By Attahiru Muhammadu Jega
As has happened in many countries, we need to interrogate the concepts of governance, bad governance, good governance, and what I call good democratic governance, as well as the practical implications of these in the ways and manners by which societies have used the governance processes to create wealth, enable their nations’ economies to grow, satisfy the needs and aspirations of their citizens.
Introduction
I appreciate the honour done to me by the organizers of this conference when they requested me to deliver this year’s keynote address. I am glad to do so. I must also commend them for choosing an apt topic for discussion in the current Nigerian context where citizens’ concerns and even dissatisfaction with some essential aspects of Nigerian governance have led to disenchantment and even protests with in many cases violent outcomes. As has happened in many countries, we need to interrogate the concepts of governance, bad governance, good governance, and what I call good democratic governance, as well as the practical implications of these in the ways and manners by which societies have used the governance processes to create wealth, enable their nations’ economies to grow, satisfy the needs and aspirations of their citizens.
Governance is a central feature, indeed, the essential pillar and pivot of all modern nation states. These states are complex organizations, which require processes, structures and institutions through which authority is exercised and decisions taken to manage the common affairs of citizens within the jurisdictional sphere of each of the state. Governance is the mechanism through which peaceful coexistence and harmonious relations could be engendered, common aspirations as well as challenges could be addressed; prosperity and wealth could be created and distributed; and the common basic needs and aspirations of citizens could be provided, protected and defended.
Governance, in the context of a modern nation state, can be good or bad. It can be democratic, or it can be authoritarian. Good governance is arguably the most desirable objective for and in all nations worldwide. If it is bad, citizens strive to make it good. If it is good, they try to make it better. Indeed, good governance could be made even much better if it is democratic, hence the suggested even more desirable “good democratic governance”.
Indeed, in countries under liberal democratic framework, democratic development circumscribed by good governance is a precondition for socioeconomic development. Serious attention needs to be paid to it, especially in post-colonial countries or newly democratizing countries, such as Nigeria, which face many serious challenges, with constant threat of reversal to authoritarian rule. The experience of post-independence Africa in general, and that of Nigeria in particular has shown that democracy is central to the quest for development and political stability (Ibeanu & Egwu, 2007:16). In other words, the strength of good governance lies in the fact that it promotes certain political factors especially democracy, the rule of law, and human rights on the ground that markets and government will only remain efficient and effective in delivery of goods and services to citizens if they are held to account by the voters and the general public.
In present-day Nigeria, given what can aptly be termed as crisis of governance at all levels, the processes, structures and institutions of governance are essentially weak, or have virtually collapsed, with regrettable consequences on desirable economic growth and socioeconomic development. For example, over the years, the legitimacy of the state has been vigorously contested on grounds of its inefficiency and lack of competence, capacity and effectiveness in securing citizens’ lives and properties, and especially failure to protect and defend their fundamental rights, and to meet their needs and aspirations. Consequently, citizens are, on their part, are becoming indifferent to political participation and constructive engagement in the governance processes, even losing hope in democratization and governance processes, which is even more worrisome.
As colonially created African nation-states, countries such as Nigeria have as desirable objectives both democratic development, nation building and socioeconomic development; and have tried to pursue these. But the evident inadequacies of governance and its weaknesses in forging an overarching national identity, amidst a multiplicity of primordial identities, have been obstructive of stable economic growth and socioeconomic as development. As virtually all major global indices, such as UNDP’s Human Development Index; Economist Democracy Index; Mo Ibrahim’s African Governance Index; Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index; and Electoral Integrity Project’s Electoral Integrity Perception Index show, post-colonial African countries in particular, and other Third World post-colonial countries generally, rank very low in comparative and relative terms (Jega, 2018).
Therefore, it is apt and timely to engage in discussions, which prioritize not only good governance, but especially good democratic governance, as a catalyst for economic recovery, growth and development.
The presentation is structured into 4 sections. First, is conceptual clarification, in which I reviewed conceptualizations of good governance and good democratic governance, as well as economic growth and development. Second is an abridged discussion of the current Nigerian economic crisis, with its impact and consequences. Third, is an exposition on why and how good democratic governance is the catalyst, indeed the panacea, for addressing the socioeconomic crisis which has currently engulfed Nigeria. Fourth is the conclusion.
