| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
141025
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
139637
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
“A DO OR DIE AFFAIR” IS A COMMON DESCRIPTION of Nigerian elections, which underlines the competitiveness and acrimony that characterize the quadrennial political ritual. The recently concluded 2015 general elections were fiercer than most, with expectations that they would end in a contentious stalemate at best, and engulf the country in violent political crisis at worst. Many people stockpiled food, the affluent and many expatriate workers took strategically timed holidays abroad, and Nigerians in regions of the country distant from their birthplaces sent their families home in expectation of a prolonged post-election crisis. Yet, in the end, the actual conduct and outcome of the elections defied expectations. Not only did Nigeria conduct its most credible and transparent elections since independence with minimal violence but, for the first time in the country's history, an opposition party – the All Progressives Congress (APC) – defeated an entrenched ruling party (the Peoples' Democratic Party, PDP). The peaceful and credible conduct of these polls has set Nigeria on a trajectory towards consolidating its democracy, transitioning from a largely unstable and expedient experiment in 1999 to the realm of political maturity. This briefing discusses how this was achieved despite the challenging context.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
095721
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
167396
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The People’s Democratic Party was the governing party for 16 years until it was defeated in the 2015 general elections. The dominance of the party over the Nigerian political landscape masked the deep internal schism that has bedevilled the party since its formation. This paper traced the origin of the protracted internal conflicts in the party to its formation process, accentuated by the prebendal character of the Nigerian state. A collection of political grandees assembled in the party without a well-articulated vision for governance other than take hold of political power and the resultant patronage accruable from occupying public office. Conflicts in the party manifest in several dimensions, namely: suspension or expulsion of party members, protracted litigation, formation of parallel party structure, defections to rival parties, verbal and physical assault of members. This pattern of conflicts weakened internal cohesion and distracted those elected from the task of actualizing their campaign promises. The methodology is qualitative, primary data sourced from party members is complemented with data from secondary sources. The paper concluded that the ultimate losers from the internal fights in the party are the citizens who suffered the effects in the form of unfulfilled electoral promises.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
113609
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
152400
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
137885
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
One of most abiding mysteries of Kashmiri politics is the love state’s Separatist (and without exception conservative Muslim) politicians have for the Indian right-wing politicians. From the weaver of fantastical and expansive Kashmiri narrative, Professor Abdul Ghani Bhat to reticent and forever hedging his bets, Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, the common refrain is that the Bharatiya Janata Party-led government is more likely to resolve the Kashmir issue than the Congress-led.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|