Thuggery: Political Parties Must Not Raise Monsters They Cannot Control

There is an African proverb which says that if a keg of palm wine is not quickly snatched from the hands of an overzealous drunk, he may drink himself into a stupor. Another proverb warns that if an inexperienced child is not assisted by elders while roasting yams in the farm, he may innocently set the entire farm and its surrounding huts ablaze.

These proverbs offer a sobering lesson to Nigeria's political class, particularly political parties, their leaders and those who encourage the activities of political thugs in the pursuit of electoral victories. They underscore the dangers of allowing misguided individuals to operate without restraint, especially when such individuals believe they enjoy the protection and patronage of powerful political figures.

Nigeria's political history has repeatedly demonstrated the dangers of recruiting, financing or providing cover for violent individuals to achieve political objectives. What may initially appear to be a convenient strategy for intimidating opponents, disrupting political gatherings or securing electoral advantage can eventually develop into a security nightmare for the very people who created or empowered it.

Political parties and their leaders must understand that violence is not a dependable political instrument. Once individuals are encouraged to operate outside the boundaries of the law, it becomes increasingly difficult to determine where their loyalty ends and their personal interests begin. The same people recruited to intimidate political opponents today may become a threat to their sponsors tomorrow.

It is particularly disturbing that some political actors appear to underestimate the consequences of exposing impressionable young people to political violence. Rather than mobilising them for constructive political participation, employment opportunities and community development, some politicians resort to using them as instruments of intimidation, harassment and destruction.

The danger is that political thuggery can gradually acquire a life of its own. Individuals who begin their activities as political loyalists may eventually develop criminal ambitions, exploit their connections with influential politicians and use the protection they enjoy to pursue personal vendettas. When this happens, the distinction between political mobilisation and criminal enterprise becomes dangerously blurred.

Political leaders who encourage such tendencies should remember that no individual can successfully rear snakes and expect to enjoy peaceful nights. A political thug who is rewarded for violence will hardly understand why he should suddenly become peaceful when his benefactor no longer needs his services.

More importantly, the consequences of political violence are never restricted to the immediate victims or the political opponents targeted. Innocent citizens, traders, commuters, business owners and other members of the public frequently bear the brunt of confrontations between rival political camps. Properties are destroyed, livelihoods are disrupted, families are thrown into mourning and communities are left to grapple with the consequences long after the politicians have moved on.

It is therefore important for political parties to understand that the activities of their supporters must be guided by the laws of the land. Political affiliation must never become a licence to intimidate citizens, attack opponents or undermine public peace. Neither should party membership be used as an excuse to shield individuals accused of criminal conduct from investigation and prosecution.

The responsibility for preventing political thuggery does not rest exclusively with the police and other security agencies. Political parties, traditional rulers, religious leaders, community elders and opinion leaders all have important roles to play in discouraging the recruitment and sponsorship of violent groups.

Party leaders, in particular, must demonstrate sufficient political maturity to condemn violence even when it is perpetrated by their supporters. It is not enough to issue statements condemning attacks after lives and properties have been lost. Such condemnations must be accompanied by genuine efforts to identify, discipline and report individuals who engage in violent conduct in the name of political parties.

The security agencies, on their part, must not wait until political thuggery escalates into widespread violence before taking preventive action. Individuals who threaten opponents, carry dangerous weapons to political gatherings, disrupt public meetings or attack innocent citizens should be investigated in accordance with the law, irrespective of their political connections.

The tendency to treat political violence as an ordinary feature of Nigerian democracy must also be challenged. Elections should be contests of ideas, manifestoes, leadership credentials and public trust, not battles in which victory is determined by the ability to mobilise the largest number of violent youths.

Indeed, politicians who believe that intimidating opponents or frightening voters is a shortcut to electoral success should consider the long-term implications of their actions. The youths they

recruit today will not necessarily remain under their control forever. Political alliances change, interests diverge and yesterday's political benefactors can become tomorrow's adversaries.

This is why political parties must be particularly cautious as Nigeria approaches another electoral cycle. The temptation to recruit young people for intimidation, surveillance, disruption of opposition activities or other unlawful assignments must be resisted. Any political organisation that genuinely seeks public support should invest in issue-based campaigns, peaceful mobilisation and responsible engagement with voters.

There is also a need for political parties to establish clear internal mechanisms for monitoring the conduct of their supporters and enforcing disciplinary measures against members who promote violence. Such mechanisms should not be cosmetic arrangements designed merely to satisfy public opinion after an incident. They must reflect a genuine commitment to peaceful political participation.

Nigeria has enough security challenges to contend with without allowing political interests to create additional threats. The country cannot afford a situation in which individuals who should be contributing to national development are transformed into instruments of political intimidation and violence.

The lesson from the African proverbs cited earlier in this context is unmistakable: elders must intervene before an overzealous child burns down the farm, just as a keg of palm wine must be taken away before an intoxicated drinker loses control. Political leaders must not wait until the consequences of their actions become uncontrollable before recognising the dangers of the groups they have encouraged.

Political parties and their sponsors must therefore be warned: do not raise monsters in the name of political loyalty. The youths you arm, finance or encourage to intimidate your opponents may eventually become a danger to you, your political associates and the very society you seek to govern.

Democracy cannot thrive where political thuggery is tolerated, rewarded or protected. Those who seek political power must learn to win the confidence of the electorate rather than command the obedience of hired enforcers.

The keg must be taken away before the drunk becomes uncontrollable. The fire must be extinguished before it consumes the farm.