Conceptualising Good Governance
Governance is often confused with government. But, as Heywood has noted, governance is a broader term than government, in the sense that it “… refers, in its widest sense, to the various ways through which social life is coordinated [in a given polity]. Government can therefore be seen as one of the organizations involved in governance…” (2015: 84). In this sense, government is the organizational platform of governance in the public sector, as ‘market’ is the organizational platform of governance in the private/economic sphere, and ‘networks’ are the organizational frameworks for governance in the civil society sector. In the public sector, governance is a form of public management, which involves “rowing” (administration or service delivery), or more recently, “steering” (setting targets and strategic objectives) in addressing the welfare and wellbeing of citizens. In this context, to ‘govern’, “is to rule or exercise control [over] others” and to preside over and coordinate the traditional government organization, the bureaucracy, through ‘top-down’ authority systems (Heywood, 2015: 85).
Governance in the context of a modern nation-state is first and foremost about providing for the fundamental needs and aspirations of citizens, through governmental institutions and processes, steered, driven and guided by chosen representatives of the people through competitive elections, which are free, fair and credible. Amongst what can be termed as the fundamental needs and aspirations of citizens in any country are: food, shelter, health, education, rights, wellbeing and human security, which is indeed paramount (Jega, 2021a).
Now it is significant to note that, the contemporary notion of “good governance” came to prominence and actually evolved with the failure of structural adjustment programmes (SAPs) to catalyse economic growth and development in the so-called developing countries, in the period of the economic crisis, which especially bedevilled third world countries in the 1980s. It was promoted by the Bretton Woods institutions (IMF/World Bank, with the support of major western capitalist countries, and as a substitute replacement for the ‘Washington Consensus’ in the 1990s. Hence, panacea was seen as ‘good governance’, which can remove distortions in the public sector and restore functionality of institutions. Thus, ‘good governance’ became the framework within which to introduce market mechanisms into the public sector governance processes.
However, I argue that it is better to conceptualize good governance in the traditional sense of distinguishing ‘good’ from ‘bad’ and from the point of view that, the nature and extent of societal transformation, positively or negatively, is conditional on whether a modern nation state is characterised by ‘good’ or ‘bad’ governance.
Hence, good governance should not merely be perceived as addressing the imperfections of governance by introducing mechanisms and processes of “market efficiency” into the public governance sphere. Rather, good governance should be conceptualised and viewed in the context of the extent to which public sector governance is driven by elected representatives/public officials/public office holders who are selfless, visionary, and who are responsible and responsive to the needs and aspirations of those who elected them; those whom they represent. Such officeholders operate within the constitutional and legal framework, lead by example, and ensure that policies are planned, designed and implemented for the benefit of all, without discrimination, inequality and inequity. They harness societal resources to efficiently and effectively address the fundamental needs and aspirations of all citizens. In any case, good governance should be viewed to mean to mean the absence of bad governance, in which elected public officials pursue selfish interests using structures, institutions and processes of governance, and privatize public resources for personal gains rather than for addressing the fundamental needs and aspirations of citizens with regards to addressing challenges to human security and development.
On the contrary, bad governance is occasioned by bad and reckless elected officeholders/ representatives; who are either in experienced and/or incompetent, but in any case, self-serving and narrow-minded; who either personalise state treasury, or look the other way while others do so; and who pursue divisive and exclusionary policies, without regard to principles of equality of opportunity, equity, justice and the rule of law. Hence, the characteristics of bad governance are identified as: lack of accountability and transparency, interference with the rule of law and corruption. Indeed, bad governance is perceived as the inability of public institutions to manage public affairs and public resources; and the failure of a government to meet the needs of society while making the best use of all the resources at their disposal.
I once argued that the World Bank’s conception of ‘good governance’ is applicable within the contexts of both democratic governments and authoritarian regimes, with profound contradictions being evident. Cutting costs, ‘rolling back’ the state, efficiency, institutional capacity building is pursued vigorously at the expense of inclusivity, participatory processes, bottom-up approaches and to some extent, even transparency and accountability. Thus, good governance is stripped off its normative democratic content (Jega, 2021b).
Thus, in my view it is more appropriate to see good governance as basically about mobilizing and harnessing societal resources to satisfy the fundamental basic needs and aspirations of citizens, with equity and justice to all, and with respect to, and compliance with, the rule of law. The rule of law is supreme, and it is the legal framework of, as well as the foundation for, good, democratic governance.
