27 Years Later, Nigeria’s Democracy Still Struggles to Stabilize

Nigeria may have preserved 27 years of uninterrupted civilian rule, yet the ideals of democracy remain out of reach, writes Davidson Iriekpen.

On Friday, Nigeria commemorated 27 years of its longest continuous period of civilian governance since independence in 1960. The federal government celebrated, pledging to strengthen democratic governance, promote national unity and tackle the nation’s challenges.

President Bola Tinubu used the occasion to reflect on Nigeria’s democratic journey, concluding that despite its imperfections, the country’s democracy has endured because citizens have consistently elected leaders through the ballot box, resolved disputes through legal institutions, and ensured peaceful transitions of power.

The president called on Nigerians to unite in the fight against terrorism, banditry and kidnapping, stressing that the battle against insecurity cannot rest solely on the government. He assured that the country would emerge stronger and more united after overcoming terrorism.

He urged citizens to avoid ethnic profiling and blame games amid security challenges, reiterating that the nation would become stronger and more united once terrorism is defeated.

The president acknowledged that many Nigerians continue to face economic hardship despite the progress made to sustain democracy. He assured that the government remains focused on reducing inflation, increasing food production, creating jobs, improving living standards and ensuring that the benefits of economic reforms reach every household.

However, the federal government’s celebratory mood was not shared by all, as insecurity across the country has provoked anger among many Nigerians, particularly over the abduction of teachers and school children in Oyo, Borno and Kogi states. Economic hardship is also taking its toll on citizens.

As reassuring as the president’s words were, they did little to soothe the constant pain many Nigerians experience, whether in the hands of bandits or the grip of hunger.

Some have questioned whether Nigeria has ever truly enjoyed democratic rule since retired General Abdulsalami Abubakar handed the reins of government to President Olusegun Obasanjo, marking the birth of the Fourth Republic on May 29, 1999.

Recall that the lifespans of the First and Third Republics were brief. The First Republic collapsed after six years of independence from Great Britain. A 13‑year period of military rule, civil war, coups and counter‑coups followed, lasting until 1979 when the Second Republic began. That too was short‑lived, lasting only four years before a military coup in December 1983 ended it, ushering in another period of military rule that lasted until 1999.

During military rule, Nigeria endured one of the continent’s most brutal dictatorships, overseen by the late Major General Muhammadu Buhari, retired General Ibrahim Babangida and the late General Sani Abacha.

General Babangida attempted to run a diarchy and create a Third Republic that would combine military and civilian rule. This experiment lasted only a few months, culminating in the failed Third Republic in 1993 when General Abacha, one of Africa’s most vicious dictators, overthrew the diarchy led by a handpicked Ernest Shonekan.

Between 1983 and 1999, it took several years of citizens’ activism, human‑rights advocacy and brutal military suppression to end military rule in Nigeria. Some citizens even fled abroad to avoid persecution by the military juntas.

While the milestone of the Fourth Republic demonstrated institutional resilience and peaceful transfers of power, it remained a mixed bag, characterized by profound socio‑economic challenges, shrinking democratic space, human‑rights abuses, electoral disputes and ongoing debates over true democratic dividends.

Many Nigerians had hoped that by now the country would be a place of prosperity. Unfortunately, that is not the case.

Even 27 years later, citizens continue to grapple with massive insecurity, severe economic hardship, soaring inflation, poverty and the controversial removal of fuel subsidies, which have deeply impacted the cost of living.

On the surface, the country displays the features of a democracy – three branches of government – but they are hindered by significant deficits and systemic issues.

Analysts say Nigeria’s democratic failure is rooted in weak institutions and a lack of accountability. The executive is seen as clueless, incompetent and manipulative; the legislature is weak and rubber‑stamps executive proposals; and the judiciary is often accused of losing its independence, compromising its role.

Those who spoke with THISDAY posited that judicial independence must be protected and insulated from executive influence. They argued that when courts align with political interests rather than legal precedent, democracy dies. Judicial appointments should be depoliticised, and judges must be empowered to hold power to account without fear of retaliation.

Elections are marred by irregularities; civil society and the media have been weakened. The erosion of these key watchdogs of democracy has allowed impunity to flourish.

“If anyone had told me that 27 years of democracy, Nigeria would be what it is today, I would not have believed. A country where nothing works. A country where we cannot conduct simple elections, which is a key component of democracy,” said one analyst.

This explains why many believe that despite maintaining 27 years of uninterrupted civilian rule, the ideals of democracy, justice, equity, good governance and accountability remain elusive.

Many feel that democracy in Nigeria has become the government of politicians, by politicians and for politicians only. How else can one explain the bloated salaries allotted to high‑ranking public officers while low‑paid servants remain unpaid for months?

There is no doubt that even though Nigeria’s democracy is 27 years old, the country remains a toddler on many fronts. It falls short in rule of law, security, free and fair elections, healthcare, education, employment and micro‑ and macro‑economic indicators.

Democracy cannot be measured only by elections or civilian governments. Its true test lies in the everyday experiences of citizens. Can they live without fear? Can they earn a living safely? Can they trust that public institutions will protect them regardless of status, connections or wealth? Are they given enough democratic space to operate freely without fear of intimidation, arbitrary arrest and detention?

To avoid any uprising that could threaten the nation’s democratic rule, the political class must, as leaders, make the people their top priority by first providing the necessities to improve their standard of living, as practised in advanced democracies. Only then will democracy be sustained.