COURSE CODE: POL 101

COURSE TITLE: INTRODUCTION TO

POLITICAL SCIENCE

DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE

FACULTY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES
OLABISI ONABANJO UNIVERSITY
AGO-IWOYE, OGUN STATE
TOPIC 1: THE SUBJECT MATTER OF POLITICS

Introduction to Contents

• Meaning of politics

• Politics as an Art and a Science

• Scientific nature/Limitation of Politics

• Sub-fields of politics

• Relationship of politics to other academic disciplines

• Approaches to the study of politics

General Introduction
Political science is relatively a younger discipline compared with other social science
disciplines like sociology, economics and psychology. In fact, politics was initially studied as
part of economics (political economy) before it finally became an autonomous discipline of its
own. Ever since, the study of politics has continued to grow in method and approach and has
over the years acquired more sophisticated tools of analysis which endeared to it its scientific
status. Today, approaches to the study of politics conveniently combine both the traditional and
modern approaches while the discipline is equally considered an art and
a science.

Meaning of Politics
Politics has been defined from different angles by several scholars such that the word
politics today has no single universally accepted definition. The most frequently quoted
definition of politics is those of Harold Laswell who defined politics as “who gets, what, when
and how” and David Easton’s “authoritative allocation of values for a society”. Yet, there are
other scholars who defined politics from several other angles including: organization of
government, decision-making, struggle for power, etc. All these definitions, despite their
limitations, are relevant in one way or the other to political analysis.
Politics as an Art and a Science
The age long debate among scholars over whether politics is a science or an art is a well-known
issue in political science literature. However, political scientists are unanimous over the fact
that politics is both a science and an art. While the art aspect of politics deals with the practical
activities usually associated with politicians, the science aspect deals with the academic
tradition of studying politics. For this reason, political science is conceived as the systematic
study and analysis of the art and the science of politics.

1
Scientific Nature/Limitations of Politics
The established academic tradition of studying politics which emphasizes fact findings
and scientific methodology has no doubt enhanced the status of politics as a science. However,
politics is not a pure or natural science like Biology, Chemistry or Physics. At best, politics can
be classified as social science alongside other disciplines like economics, sociology, geography,
etc. simply because of the inherent limitations in studying politics and other social science
subjects. These limitations include: the object of study of political scientists; the environment
of study of political scientists; value judgement, non-universal applicability of social science
theories among others.
Sub-Fields of Politics
The sub-fields or areas of specialization in politics include: comparative politics, public
administration, international relations, political economy, political philosophy, political
sociology, etc. Some of these sub-fields have equally been well developed such that they claim
to be autonomous disciplines, also with their own sub-fields.

Relationship of Politics with other Academic Disciplines

Politics, just like other social science disciplines like economics, geography, sociology
and psychology, deals with man in society. For this reason, the relationship between politics
and other social science disciplines is obvious. They all analyze human behaviour from different
perspectives.
Politics also maintain close academic relationship with history, law, and philosophy.
Approaches to the Study of Politics
Approaches to the study of politics are basically two, namely, the traditional approach
and the behavioural approach. The traditional approach is the earlier approach to the study of
politics and it assumed four major methods or sub-approaches which are: institutional approach,
philosophical approach, historical method and legal/constitutional approach. The traditional
approach has been criticized on the grounds of not being scientific and systematic. It is argued
that the approach is too normative, descriptive and value laden.
The behavioural approach is a more recent approach to the study of politics and it
focuses on the political behaviour of man in society with emphasis on scientific method.
Summary

- The word politics has no single universally accepted definition.

- The definitions of politics given by scholars and authors throughout ages have their
individual merits and usefulness.

- Politics is both an art and a science.

- There are two major approaches to the study of politics, namely, traditional approach
and behavioural approach.

2
 - The sub-fields of politics include, comparative politics, public administration, political
economy, international relations, etc.