Indeed, to my mind a more useful concept would be that which qualifies governance, such as a notion of “good democratic governance”. In a transitional democracy, such as Nigeria’s, whatever else governance could be, it must have a democratic content: it must be participatory, with bottom-up processes and it must have inclusivity. Hence, good democratic governance is governance within a constitutional framework and based on the rule of law, as well as circumscribed by universal rights and freedoms. Governance in an undemocratic context and framework, no matter how ‘good’, may not necessarily be sustainable. That is why it is better to focus on good democratic governance, rather than just good governance as conceptualized and promoted (imposed?) by the Bretton Woods institutions, to rationalize the failure of SAP and its profound negative consequences on socioeconomic development in the countries compelled to introduce and implement it.
Hence, to re-echo my often re-stated and repeated argument, what Nigeria needs and requires is not merely ‘good governance’ as conceptualized by the World Bank and the IMF, but good democratic governance, anchored on constitutionalism, the rule of law, lawful conduct by elected public officials, representatives of the people and their appointees, circumscribed by professional, moral and ethical conduct, as well as selflessness. Thus, in this context, the essentials of good democratic governance, which Nigeria’s elected leaders/representatives, in particular, and Nigerian patriots/democrats in general, need to appropriately recognise, and take into consideration, in the striving to cure endemic bad governance, are as follows:
- Providing good quality leadership: predicated on knowledge, experience, competence, integrity, vision, and selflessness
- Transparency and accountability in policies and decision-making processes. This would go a long way to engender trust for government among citizens, which is essential during times of crises.
- Respect for and compliance with Rule of Law. This is required to mitigate excessive impunity and executive lawlessness, which is all pervasive at all levels of governance.
- Efficiency and effectiveness in the management of public resources can go a long way to free resources for prioritisation of citizen’s welfare and social justice to address the needs and aspirations of the most vulnerable members of society, especially in times of crises.
- Participation of citizens in discussing what affects them, based on deliberate inclusivity, is necessary to ender trust, and generate additional ideas and perspectives, and citizens buy-in for addressing collective concerns
- Project/programme deliverability, based on a rational, knowledge, and evidence based deliberative processes should be engendered and sustained.
- Careful, even visionary planning is a requirement, and should also be broadly participatory, utilizing a bottom-up approach.
- Harnessing resources to address the fundamental needs and aspirations of the citizens with respect to human dignity and security
- Equity, equality of opportunity, justice and fair play, are requirements to ensure that citizens have equal rights and obligations and are treated without fear or favour (Jega, 2023).
Hence, good democratic governance must be nurtured and entrenched in the interest of achieving public goals that are beneficial to the citizens, rather than for the benefit of a few members of the ruling class.
Conceptualizing Economic Growth and Development
It has been established that economic growth and development are related processes based on the structure and functions of the political economy. They are interdependent processes, because as the economy improves, the level of development increases, as socioeconomic indicators such as per capita income, human development indices, etc., should improve vice-versa (Malizia, 1990). According to Ivic, Economic growth means ‘constantly increasing volume of production in a country, or an increase in gross domestic product as the main quantitative indicators of production for a period of one year’ (2015:55). Vishandass defines economic growth ‘as an increase in the production of economic goods and services from one period of time to another’ (2022:162). Hence economic growth denotes an increase in both national income and per capita income. In other words, economic growth occurs as a result of an increase in productive resources such as labour and capital, and a quantitative increase in output. Economic growth is the most powerful instrument for reducing poverty and improving the quality of life in countries, especially when the benefits are equitably redistributed through interventions in the governance processes and institutions, rather than merely leaving them to ‘trickle down’ via market forces and the ‘invisible hand’. It can generate virtuous circles of prosperity and job opportunity. Strong economic growth therefore advances human development, which, in turn, promotes economic growth. Economic growth is essential if governments are going to be able to continue to provide public services, which directly benefit the poor. As Brown has shown, eight essential conditions for strong economic growth are: physical capital; human capital; competitive markets; the rule of law; macroeconomic stability; infrastructure; openness to trade and investment; and increased agricultural productivities (2007).
