TRANSFORMING LAW INTO SOCIAL ORDER: SUSTAINING NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT BY RECALIBRATING NIGERIA’S FAILED APPROACH

Man is a social creature but so are dogs and chimpanzees and in fact, we have biological predispositions like the other animals on earth. But, what is different about us humans is that we have linguistic abilities and are guided by reason. We are the only creatures capable of consciously and intentionally creating systems of rules and institutions to help order our lives by giving us reasons to behave in one way or the other. What is distinctive about law in this sense however, is that the creation and enforcement of legal rules is accomplished by the state, including its near monopoly on lawful enforcement. This law is like a mirror. Just as the mirror reflects us and sometimes disappoints our expectations, the mirror reflects what actions and not, we must engage in order to ensure social collectivism and development of law. Indeed, the mirror is a miraculous invention without which man will commit great sins against decorum.

Despite the horizontal division of government, the toga of Nigeria's constitutional democracy, has been blotted by a certain worrisome concern; the insensitivity to law and order. The development of any democracy is strongly akin to order. Where law is yet to translate to social order, where law is yet to functionally exemplify social engineering, the institutions of the government will be faced with a routinely defiant system.

As simplistic as this appears, it has far-reaching effects most prominent of which are two-pronged: First, In order to grow a society, the machinery of the government must be saddled by persons who understand the need to work within the permissible limits of the law. This understanding in Nigeria is significantly abysmal. This in fact, is what festers corruption in the topmost echelon of government. Using a more practical example, the war against corruption has remained a losing battle because the persons involved and the machinery intended to bring the malaise to a standstill consist of persons who are yet to come to grips with the essence of the rule of law. President Buhari's fight against corruption falters for this reason; while corruption can be loosely assumed to be an innate feature of every man, it is bolstered adequately in a system where the place of the rule of law is not internalised as a moral construct. In that sense, law is said not to have transformed into social order. When mention is made of corruption in the Judiciary such as the allegations levelled against Justice Ademola in this very regime, it disturbs the rational mind: why should a custodian of the law engage in a corrupt practice? The reason stares us starkly in the eye. For as much as the essence of the rule of law is not understood to be a guide to the exercise of common sense, the common man will act commonly with common predilections to do what he believes to be commonly excusable; corruption in this sense. Saraki as president of the Senate was accused of corruption and his trial came a cropper. Such allegations elicited a level of disappointment in the legislature. If legislators whom upon it is incumbent to make laws refuse the audacity of adherence, what is the concern of the plebeian? Senator Saraki, like every other machinery runner and power wielder who is strange to the idea of respect for the rule of law will simply follow voguish fashion and do that which is commonly excusable.
Secondly, in order to fuel societal growth and development, the governed must understand the extent to which law regulates social interactions have any impact on the developmental weight pulled by the government. It is on this front that people often say, "the people are the problem not the rulers." A close follow up of the political history of this country will reveal that in fits and starts at least, developmental moves have been made in various sectors of the economy. The most visible cause of the nation's economic decline is absence of sustainable development. In order to sustain an idea or a project, the common weal of the people must align with the apparatuses of state control over such an idea. That way, the enlightened lot will have no hands in the decline of that project, nor will the enterprising state. In Nigeria, however, the horses bolt out before the stables are locked.

Interestingly, the surest and safest machinery of the government that maintains development is the machinery of law. The enforcement mechanism of any state must be so intensely efficient in order to transform law into social order. In first world countries such as the US, UK, Germany, Russia, China and the likes, the law is the arbiter of social control. Where the intensity of legal regulation becomes the order of the day, the citizenry internalize it and accept it as part of their moral guides. That way, they are first moral bound to desist from unscrupulous actions even before the legal reprehensibility of such actions strikes. Sadly conversely, Nigeria is yet to mimic the sinews of legal regulation. Consequently, a government that is bedevilled with progressive corruption and a stagnated ability to regulate the ungovernable operations of her people will keep running with the hare and hunting with the hounds. 

To effectively pursue this trajectory, the security agencies must be tremendously proficient in their activities. Sadly, the vices these agencies ought to cure have crawled to fester the agencies themselves. Truthfully, understanding the concept of the rule of law and the impact of insensitivity to same on the polity of every state has never been synonymous with reciting ABCs; it requires two factors most times: time and mental recalibration. The people must grow to not only accept but also understand that without allowing law to take its course, there's hardly a better route to navigate if human interrelations and interconnectedness must be retained. In the US and in Britain, the full machinery of the law is testamentary in every endeavour. Yet, they had their hitches. The American system provides a paragon for an example.