The Meaning, Nature and Scope of Politics: Definitional Problem of Politics

It is generally agreed among political science scholars and authors that giving a precise and
accurate definition of politics is rather a herculean task because of the diverse interpretative
connotations the definition of politics has taken throughout ages. This fact was acknowledged
by Stephen Wasby (1970:3), a renowned political scientist and author in his observation that a
great deal of confusion and disagreement about the changing nature and uncertain boundaries
of the study of politics makes it difficult to give a single and accurate definition of politics. This
confusion it can be argued is partly a result of the interchanging wrong usage of the three
concepts: politics, political science and politician mostly by laymen. On the other hand, the
wide coverage area of the discipline called political science and the very nature of its primary
concern on decision-making, conflict, reconciliation and consensus in a society, as well as its
associated central organized concepts such as power, influence and authority, all combined to
make the definition of politics highly dynamic and very elusive. Yet, another problem
associated with the conceptualization of the word politics, is the age long debate over whether
politics is an art or a science. What then is politics?
Politics as Conceived by different Scholars
Politics has been variedly defined and from different perspectives too. Etymologically,
the word politics emanates from the Greek word ‘Polis’ meaning the City-States. Aristotle (384-
322BC), the great Greek political philosopher and the first person to make use of the word
politics referred to it to mean the “general affairs operating in the Greek city states at the time”.
(Oyediran, 1998:2). This bothers essentially on how the Greek city-states were politically
organized and administered towards the realization of their objectives. It follows therefore that
every society in order to minimize conflict and chaos must fashion out a system of law and
order regulated by ‘selected’ individuals, otherwise called the government. Such government is
vested with authority to make and enforce laws, as well as to claim obedience from its citizens.
In return the government protects the citizens’ lives and property and strives to improve their
lots in all ramifications. Politics therefore in the words of Appadorai (1975) “deals with the
state or political society, meaning… a people organized for law within a definite territory”, or
by extension, in the coinage of Paul Janet as “that part of social science which treats of the
foundation of the state and the principle of government”.
The afore-mentioned only gives credence to the state-centred explanations of politics
offered by earlier political philosophers. Aristotle had suggested political interaction based on
institutionalized framework to resolve social conflict as the only way of realizing individual
capabilities and collective goals of the state. Other political thinkers including Jean Bodin
(1530-95), a French political philosopher, had focused on the characteristics of the state, its
organization, as well as its relationship to law, while Montesquieu (1689-1755) encapsulated
the functions of the state in the three organs of government - the legislature, the executive, the
judiciary. In essence, the popular notion of politics among the classical scholars of the Medieval
Thinkers was basically theoretical and organizational. It is therefore not surprising that politics

3
as conceived by these scholars was exclusively confined to the organization and operation of
the institutions of government, which make, enforce and adjudicate laws.
Politics is however a more complex discipline than the view expressed above, and any
attempt to ignore its complex nature as rightly observed by Robert Dahl (1995:2), will amount
to over simplifying politics. In order words, the definition of politics can no longer be restricted
to the formal institutions of the state. Hence, in the more recent times, politics is better seen and
accepted as a process (political process) rather than a static discipline confined to the study of
the structure and organization of the state. This argument (of politics as a process) is further
buttressed with the fact that politics encompasses both the working of the institutions of
government, i.e. the legislature, bureaucracy, courts, etc, as well as other political variables such
as: the activities of political parties and pressure groups, voters’ political attitude, election and
electoral system, etc., and those socioeconomic and psychological indices which consciously
or unconsciously influence political decisions and actions.

Ernest Baker (1962:1) captures the process perspective of politics when he defined politics as
“the process of making and execution of governmental decisions and policies”. Baker’s
definition however does not explain or unveil to us what transpires or the forces at play in the
process of decision making before they are actually implemented. Rather, the definition raises
more questions than it answered. Thus, one is compelled to ask: How are policies initiated and
adopted? Who initiates, articulates and implements them? To whose interest or benefit, are
they? What determines the actual implementation of a particular policy among competing
alternatives? Harold Laswell, writing in 1930s may have provided answers to some of these
penetrating questions when he described politics as “who gets what, when and how” and
proceeded to see politics as the struggle for positions of power and influence, especially when
one sees politics in the terminology of Vemon Dyke (1960:134) as a “struggle among actors
pursuing conflicting desires on public issues.” In this connection therefore, politics in the words
of Quincy Wright (1955:130) has been defined as “the art of influencing, manipulating and
controlling others” and in a similar directional analysis, both Harold Laswell and Abraham
Kaplan (1950:74-75) equate politics with the study of influence and the influential. It can be
argued therefore that who gets what, when and how, (i.e. what an individual or a group gets in
the process of struggling to reflect his/its interest at the point of decision making) is a function
of what Robert Dahl (1995) analysed to be the interlocking relationship between the power,
influence and authority an individual or a group wields on the governing authority vis-à-vis
other individuals or groups.
David Easton (1965) in what looks like a corroborative assertion to Laswell’s and Dahl’s
definitions of politics also defined politics as the “authoritative allocation of values for a
society” By values, Easton means those things desired by man to live a comfortable life in the
society. The governing authority allocates these values, according to him, authoritatively to the
members of the society, which in effect suggests that they are binding. But values are not
allocated in a vacuum. There
must be some kind of interplay of power as individuals and groups struggle to influence the
governing authority to reflect their interests among values to be allocated or distributed. The
emphasis of power and influence is also very glaring in the definition of politics given by
William Bluhm. According to him “politics is a social process characterized by activities

