•Prof Anthony Kila
Dear readers,
Our recent epistles, penned in celebration of the silver jubilee anniversary of uninterrupted democracy in Nigeria, have ignited a spectrum of reactions from you, our esteemed readers. Your distinct viewpoints are instrumental in fostering a comprehensive and vibrant dialogue.
I am deeply appreciative of those of you who, after reading and reflecting on our shared musings, have deemed them worthy of a response. Your thorough comments, often presenting alternative perspectives and endorsing or challenging our shared views, significantly enrich our ongoing discourse.
There is a (now retired) Professor of Pharmacy (a very senior senior, as we say in our world) whose command of the English Language and his love for its correct use make him a linguistic puritan who reads and responds to our epistles.
In this case, the senior Prof did not find the expression “Towards a More Perfect Democracy” easily digestible; his protest against this was the usage of the terms “more” and “perfect” in sequence.
My response to him that the expression was borrowed from the American expression “towards a more perfect union” was understood; luckily, he is also a published poet. However, it opened more shelves of reservations about America and the American system.
Please feel free to see why the epistle that followed part 2 of the “Towards a More Perfect Democracy” and titled “An Imaginary Speech by Joe Biden” was about the ongoing electoral campaign in the USA.
Contrary to what some readers assumed, the essay about the American elections was neither a diversion nor a detour from the essays around 25 years of democracy in Nigeria; rather, they are all part of the same theme and reflections on the concept of democracy.
As I have often pointed out, whilst I fully agree with the need to contextualise ideas and localise concepts, I still personally strive to ensure that the thoughts we share here are universal in outlook and durable in texture and time.
To that extent, real-life episodes like the Silver Jubilee of uninterrupted democracy in Nigeria or the election campaign in the USA become mere but valuable real-life examples of the concepts and ideas we reflect on.
Some readers have challenged me to offer my definition of democracy, which focuses on the crucial elements that make democracy what it should be, including the law and the duties and limits of government.
In reality, I have done this elsewhere and many times: I have offered my functional, process-centred, accountability-driven, and transparency-indexed definition of democracy everywhere and in every conversation possible.
Since poetry can rarely persuade a hungry lover, or can bread impress a satiated one, on this occasion, allow me to move away from my functional definition and offer an alternative inspirational definition of democracy that can match ( I believe even clearly surpass) Lincoln’s November Gettysburg 1863 speech.
My choice for a description of democracy that can, on one side, inspire and excite and, on the other side, inform and admonish is taken from a speech given by an eminent Athenian politician at the end of the first year of the Peloponnesian War (BC 431–404) as a part of the annual public funeral for the war dead.
In that speech, the speaker, Pericles, amongst other things, described democracy as the defining feature of his Athens and declared that:
“In Athens, we are thus:
Our government works for the most rather than the few. Our laws ensure equal justice for all in their disputes, but we never ignore merit for excellence.
When a citizen stands out for merit, then such a citizen will be recognised and invited to serve the state instead of others, not as an act of entitlement or privilege but as recognition and reward for merit and capacity.
We do not allow their social or financial background to impede recognition and position in government.
The freedom we enjoy is extended to our daily lives.
We do not suspect each other and do not discriminate or disdain those around us because their way of life differs from ours.
We are free to live as we deem suitable, but we are ready to fight off any danger.
An Athenian citizen pays attention to their public duties and interests when dealing with personal interests, but above all, they never get into public service to fix personal interests.
In Athens, we are thus.
We have been taught to respect judges and the law and never to forget to stand up for the oppressed and the discriminated against.
We have also been taught to respect those unwritten natural laws clearly written in the spirit of what is right and decent.
We do not consider those who show no interest in the affairs of the state harmless but useless because we know that though few can manage politics, we all can judge it.
We do not consider debates an obstacle to democracy. We believe that happiness is a fruit of freedom, but freedom is a fruit of value”.
The fact that Pericles could conceive a society and system of government over 400 years before Christ that understood the value of equality and merit, the richness of diversity, the centrality of the law and the importance of value, and the need to protect minorities says a lot about the depth of that period and culture. However, it also says a lot to those who, over two thousand years after Christ, still do not understand the essence of democracy.
Those who should know but for partisan and private interests refuse to stand for what is right even when difficult would not have been considered worthy in the Athens of Pericles.
If we want our democracy to work, the role of the law and judges must be closely monitored and evaluated.
In working towards a better democracy, we must understand that anyone who tries to exploit or manipulate the law for personal or partisan interest is one who betrays the spirit of democracy. For our democracy to move towards perfection, we must ensure that we agree that judges who betray the law are traitors of the spirit of democracy, decency and everything decorous about the commonwealth.
There is an original sin that some systems have committed, and that sin makes corruption of the bench and the law possible if not necessary.
I refer to the weak, corrupt, confusing, and corrosive cord that links the bench to politics.
Please feel free to think of the nomination of the Supreme Court in the USA and even the election of district attorneys.
What shall we say of those judges who casually disregard precedence or even give conflicting judgements in their own cases? What shall we say of those judges who recklessly intervene with injunction orders and counter judgments in cases currently treated by other courts?
What is worse, their mischief or ignorance of their position in democracy?
In a democracy, a bench totally independent of and unconnected to politics will better serve the law and justice.
Recent events in the world, thanks to access to more information, have exposed the failings of many Western countries that once stood as models of democracy. We have now discovered that no country can stand as a teacher to all. We have now discovered that we are all students who can learn from each other’s flaws and virtues on how to move to a more perfect democracy.
Join me on Twitter @anthonykila to share your thoughts, ask questions, and continue these engaging conversations.
• Prof Anthony Kila is an Institute Director at CIAPS. www.ciaps.org. He is also a regular contributor to The Frontier.