In the 1832 American case of Worcester v Georgia, the Supreme Court of the USA then headed by Justice Marshall, proclaimed that the law of the state of Georgia which sought to oust the Cherokee Indians from the borders of the state was in violation of several laws and treaties of the US. Sadly however, to demonstrate the inconclusiveness of the Supreme Court's powers, the then President Andrew Jackson refused to enforce the judgement of the court. He, Jackson, had reportedly said that "Judge John Marshall has made his decision. Let him go and enforce it." In effect, despite the horizontal polarization of equal powers among the arms of government, the general idea of the rule of law was unappreciated and therefore ruinous moves culminating in riotous outcomes were the order of the day.
The popular 1954 American case of Brown v Board of Education which Thurgood Marshall argued up to the Supreme Court decrying the segregation of blacks from supposedly white schools, enjoyed the Court's favourable judgment but it was not enforced until 1957. In Cooper v Aaron which was adjudicated by the Supreme Court on the question of the segregation of black students from the school in Little Rock. The Supreme Court condemned the segregation as illegal and almost immediately, the then president, Dwight Eisenhower deployed about 101 Air troops to be present at Little Rock, seeing to the enforcement of the Supreme Court's ruling. Evidently, the overlap between legislative, judicial and executive powers in the development of law strikes these organs with a common understanding of their respective significant roles in the improvement of the society with the law as the instrument of social engineering.

The US now, has grown to the extent that even in the absence of immediate implementation of law, the people understand the place of law and the need to conform to its dictates first as a moral obligation and ultimately as reaction to the awareness of the socio-legal consequences of acting otherwise. In the United States case of Bush v Gore (2000), both presidential candidates claimed victory in the election but the minute the Vice President had been declared to have lost the election to George Bush by the Supreme Court on a very controversial decision, Vice President Al Gore was on the Television, almost immediately, conceding the loss of the election and allowing a peaceful transition of power to president George Bush. What is bleeding obvious here is that although we theorise the basic tenor of the American constitution, we need to do much more than import the text; we must import the constitutional spirit and structure.

In the notorious Nigerian case of Attorney General of Lagos State v Attorney General of the Federation (2005) All FWLR Pt. 244; 805, the then President of Nigeria, Olusegun Obasanjo breached his substantive limit as an Executive head by directing that allocations should no longer go to the Local Government Councils of Lagos State until the state reversed its decision to create more constituent states. A timorous Supreme Court, given the President's obduracy, gave a pusillanimous judgment that left both parties to the suit rejoicing out of the court. For fear that the judgment would offend the presidency, the court decided to adopt prevarication in judgement. The federal Government after the judgement refused to continue payments to the councils and the state went on a frolic of her own also. This is one instance out of an awful deluge of instances that visited the court. A lot of other instances of inattentiveness to the pride of place of law abound and indeed these instances are demonstrable in diverse fashions.

In 2009, the men of the Nigerian Police Force arrested a certain Ustaz Yusuf Mohammed for his role in the series of violent clashes that were carried out by the hitherto unheralded Boko Haram Islamic fundamentalist group. A few days later, it was reported that Yusuf Mohammed was killed in police custody. From that moment, all hell was let loose and Boko Haram found justification to wage a "holy war" against western influences which the Nigerian Government represented. Till today, Nigeria is yet to recover from the terrorist organization that the Boko Haram grew into in a bid to avenge the extra judicial murder of their leader by the Government. Maybe, just maybe, Boko Haram would not have garnered the justification and sympathy which served as a springboard for their incessant war against the Government if the Nigerian Police Force had carried out their investigation of Yusuf Mohammed in line with the rule of law as enshrined in the Nigerian Constitution.