4
involving rivalry and cooperation in the exercise of power and culminating in the making of
decisions for a group;” (Bluhm, 1965:5)
These definitions are not without their shortcomings. They have been criticized on grounds
of incomprehensiveness of political situation, defining politics only in distributive terms, and
inability to draw a sharp distinction between what is “political” from other forms of social
activities. For instance, there is nothing particularly political about ‘who gets what, when and
how’, or “authoritative allocation of values.’ The same goes to other social or religious
associations like social club, church, trade union, who among their members determine who
gets what, when and as such allocate values authoritatively. These criticisms notwithstanding,
the definitions help to reveal the complex and dynamic nature, as well as the universality of
political activities. Thus, politics at another extreme is freely conceived as a universal
phenomenon, which transcends state matters to apply to the activities of other societal
organizations and institutions like the family, the church, the trade union, etc., for according to
Robert Dahl (1995:1)

A citizen encounters politics in the government of a country,

town, school, church, business, firm, trade union, club, political
party, civic association, and a host of other organization. Politics
is an unavoidable fact of human existence. Everyone is involved
in some fashion at some time in some kind of political system.

Also, in defence of the universal applicability of politics beyond the limit of what has been
described as political element, Anifowose (1999:3) has this to say:

Politics is found wherever power relationship or conflict

situations exist, which mean that the political scientist can
legitimately study the politics of a labour union or corporation,
religious organization, as well as what goes on in a legislature or
administration agency.

And since power relationships and conflict situations are not limited to political arena
as they also exit in the family, religious organizations, professional associations, clubs, etc., it
is not a misnormal to hear or read on the pages of newspapers phrases such as: the politics of
religious crisis, the politics of AIDS cure, the politics of revenue allocation, the politics of
marginalization, the politics of minimum wage, etc., as often said and read on the pages of
newspapers in Nigeria.
On a closer scrutiny too, we observe that if we choose to define politics in a universal
term it will appear that the study of politics knows no bounds or academics restriction, yet
politics in the academic parlance has boundaries which are limited to political elements. At this
juncture, we are unavoidably faced with two dilemmas, both of which do not address the
question of what politics is, and its limits. For one, if we choose to conceive politics in its
universality to include the activities of other societal organizations, we shall be unduly throwing

