For instance, the Plateau state governor, Joshua Dariye, sometime ago claimed he gave the PDP part of the 1.6 billion naira ecological fund he was accused of mismanaging. Similarly, only recently the ANPP caretaker committee chairman and governor of Bornu state directed all the seven governors on the platform of the party to contribute 20 one thousand million Naira each to the partys purse within two weeks while all presidential aspiran ts and senators were to contribute 10 million Naira each towards the administration of the party (The Punch Editorial, June, 200616).The implication of this is that Nigerian parties will likely for long be hijacked by money barons who will eventually constitute godfathers within the parties. Second is that credible aspirants who cannot afford to pay the wide sums would have to forget or submerge it while thirdly, internal party democracy becomes jeopardized. The resulting effect of all these is that parties becomes constrained as popular organizations capable of being the vanguard of democratic growth. Rather, they become characterized by frequent conflict and internal party squabbles. Also as a fall out of the above circumstances, programmes and policies that are often articulated and implemented reflect more of the interests of the so-called godfathers rather than that of the formal party organization. Thus, as the International estimate (20068) have noted, given this context, Nigerian party life is characterized by a very low level of debate on policy options. Another observed weakness of Nigerian political parties is the absence of political education. It is a common fact that Nigerian political parties have not been carrying out programmes aimed at enlightening the populace and even party members.This is because the party organization has been confined to mere instrument of contesting elections. Thus after elections, most of the parties become docile both in terms of recruiting new members and organizing activities to enlighten citizens about the political process. According to the country report on Nigeria by the worldwide IDEA (20068), all the parties surveyed do agree that their members are active only during elections. The import of this is that once elections are over, only very few things link the party with its members thus, the expected role of political communication and education wanes out. We may also note the long years of military rule a s another factor for the nonperformance of Nigerian political parties. Indeed, Nigerias long reign of military rule from 1966 to 1999, except for the brief period of 1979 to 1983, have affected the psyche of the average Nigerian politician. Military rule as it were is undemocratic.But its long reign in Nigeria with all its undemocratic tendencies have walked its way into the subliminal consciousness of most Nigerian. Thus, even though the military is out of power and democracy in place, the legacy of authoritarian tendencies still permeates the orientations and behaviours of the political class. The implications of this are that Nigeria currently has a short supply of tested democrats while democratic institutions remain large underdeveloped. In other words, while the success of any democratic experiment is predicated on the availability of individuals who are democrats in themselves, Nigerias long years of military tutelage has done no less than wipe out the last vestiges of democr atic qualities among Nigerian politicians.ConclusionSo far in this work we have tried to examine the link between political parties and democratic sustenance in Nigeria. It is observed that the institution of political party is indispensable if democracy is to be strengthened. This is by virtue of the various functions they perform which transcend the mere activity of fielding candidates for elections. However, the Nigerian situation is observed to be a recreation from the norm. if anything, Nigerian parties have not only failed in discharging these roles, but are equally working in the direction of democratic regression.In the main, the poor financial base of these parties, lacks of institutionalization, empty ideological content among others are part of their major constraints. Against this background, it is suggested that the government should improve on its funding of these parties in order to avoid their hijack by selfish money barons. Equally, the INEC should put in place mec hanisms that would ensure these parties are internally democratic. Internal democracy of the parties no doubt will magnify into useful premise for democracy to exposit in the larger Nigerian society. Above all, there must be the political will by politicians themselves to allow democratic tenets to take root in the country. The above, it is believe are good recipe for democratic sustenance in Nigeria.ReferencesAnifowoshe, Remi (2004), Political Parties and Party System in the Fourth state of Nigeria Issues, Problems and Prospects in Olurode, Lai and Anifowoshe, Remi (eds.) Issues in Nigerias 1999 General preferences. Lagos, Nigeria John West Publications moderate and Rebonik Publications Ltd, pp. 55-78.Diamond, Larry, Kirk-Greene, Anthony H.M and Oyediran, Oyeleye (eds.). Transition without End Nigeria Politics and Civil Society under Babangida. Ibadan, Nigeria reward Publishers.Babawale, Tunde(1999),Political Culture and Political Socialization inRemi, Anifowoshe and Emenuo, F rancis (eds.) Elements of Politics. Lagos, Nigeria Sam Iwanusi Publications. Pp. 210-225.Ball, Alan (1988), ripe Politics and Government 4th Edition. London Macmillan PressColeman, J.S (1971) Nigeria Background to Nationalism. Berkeley University of atomic number 20 Press.Hague, Rod and Harrop, Martin (1987), Comparative Government and Politics An Introduction. 2nd Edition. Basingstoke and London Macmillan bringing up Ltd.International IDEA (2006), Nigeria Country Report Based on research and Dialogue with Political Parties. Stockholm, Sweden.Janda, Keneath (1993) Comparative Political Parties Research and Theory in Finifter, Ada, W (ed.) Political Science The State of the Discipline II. Washinton DC American Political Science Association. Pp.163-191.Joseph, Richard (1991), Prebendal politics in Nigeria The Rise and Fall of the Second Republic. Ibadan UPLMarahatha Christian Journal Online (2003), Religion is Likely to determine Nigerias Election. universal resource locator http/ /www.mcjonline.com/news. Retrieved August 15 2005Momoh, Abubakar and Thovoethin, Paul-Sewa (2001), An Overview of the 1998 1999 Democratisation Process in Nigeria. DPMN Bulletin Online http//www.dpmf.org (Retrieved January 4 2006)Okoosi-Simbine, Anthony (2005), Political Vagrancy and Democratic Consolidation in Nigeria in Momoh, Abubakar and Godwin, Onu (eds.) Elections and Democratic Consolidation in Nigeria. Nigeria Nigerian Political Science Association pp 17 33Onuoha, Browne (2003), Political Parties and Elections A Critical Review of Party Manifestoes in New Era Foundation, The Grassroots and Political Change in Nigeria. Lagos Joe Tolalu Associates pp 137 152Suleiman, A. and Muhammad, A. A. (2006), Religion, Party politics and Democracy Implications of Religion in Nigerias 2003 Presidential Election Journal of Development. Vol. 2 no 1 (Forth coming)Ujo, Abdulhamid (2000), Understanding Political Parties in Nigeria. Kaduna klamidas PublishersWilliams, Adebayo (1995) The Fict ionalization of Democratic Struggles in Africa The Nigerian Experience in Olowu, Dele Soremekun, Kayode and Williams, Adebayo (eds.) governance and Democratization in Nigeria. Ibadan, Nigeria Spectrum Books Ltd. Pp. 65-67.Yaqub, Nuhu (2002), Political Parties in the Transition Process in Onuoha, Browne and Fadakinte, M. M. (eds.), Transition Politics in Nigeria, 1970 1999. London Malthouse Press limited pp 118 134