In 2015, the government of President Muhammad Buhari rode to power on the wings of a fierce and all inclusive war against corruption. In line with this much touted war on corruption, Colonel Sambo Dasuki (rtd), the immediate past National Security Adviser was arrested by the Department of Security Services on allegations of diverting funds allocated for the purchase of military hardware. At the time of the arrest, not a few Nigerians applauded the Government for being decisive. Sadly, almost four years since Sambo Dasuki was arrested, he is yet to be convicted of any crime by the Court and he's yet to also regain his freedom even after numerous Courts had granted him bail. Instead of obeying the verdicts of different Courts in Nigeria and even the ECOWAS Court, the Federal Government has stubbornly refused to let Dasuki enjoy his court given freedom. The Government's refusal to obey court orders of competent courts is a flagrant violation of the principles of rule of law and this refusal to uphold democratic institutions makes mockery of the war against corruption, if any.

In 2015 again, members of the Shi'ite Islamic movement were arrested and some, even shot by men of the Nigerian Army while they embarked on a demonstration. Among those arrested was the leader of Shi'ites in Nigeria, Ibrahim El-Zakzaky. Since 2016, El-Zakzaky has been in the custody of the Department of Security Services despite numerous court orders that granted him bail. This refusal to obey an order of the Courts with regards to the release of El-Zakzaky has certainly caused Shi'ites to feel genuinely aggrieved, leading them to stage protests in the Nation's capital, the most recent of which held on the 29th and 30th of October, 2018. The most recent Shi'ite demonstrations would have been probably avoided if the Federal Government had agreed to be bound by the decisions of the courts granting El-Zakzaky bail.

Most recently, the President and Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, Muhammadu Buhari appeared to infer that the rule of law is subject to national security. Some might try to justify the President's posture with regards to the rule of law but the truth is that the blatant disregard shown towards rulings and orders of the Courts is capable of creating a national security crisis. And of course, the refusal to obey court orders which the executive arm of Government does not find convenient or acceptable is a huge slight on the judiciary as an institution of Government.

It is without doubt that at the core of most problems that have belaboured the Nigerian State is the inexcusable disregard for the rule of law by the relevant authorities and if Nigeria is actually serious about her growth, then greater emphasis will have to be placed on compliance with the rule of law.
To put in proper perspective, Boko Haram would have probably remained a group of bandits with no real power to cause regional strife if the Police did not take laws into their own hands by killing him even when there was no death sentence passed upon him by the Court.

Again, it is possible that the Shi'ites who protested and subsequently lost their lives in a battle with the Nigerian Army on the 29th and 30th of October, 2018 would have probably been praying in their mosques if the Federal Government obeyed the ruling of the Courts that granted bail to their Leader.
The importance of laws in any society that is desirous of progress cannot be over flogged; even more pertinent is the need to ensure that every sector of the society is governed by laws.
Laws are important for growth, development, peace, order and security. Life in a society without laws was best described by Thomas Hobbes as short, nasty, and brutish.

Hence, if Nigeria is serious about not remaining the poverty capital of the world; if Nigeria is serious about attracting serious foreign direct investment; if Nigeria is serious about reducing the number of out of school children; if Nigeria is serious about not having to be synonymous with corruption, compliance with the already existing laws must be enforced.

It is disheartening that in a country that is blessed with abundance of mineral resources as Nigeria, a large percentage of her population still live below the poverty margin. It is equally heartbreaking that in spite of Nigeria's huge oil reserves, Nigeria does not have a refinery that is capable of producing to an appreciable capacity.
It is painful that the Nigerian Army that earned massive plaudits for its role in bringing peace to Liberia is now basically an internal security apparatus. It is sad that in Nigeria, public office holders inflate contracts in order to fleece the people without any real consequences. It is bemusing to note that in 2018, Nigerian banks are still being run to the ground by the sheer greed of corporate executives even when there are laws that stipule how corporate entities should be run.
Nigeria is failing and crashing really hard and the reason for this is the disregard for the rule of law.
Granted, our laws in Nigeria are replete with loopholes but the existing laws should at least be adhered to while we expect reforms. The difference between super powers and Nigeria is that the Super powers place premium on the rule of law, unlike in Nigeria where the rule of law is audaciously violated. For example, England is not in any way "blessed" with the number of natural and human resources that Nigeria has, but the difference between England and Nigeria in terms of development is unprecedented. While Nigeria has crude oil, limestone, gold, among others, England has a tax system, strong tax laws, and a zealous compliance that with the Laws.
Nigeria's problem is not the lack of laws; it is the lack of a political will to implement the laws to the letter no matter whose ox is gored that has remained the bane to Nigeria's national growth.