As Seers, a long time ago stated, the questions to ask about a country’s development are as follows:
What has been happening to poverty? What has been happening to unemployment? What has been happening to inequality? If all three of these have declined from high levels, then beyond doubt this has been a period of development for the country concerned. If one or two of these central problems have been growing worse, especially if all three have, it would be strange to call the result ‘development’, even if per capita income doubled. This applies of course to the future too. A ‘plan’ which conveys no targets for reducing poverty, unemployment and inequality can hardly be considered a ‘development plan’ (1969:5).
Development involves not only an increase in material production, but also all the other socioeconomic processes and changes caused by the influence of economic and beyond economic factors. Hence, development is more complex than economic growth (Ivic, 2015). Thus, development implies qualitative changes that lead to a better and more complete satisfaction of all human needs. Hence, development occurs when poverty, unemployment and inequality are reduced. Development is about structural change, and a sustained improvement in society’s material well-being. In addition, development is a sustained improvement in society’s material well-being. There are many measures of economic development that is beneficial to citizens such as the HDI (Human Development Index), gender-related indexes, Human Poverty Index (HPI), infant mortality, literacy rate and so on (Vishandass, 2022:163).
Therefore, while both economic growth and development are interrelated, if not necessarily correlated, there are important distinctions between the two.
Current Nigerian Economic Crisis: its impact and consequences
Over the years, Nigeria’s current rating using comparative global indices tell a sorry tale about the nature and character of the trajectory of our country’s ‘democratic development’, especially since transition to civil democratic rule in 1999. It is an unwholesome image, which leaves much to be desired and which calls for urgent attention and for urgent reforms and repositioning, if Nigeria is to attain its potential of using its vast resources to address the socioeconomic needs of its citizens, as well be a globally competitive member of the comity of nations.
Specifically, 25 years of ‘transition to democracy’ with regularly elected governments and legislators, at the federal, state and local governance levels, reveal a sorry picture and evidence of systematic undermining of the welfare and wellbeing of citizens as well as their needs and aspirations, by elected public officials, resulting in the current situation of almost total lack of state capacity to protect, promote and defend human dignity and human security for an overwhelming majority of the citizens. For example:
- Incidence of poverty has increased and is now very high, while Nigeria rates poorly in comparison to other nation-states. Indeed, Nigeria has now assumed the unenviable position of being named as the poverty capital of the world
- Nigeria’s rating of Human Development Index (HDI) is very low, indicative of lack of state capacity to promote socioeconomic development and ensure human security for its citizens
- Perception of Integrity of Nigerian elections rank poorly
- Quality of Democracy rating is very low
- Governance rating is equally low.
Table 1: Five Main Features of Human Security
| Food Security | Hunger; Famine |
| Health Security | Deadly infectious diseases; Malnutrition; lack of access to basic health care |
| Environmental Security | Environmental degradation; resources depletion; natural disasters; pollution |
| Personal Security | Physical violence; crime; terrorism; Domestic violence; child labour |
(Adapted from UN Trust Fund 2009: 6 in Jega, 2021b)
Regrettably, all of these threats are not just imminent but evident in the current Nigerian context. In addition, Table 2, shows the latest ranking of Nigeria and scores on global indices of democracy, governance, freedom, corruption, human development, quality of life, security, among others.
Table 2: 2023 Nigeria’s Ranking and Scores in Global Indices of Democracy, Governance, Freedom, Corruption, Human Development, Quality of Life, Security, among others.
