At the beginning of the week, Arise Television and Centre for Democracy and Development hosted the first in an undisclosed series of debates on security and economy with five out of 18 presidential candidates.
While reactions have been mixed about debate operations and performance of candidates, there is an unexpected outcome: that this first debate might be the last presidential debate we have before the 2023 elections because of the explanation Bola Tinubu of the All Progressives Congress (APC) gave for ignoring the debate. In a press statement, Tinubu pointed out that aside from his gruelling campaign schedule, there are going to be several debates organised by and with different television stations and he will not be able to make them all. To avoid accusations of ‘selective appearance’, he plans to decline all debates. The multiplicity of debate platforms is a plausible reason. In the United States, the Commission on Presidential Debates, a nonprofit organisation jointly funded by the Democratic and Republican parties, organises the debates; in Nigeria, what we need is more collaboration between media and civil society on planning inclusive debates for federal and state candidates e.g., Nigeria Elections Debate Group.
One could also argue, based on the invitations he has not honoured, that Tinubu is already selective about his appearances and is comfortable only on home turf and APC-controlled environments.
Already, there are indications that one presidential candidate will stop debating if Tinubu refuses to participate. This is unfortunate. The decision to not engage Nigerians and other candidates on their manifestos, visions and track records is not one worthy of emulation but there is an election myth to protect.
In the US, the first televised presidential debates with presidential candidates in attendance was held in 1960 between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon. Some would say the first debate was in 1956, but Democratic candidate Adlai Stevenson was represented by Eleanor Roosevelt while Senator Margaret Smith represented incumbent Republican president Dwight Eisenhower. Interesting tidbit for the gender of the representatives and that representatives were not vice presidents.
Read also: Our candidates will longer appear in debates with surrogates – LP
There have been no-shows for debates in the US. For instance, after he was shown up at the debate with Kennedy, Nixon refused to debate against Humphrey in 1968 and McGovern in 1972. Johnson also refused to debate republican Barry Goldwater in 1964 but since 1980, both republicans and democrats have turned up for presidential debates.
There are several reasons we need debates – to keep the element of surprise and to ensure the door of opportunity remains ajar. Some did not know Kola Abiola (Social Democratic Party), until the Arise TV debate; now they have a better sense of him; while some came away impressed with Rabiu Kwankwaso’s outing (New Nigeria Peoples Party).
Aside from providing a platform for competition of ideas, composure and experience – debates level the playing field – allowing underdogs and those who have been dismissed to present themselves. Voters and influencers of voters get to see them on the same stage with other candidates including incumbents and favourites; this is precisely why Tinubu is staying away. Elections are a contest and contests can be ungovernable and unpredictable, open in a way that Lagos State politics, where Tinubu has ruled for 24 years, cannot condone.
Candidates can and should hold their town halls and rallies with their home crowd but the voters should be able to compare and assess candidates through dialogue between the candidates as they take each other on. It provides insight into how they handle pressure and how convincing or convinced they are about their plans. Debates provide glimpses into their weakness and humanity – we see a little bit about who they are when the doors are closed – who snaps, won’t stop talking, does not care about rules and process, and who will dodge the issue and throw mud.
Unfortunately, we have a history of incumbents not debating such as Jonathan in 2011 and we have the Buhari model, where he debated in 2011 and lost and then did not debate in 2015 and 2019 and won – fostering this sense that ‘only the weak’ debate. It is a hidden admission of insecurity and need for self-preservation for those who have done badly at it and those who are not sure they will do well. Like the emperor robed only in the most exquisite hot air a con artist could dream up, the debate weak candidates know and we know why they won’t show up, but the popular narrative driven by supporters is that ‘debates don’t matter’, ‘that’s not how elections are won’ and ‘those who vote don’t care about debates’. These are the narratives of election manipulators.
We need to bury the decades old myth about who votes in Nigeria and where votes come from. It’s stale on the side of propagandist propagators and it’s lazy on the side of those who accept it without challenge. It is common knowledge, from the cries of those who feel betrayed by the practice, that vote padding does not take place in the cities where the educated, civil society and international observers flock with eagle eyes – it happens in rural areas, in creeks and forgotten villages. Population drift shows urban Nigeria with 52.75 percent of the population; without a breakdown of where votes come from by polling unit, there is no basis for this 60-year-old folktale that the majority of the votes come from the deliberately impoverished and rural areas. What we do know is that in urban areas, violence is used to keep people home and away from the polls because to depress voter turnout is to make it easier to win and despite technology and billions of naira, the Independent National Electoral Commission, four years after, cannot provide a breakdown of polling unit results of the 2019 presidential election. We also know that Nigeria’s demographics has changed. We have a majority youthful population engaging with information and technology in different ways and data from the last voter registration exercise indicate that the highest number of new registrants were students. Since Nigerians are not homogenous, it is not unreasonable to expect presidential candidates to have a variety of voter engagement formats including debates for those who want this level of engagement.
Tinubu was the architect of APC – we give him all the glory; making Buhari president was the path he saw to his crowning ambition. He must also take all the ignominy: he sacrificed Nigerians wellbeing and it is incredible that instead of submitting himself to be questioned about his and APC’s record, he refuses to engage.
A time will come when it will be unthinkable that a person who wants to lead Nigeria will refuse to engage in public and compete with honour with other candidates seeking the same opportunity. Maybe that time is now. Only voters can send the unequivocal message to candidates that those who refuse to engage with them will pay dearly at the polls.
Ayisha Osori, author of ‘Love Does Not Win Elections’, writes for BusinessDay for the Nigeria Decides 2023 series every fortnight on Wednesdays.