5
open the frontier of the discipline beyond its limits. And two, if politics is exclusively conceived
as a process, one runs the risk of undermining the importance of “political element”.
Today, politics according to Nnoli (1986:7) is associated with state power. This seems
to provide a blend between the state-centred and process perception of politics, - an attempt to
define the limit of politics. Nnoli has defined politics in this connection as “all those activities
which are directly or indirectly associated with the seizure of state power, the consolidation of
state power and the use of state power”. As earlier observed in our discussion above, that a
precise and accurate definition of politics is very elusive and practically impossible, rather, the
definition of politics is better seen in a contextual framework – that is, within the context of the
issue raised.
At this juncture, it is important to note that all the definitions above are useful and
relevant to political analysis. A political analyst merely adopts a definition most relevant to his
phenomenon of study and object of analysis. For instance, Awofeso and Ogunbodede (2000: 9)
have used Nnoli’s definition of politics to analyse the dynamic relationship between religion
and politics to determine the extent religion has been politicized in Nigeria in order to have
access to state power, to consolidate and perpetuate the use of state power and to destabilize a
polity.
Is Politics an Art or a Science?
An age-long controversial debate over the scientific status of politics has elicited so much
disturbing questions as: whether politics can be study scientifically, or whether political science
can be classified as a science or an art, otherwise, how scientific is political science?
Some pessimistic and skeptical opinions about the scientific status of political science
have been expressed. One of such is the quotation credited to F.W. Maitlan that “when I see a
good set examination question headed by the words ‘political science’, I regret not the question
but the title.” One is less bordered about this, especially when one conceives political science
in its two major aspects – Art and Science. Some have even erroneously equated political
science with those activities usually associated with politicians. These include “elections,
electoral campaigns, legislature debates, speeches by presidents, prime ministers and party
officials, the signing of an edict by the head of a military regime.” This is correct to some extent,
especially when politics is exclusively seen as an art, and to that extent too, the above activities
are political actions often displayed by individuals (mostly politicians). However, political
science apart from this also requires the ability to explain and predict these political actions
mentioned above, the possibility of which demand a scientific method of inquiry as often used
by political scientists in their researches and analysis of political phenomena.
From our foregoing discussion we wish to say categorically here that politics is both a science
(not natural science) and an art. This fact was attested to by Robert Dahl when he stated:
To the extent that many aspects of political analysis are easily
acquired by practice and training under the supervision of a
person already skilled in political analysis, it is an art. Whenever
of students of politics scrupulously test their generalizations and
theories against the data of experience be means of meticulous
observation, classification and measurement, then political
analysis is scientific in its approach.

6
 Perhaps Stephen Wasby (1969:8) may have put it in a clear tune when he observes that:
Politics is generally agreed to be an art, the art of the possible,
while the study of politics is thought to be science.

In broader term therefore, politics can be conceived to mean the systematic study and analysis
of the art and the science of politics. While “the science provides the principle; the
corresponding art applies them.” Thus, “the political scientists provide the principles for the
politician” (Anifowose, 1999:7). At this juncture we wish to probe further the scientific status
of political science by stating the meaning of science and scientific method and see the extent
to which political science or the study of politics satisfies the requirements of scientific
methodology.
Science and Scientific Methodology
Science has been variedly defined as “knowledge acquired by careful observation, by
deduction of the laws, which govern changes and conditions, and by testing these deductions
by experiment;” “a branch of study concerned with fact, principles and methods;” “systematic
and objective investigation of e9mpirical phenomena”.
From the above definitions of science, it can easily be deduced that what qualifies a
discipline as science is not its subject matter, but its modes or methodology of acquiring
knowledge. Science in this regard can be seen as “all knowledge collected by means of the
scientific methodology.” The scientific methodology has been described as “a system of explicit
rules and procedures upon which research is based and against which claims for knowledge are
evaluated.” It has its commonly accepted rules and procedures anchored on correspondently
developed methods, tools of analysis and techniques. A researcher’s finding is only adjudged
empirical or scientific when this procedure is strictly adhered to, with techniques and tools of
analysis properly applied.
Political Science and Scientific Methodology
The ultimate goal of science is to explain, predict and understand empirical phenomena.
Likewise, political science through scientific methodology also aimed at explaining, predicting
and understanding political phenomena.
Social science (of which political science is one) has generally over the years institutionalized
a language for communication, rules for reasoning and procedures and methods for observation
and verification. These rules and procedures conform with the generally acceptable scientific
methodology, and in social sciences referred to as ‘research methodology. The social science
research methodology encompasses procedural stages, which include: identification of an
empirical problem, formation of hypothesis, collection of data, data analysis, testing and
verification of hypothesis, generalization and formation of theory.
The ultimate in social sciences and political science in particular, is to come up with
theories and laws capable of explaining and predicting a phenomenon. Thus, a theory has been
defined as “a set of general statements which act as the premises for explanation.” It is “a set
of interrelated concepts, definitions and proposition which present a systemic view of a