| S/N. | Global Index | Ranking among number of countries measured | Score (measured over 100; or or over 10 or 1) |
| 1. | Corruption Perception Index (CPI) | 150/180 | 26 |
| 2. | Censorship Index | 123/180 | 49.56 |
| 3. | Political Indicator Index | 107/180 | 51.96 |
| 4. | Economic Indicator Index | 110/180 | 44.12 |
| 5. | Legislative Indicator Index | 126/180 | 50.54 |
| 6. | Social Indicator Index | 88/180 | 63.80 |
| 7. | Security Indicator Index | 147/180 | 37.38 |
| 8. | Ease of Doing Business Index | 135/190 | |
| 9. | Democracy Index | 109/180 | 4.23 |
| 10. | Fragile State Index (Alert) | 15/179 | 98.0 |
| 11. | Gender Gap Index | 130/146 | 0.637 |
| 12. | Human Freedom Index | Partly Free | 43 |
| 13. | Ibrahim Index of African Governance | 30/54 | |
| 14. | Organized Crime Index (African) | 6/206 | 7.28 |
| 15. | Perception of Electoral Integrity | ||
| 16. | Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) | 133 million | 63 |
| 17. | Quality of Life Index | 88/206 | 0.38 |
| 18. | Religious Freedom Index | 6/206 | |
| 19. | Insecurity / Global Peace Index | 144 in the world and 37 in Africa | |
| 20. | Global Hunger Index (GHI) | 109/125 | 28.3 |
| 21. | Human Development Index | 0.535 | |
| 22. | Security & Rule of Law Index in Africa | 50/54 | |
| 23. | Economic Opportunity Index in Africa | 20/54 | |
| 24. | Human Development Index in Africa | 19/54 | |
| 25. | Participation Right and Inclusion Index | 48/54 | |
| 26. | Health and Survival Index | 99/146 | 0.967 |
| 27. | Political Empowerment Index | 142/146 | 0.041 |
| 28. | Economic Opportunity and Participation Index | 54/146 | 0.715 |
| 29. | Global Ranking for Educational Attainment Index | 137/146 | 0.826 |
Sources (see reference list)
Clearly, things have deteriorated abysmally and ranks lowly on these indices both globally and within Africa.
As I once had cause to argue, many of the prevailing national security challenges in Nigeria are on account of poor management of complex diversity and bad governance, complicated by heightened mobilization of ethno-religious identities, especially in political and electoral contestations, weak institutional framework for policing and general security provisioning, as well as pervasive corruption in the key state institutions, judiciary, the security sector, the bureaucracy. (Jega, 2023).
On the matter of how Nigeria is ranked on the index of governance, in the West African Sub-region alone, not to talk of Africa and the world, table 3 depicts a worrisome picture.
Table 3: ECOWAS Countries Ranking in EIU Democracy Index 2023
| Rank | Country | Political Regime Type/Classification | Index |
| 1. | Cape Verde | Flawed Democracy | 7.65 |
| 2. | Ghana | Flawed Democracy | 6.43 |
| 3. | Senegal | Hybrid Democracy | 5.72 |
| 4. | Liberia | Hybrid | 5.43 |
| 5. | Sierra Leone | Hybrid | 5.03 |
| 6. | Benin | Hybrid | 4.28 |
| 7. | The Gambia | Hybrid | 4.47 |
| 8. | Cote d’Ivoire | Hybrid | 4.22 |
| 9. | Nigeria | Hybrid | 4.23 |
| 10. | Mali | Authoritarian | 3.23 |
| 11. | Burkina Faso | Authoritarian | 3.08 |
| 12. | Niger | Authoritarian | 3.73 |
| 13. | Guinea | Authoritarian | 2.32 |
| 14. | Togo | Authoritarian | 2.93 |
| 15. | Guinea-Bissau | Authoritarian | 2.56 |
| ECOWAS REGION AVERAGE | |||
| SSA (44 Countries) AVERAGE | 4.6 |
Source: Economist Intelligence Unit, Democracy Index 2023
The main point to emphasize in all these, is that in the past 25 years of ‘transition to democracy’, Nigeria has been afflicted by the misfortune of having so many characters in governance, who are neither selfless, nor visionary; who are rather essentially greedy (for power and/or money), clueless, reckless and therefore perpetrators and consolidators of poor/bad democratic governance, rather than the desirable good democratic governance.
One of the major challenges of good democratic governance in Nigeria, therefore, is that of getting selfless, visionary, patriotic, pro – people, inclusive, focused and effective leadership, to drive/pilot Nigeria’s national affairs and the political economy towards good, democratic governance. We have muddled through national problems, epileptically and superficially, essentially due to the absence of such requisite leadership, as a result of which the challenges have magnified and become complexified, appearing daunting and insurmountable, and pushing the country towards the precipice and potentially off the cliff. In the current situation, getting things right and reverting to the appropriate trajectory of good democratic governance would require selfless, visionary leadership committed to, and focused on, people-oriented policies for socioeconomic growth and development (Jega, 2021b).
Good Democratic Governance as the Panacea
As earlier emphasized and consistently argued, therefore, what Nigeria needs and requires is not merely good governance, as popularized in Nigeria and other countries, by the Bretton Woods institutions, but good democratic governance. This is because good democratic governance is the panacea for national socioeconomic growth and development and human security in countries that are democracies or aspire to be so, such as Nigeria.
