The Brewing Democratic Crisis in Anambra State: An Analysis of Zoning, Governance, and Political Entrenchment
Democratic Crisis in Anambra State
As Anambra State approaches its 2025 gubernatorial election, several concerning trends threaten to undermine its democratic foundations. This analysis examines how the interplay between zoning systems, party dominance, and incumbent protection threatens to replace merit-based governance with entitlement-based succession.
The Zoning System’s Double-Edged Sword
The zoning system in Anambra State, which rotates governorship among three zones (Anambra South, North, and Central), was originally conceived to ensure equitable representation. However, this well-intentioned system has evolved into a mechanism that potentially undermines democratic principles. Rather than serving as a guideline for representation, it has become a rigid framework that some use to claim entitlement to fixed terms, regardless of performance.
Current Governor Charles Chukuma Soludo’s supporters argue that his zone is entitled to eight consecutive years of governance despite the constitutional provision for four-year terms with the possibility of re-election. This transformation of electoral terms from earned privileges to zonal entitlements represents a fundamental misunderstanding of democratic principles.
Performance Analysis: Beyond Road Construction
Governor Soludo’s first term has shown limited scope in developmental initiatives. While there has been progress in road infrastructure, closer examination reveals that many of these projects were initiated and funded by private citizens and other government entities, with the governor primarily serving in a ceremonial commissioning role.
The administration’s shortcomings include:
Security Challenges
Widespread insecurity leading to numerous casualties
Allegations of security institutions’ involvement in harassment
Police brutality and systematic extortion
Youth profiling and harassment based on appearance
Economic Decline
Business exodus to neighboring states, particularly Asaba and Lagos
Lack of government support for business growth
Limited implementation of 21 signed MOUs
Multiple taxation and extortion affecting daily commerce
Healthcare and Infrastructure
Minimal progress in healthcare development
Limited institutional development beyond basic equipment purchases
Insufficient attention to job creation and economic diversification
The Triple Threat to Democracy
Three key factors currently threaten Anambra’s democratic future:
- Suppression of Political Competition
Incumbent supporters actively discourage potential candidates from running, often through intimidation and threats. This behavior contradicts the fundamental democratic principle of open political competition. - The Rigid Zoning System
The zoning system has evolved from a mechanism for ensuring fair representation into a tool for maintaining political control, potentially blocking more qualified candidates from other zones. - Party Monopolization
The All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA) has become entrenched as the “only acceptable party” for Anambra, despite Nigeria’s multi-party system. This artificial restriction of political options limits voter choice and potentially excludes capable leaders from other parties.
The Fundamental Questions
This situation raises several critical questions about the nature of governance in Anambra:
Should zonal representation take precedence over governmental performance?
Are we electing individuals, parties, or zones?
How can democratic institutions be protected while maintaining equitable representation?
What is the proper balance between traditional political structures and merit-based governance?
Conclusion
The approaching 2025 gubernatorial election represents a critical juncture for Anambra’s democratic future. The convergence of zoning entitlement, party monopolization, and incumbent protection threatens to replace democratic competition with predetermined succession. For democracy to thrive in Anambra, citizens must prioritize performance over zoning, competence over party affiliation, and democratic principles over entrenched interests.
The current situation demands a reassessment of political practices to ensure that democratic institutions serve their intended purpose: enabling citizens to choose the most capable leaders rather than submitting to predetermined political arrangements that may not serve their best interests.