7
phenomenon by specifying a relationship among variables with the purpose of explaining and
predicting the phenomenon.” Theories therefore seek to explain the truly existence of fact. It
follows therefore that data must be sourced objectively to reflect the phenomenon under
investigation, and analysed appropriately to validate conclusions drawn. The very nature of
validating in research analysis presupposes the formation of hypothesis, which by standard,
requires confirmation or in the language of science, verification. Hypothesis, simply defined is
a tentative answer to a research problem. It is a statement of expectation about the situation,
which can be tested by empirical observation. They are propositions, which can be put to test
in order to determine their validity. They are observable and testable statements, the validity of
which based on information of data collected, can be accepted or rejected. An accepted
hypothesis simply confirms an existing theory or theories, or set out the basis for new theory or
law, which is subject to further confirmation or verification.
How Scientific is Political Science?
The question has often been raised whether political science can be classified alongside pure
or natural sciences like Biology, Chemistry, Physics, and Mathematics. Studies have however
confirmed that political science “is not an exact science like physics and chemistry, otherwise,
political science can be classified alongside sociology, economics and geography as social
science, while subjects like physics, chemistry, etc. are pure sciences. The reasons for this are
as follows:
1. The Object of Study
The object of study in pure sciences and social sciences differ and this to a large extent
determines their levels of precision and accuracy. While physics and chemistry deal
with matter as object of study, politics and economics deal with man in society. It is
easy for pure sciences to attain precision and accuracy because their object of study,
matter, is relatively constant and therefore can be controlled. For instance, “chemical
element is exactly the same all the world over; and variations in its composition can be
tested and explained.” Man on the other hand is not predictable and therefore difficult
to control. Besides “social phenomena are perpetually under-going changes and are
more difficult to control”. The uncertainty and unpredictability of man’s behaviour and
attitudes have made social science researches less accurate with precision difficult to
attain.
2. Environment of Study
The natural science researches are mostly experimented in laboratories under relatively
controlled and stable condition. This to certain extent has enhanced precision and
accuracy. The social scientist’s laboratory is the environment, which is always in a
perpetual state of flux, unstable and ever-changing. Environmental factors often
influence the attitudes of man and social phenomena. Social investigations carried out
in different environment are bound to produce different findings, and thus, varied
conclusions because of different environmental conditions the investigations are
subjected to. It follows therefore that the political scientist has no power and control
over his material and environment unlike the chemist who can subject an element to
laboratory test.

8
 3. Quantification and Measurement of Variables
The natural scientist can easily subject his object of study to precise quantification and
measurement, while the social scientist variables are difficult to be accurately quantified
and measured. For instance, it is difficult to quantify variables like “political power”
and similar concepts in political science. Besides; there are often disagreements over
definition of concepts, scope and method of analysis. It is therefore not surprising that
while the natural scientists prefer to be definite and precise in their language, the social
scientists choose to be probabilistic. For instance, the social scientist and natural
scientist may prefer to describe a man “as tall” and as 6ft” respectively.
4. Value Judgment
While the natural scientist findings and conclusions are often value – free, the social
scientist findings and conclusions cannot totally be free of value judgment. Many
reasons are responsible for this. We have already discussed above the influence the
environment and objects of study exert on the researcher’s findings and conclusions.
Most importantly however, is the fact that while it is easy for the natural scientist to
isolate himself from his research the social scientist is often part of the research and
thus difficult to be unbias.
5. Uniformities and Regularities
While it is possible in natural sciences to artificially create actual uniformities for the
purpose of comparison, the same is difficult to achieve in social sciences. It is easy in
natural sciences for instance, to “take two pieces of copper ore, unlike in shape and
appearance and chemical constitution, and extract from them two pieces of copper so
nearly alike that they would give the same results when treated in the same way”.
Alternatively, it is difficult to come by two human beings, who will behave alike under
like circumstances. The implication of these in research is that while regularity is easy
to attain in natural sciences, it is difficult in some cases in social sciences.

6. Universal Applicability
Natural Sciences laws are universally applicable. For instance, the law of gravity is
universally accepted, while oxygen and hydrogen are always the two components of
water anywhere in the globe. On the other hand, social science theories and laws are
often deficient in explaining all cases. For instance, theories of development and
underdevelopment are of varied analytical standpoints.
It is however worth mentioning here that the above reasons given so far to differentiate
natural sciences from social sciences are not sufficient to remove “science” from “politics,” for
as rightly observed by Appadorai (1975:6)

Politics, like other social sciences, has a scientific character

because the scientific method is applicable to its phenomena, viz,
the accumulation of facts, the linking of these together in casual

9
 sequences and the generalization from the latter of fundamental
principles or laws

To this professor Mackenzie has added corroboratively, but in a non-rival tone between natural
science and political science. According to him;

So far I can judge, “political science’ is still the name which

carries meaning to the general public… the word science here
indicates simply that there exists an academic tradition of the
study of politics, it does not mean that this discipline claim to be
a natural science,’ or that it could be improved by copying the
methods of physics and chemistry more exactly.