Also, as I once argued elsewhere, constitutional democracy, if properly entrenched and practiced, is catalytic of nation building and democratic development. Strict adherence to the rule of law, and compliance with professional, moral and ethical conduct, can produce good leaders, who can be responsible and responsive to popular needs and aspirations of the citizens and who can pursue appropriate policies of strengthening national unity and socio-economic development. Additionally, nurturing and deepening electoral integrity is a necessary foundation of good democratic governance and stable socio-economic development, and therefore adequate attention must be paid to that, as electoral integrity ensures a transparent process of electing people’s representatives into the legislative and executive organs of government. It minimizes divisive politics and nurtures stability in the political process as well as in the governance system. And it catalyses responsible and responsive governance framework, which facilitates reasonable satisfaction of the needs and aspirations of citizens and general socio-economic development (Jega, 2017; Jega 2018).
For Nigeria’s political and democratic transition to be transformative, to be stable, to reinforce state legitimacy, to nurture good, democratic governance, and to catalyse economic growth and socioeconomic development, four (4) variables are significant:
- Competence, world view and disposition of leadership
- Institutional capacity, professionalism and credibility
- Credible and competent institutional mechanisms of adjudication of disputes and enforcement of the Rule of Law (e.g., by the judiciary, law enforcement agencies, etc.)
- Respect for societal core values.
If ongoing democratic transition is not positively catalysed by these important variables, it would, essentially, leave much to be desired, would-be conflict ridden, and would continue to be characterized by bad, undemocratic governance and would be unable to satisfy the fundamental needs and aspirations of citizens, on the basis of equity, justice, and the rule of law.
Specific Recommendations
All things considered in this presentation, in summary, I offer the following recommendations:
- There is the need for patriotic Nigerians to pay serious attention to how to nurture and entrench good democratic governance, rather than merely good governance, to catalyse economic recovery, revive economic growth and place Nigeria on a sustainable trajectory of people-oriented development, which is most beneficial to Nigerian citizens
- There is need for transparency and accountability in governance, and full respect for the rule of law. These are conditions for the generation of social trust, cooperation and active participation of citizens in the development of their country. This in long run will help in nurturing and sustaining good democratic governance.
- For Nigeria to develop as expected, it requires people in leadership positions who are not merely selfless, but also visionary, patriotic and people-oriented, who have the capacity, competence and ability to appreciate and manage the complexity of our diversity, on the basis of equity, equality of opportunity, fair-play and the rule of law. And Nigeria needs such qualities across all levels of government, not just at the federal government level.
- Above all, there is need for citizens to, in spite of the mounting and demoralizing challenges, keep hope in Nigeria alive, become active and constructive participants in the struggles to nurture and entrench good democratic governance for stable and sustainable economic growth in our country, and development in our country. It is seemingly difficult, but it is not impossible to bring this about, once all hands are jointly placed on deck, in a purposeful manner to replace bad governance with good democratic governance. It is the task of patriotic activists to enlighten, educate, conscientize, mobilize, and lead citizens in these necessary and worthy struggles to rescue our country away from the few selfish people in leadership positions who are harvesting the dividends of reckless bad governance, to reposition it with better quality leadership that can pursue people-oriented policies and development programs that are beneficial to the overwhelming majority of citizens.
Conclusion
It has to be constantly emphasized that democratic development in Nigeria needs to be strengthened; the necessity of strengthening governance processes is based on the fact that democratic development anywhere in the world is a work in progress. Nigeria has vast human and material resources and great potentials for appropriately deploying and utilizing these to solve current existential challenges and accelerate desirable beneficial democratic development on a sustainable basis. Therefore, Nigeria needs to reposition its democratic development away from the notion of mere ‘good governance’, towards the more substantive and desirable notion of ‘good democratic governance’ that is anchored on the rule of law; on professionalism; competence; moral and ethical conduct; and specifically in the protection, defence and promotion of citizenship rights and citizens’ human dignity and security. It is also necessary to do whatever it takes to continue to enhance electoral integrity through citizens active participation and contentious watch-guard.
A Keynote Address Delivered by Prof Jega, former Chair of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INCE), Nigeria at the 2024 Annual Directors Conference of the Chartered Institute of Directors, 30th-31st, October 2024, in Lagos