Sub-fields of Political Science

The sub-fields or what is sometimes referred to as areas of specialization in political science
include branches of knowledge like comparative politics, public administration, international
relations, political economy, political philosophy, political sociology and area studies (in our
own context, Nigerian politics). We may examine them one after the other.
Comparative Politics
This branch or sub-field of political science seeks to identify significant similarities and
differences in political institutions and political behaviour cross-nationality and cross-
culturally. The emphasis here is to explain and perhaps predict any observable differences and
similarities. This approach helps in identifying countries that share similar and different
characteristics in term of their structure, institutions and attitudinal behaviour of the people
therein. It also helps to explain why people react differently to some political issue despite
similar historical background and governmental structures, or why certain institutions work
perfectly in some places and fail in others despite similar structure, etc.
Public Administration
This sub-field of political science studies the administrative patter and behaviour in states and
complex organizations. Topical issues here include: bureaucracy, organizational behaviour,
administrative principles and practice, government administration, ecology of administration,
etc.
International Relations
This branch of political science studies the behaviour of actors in global politics. Thus, foreign
policies of sovereign states, resolutions of international organizations and decisions and actions
of multinational corporations are necessarily analyzed with the view to examining the extent to
which they influence international peace and security. Likewise, the implications of war and its
remedy, terrorist activities, famine, international inequalities, poverty, etc. are issues given
serious attention in international politics. Also, of special interest in international politics are:

10
topical issues in diplomacy, international economic relations, international institutions,
international law, etc.
Political Economy
This branch of study of political science tries to explain economic situation politically. Put
differently, it studies how economic resources are politically allocated. The focus is on those
determinant variables for economic distribution within and among states. Its premise and
analytical standpoint are the nature and character of states in their historical specificities.
Topical issues in political economy are more often than not, subjected to two different and
opposing academic traditions – the Liberal and Marxist schools of thought. These may include
development and underdevelopment, modernization and dependency, class and modes of
production, state and economy, colonialism, neo-colonialism and imperialism, etc.
Political Philosophy
Essentially, the focus of political philosophy is normatively oriented and concerns itself with
issues such as how the state ought to be administered, what ought to be the rights, duties and
responsibilities of citizens. The works of great philosophers like Plato, Aristotle and
Machiavelli are instructive in this connection. Studies on African political philosophers have
also been carried out extensively. Hence, philosophical views of African philosophers such as
Julius Nyerere, Dr. Azikwe, Kwame Nkurma and Obafemi Awolowo are worth mentioning.
This branch of study is closely related to philosophy and it relies mainly on reasoning and
logical conclusions, it is less scientific and methodological.
Political Sociology
It takes a sociological analysis of political issues. Thus, approaches which examine the
environment of organizations, what happens there, and the influence of environment on their
efficiency are essentially sociological. Besides, political concepts such as political socialization,
political culture were borrowed from sociology.
Area Studies (Nigerian Government and Politics)
It concerns itself essentially with the nature and character of politics in a particular country.
Thus, one can talk of Nigerian politics just as politics in America, Britain and other countries
are discussed. With reference to Nigerian politics, topical issues that have been subjected to
analysis range from the structure of government to peculiar political issues in the country.
For instance, much work have been devoted to the Nigerian federal structure,
presidentialism and parliamentarianism as practiced in Nigeria, and in some cases compared
with other countries. Besides, attention had also been devoted to peculiar political issues in
Nigeria such as, ethnicity, voter’s behaviour, political participation, electoral malpractices and
violence, military intervention, etc.
Relationship of Political Science with other Academic Disciplines
The relationship that exists between political science and other social science disciplines is
obvious. This is because, other social science disciplines such as: economics, psychology,
geography and sociology and anthropology deal with man in the society just like the political
science, the only difference being their phenomena of analysis. Apart from social sciences,

11
academic interrelationship also exists between political science and art subjects such as history
and philosophy. Other branches of learning such as law and even natural sciences have indirect
academic relationship with political science.

Relationship of Political Science with Other Social Science Disciplines

1. Relationship with Economics
Politics, it is often said, cannot be separated from “Economics”. This assertion is true of the
individual, group and even the state. This is because most economic decisions taken by
individuals, groups and the state are often unconsciously politically influenced and determined.
If economics is basically concerned with how scarce resources are used and distributed for
ultimate satisfaction of the society and maximum efficiency, the same is fundamental to the
state. For instance, capitalism and
socialism (both topical issues in economics as well as political science) state the limit of state
interference in economic activities. Besides, most classical and neo-classical theories of
economics require political applicability. Keynesian control of the economy through increase
and decrease in taxation, is for instance, a political affair which boarders on state decisions.
Likewise, Marxist theories of state, class, mode of production, etc. are all economically
founded, and thus, analyzed. Similarly, economic issues such as government annual budget,
development plans, and general economic strategies all have political implications.
2. Relationship with Sociology and Anthropology
If sociology has been seen as the “study of relationship of men in group and groups in the
society as a whole”, and anthropology as “the study of men in relation to physical, social and
cultural development, then, the close inter-relationship between political science and sociology
and anthropology is real, for they all study man in the society. Also, certain sociological
concepts have been used to explain political phenomena like, political culture, political
socialization, etc.
3. Relationship with Psychology
Modern approach to the study of political science had borrowed extensively from
psychologists’ analytical tools. In order to explain certain political behaviour, individual has
been the unit of analysis in poli/tical science. Thus, psychology has been tremendously helpful
in the studies of groups – leadership and public opinion, as well as individual political attitudes
and behaviour.
4. Relationship with Geography
The importance of geography in analyzing politics both locally and internationally has led to
the emergence of a subject of politics called geopolitics. Discussions on issues that border on
oil, mineral resources, imports and exports, boundary limits and delimitation, etc. are all of
equal importance to both geographers and political scientists. There is also a way in which one
can explain certain political attitudes such as voters’ behaviour with geographical analysis,
hence, political phenomena like ethnic rivalry, ethnic politics, tribal loyalty are geographically
underpinned.

12
 In international politics, the geographical location of a country is a major contributive factor
to her economic and military strength, while boarder disputes within and among nations have
often degenerated to civil and international war. Geopolitical analysis can be used to explain
the nature of politics in most heterogeneous societies. For instance, in Nigeria, politics of states
creation, revenue allocation, census, federal character and quota system all have geographical
implications.

Relationship of Political Science with Art Subjects

Relationship with History
The mutual interdependence which exists between history and political science is such that;
“historical facts are the raw materials of political science”. History has been described as the
record of past events and their causes and interrelations. History is basically concerned with the
presentation of facts. And for that purpose, some facts of history are of great importance for the
study of political science. History supplies politics with data from which it draws reasons on
past political experiences and with this politics gives direction and explanation to many
historical studies. Besides, information or data accumulated about the past by history are used
by political scientists to justify, condemn and improve on the present and to project for the
future. It must however be pointed out that history supplies only part of political materials.
Much of political science information are dawn from contemporary investigation and other
social sciences.
Relationship with Philosophy
The writings of ancient and medieval philosophers such as Plato, Aristotle, John Locke,
Thomas Hobbes, Machiavelli, Rousseau and others are no doubt of political implications, even
though they are ethically oriented. And this has ascribed them the status of “political
philosophers”. The political philosophers try to establish the ethical relationship between law
and politics and revise the question of what ought to be and not what is on ground. Ethically,
political philosophers raise questions of political implications and try to discover “not what
government prescribes, but what they ought to prescribe”.
Political philosophers more often than not draw the relationship between ethics and politics
and try to condition political actions by ethical ideals. Thus, certain actions of the government
which ought not to be are condemned on ethical grounds. For instance, it was on ethical ground
that the annexation of Kuwait by Iraq was condemned worldwide and sanction imposed on the
latter. It may also be of interest to note that issues like law-making and constitution framing,
fundamental human rights of citizens, citizens’ obligation to state, etc. are of ethical connection.
Relationship with Law
The relationship that exists between law and politics is ethical too. However, the legal and
extra-legal connection of law to politics is more of what is on ground than what it ought to. It
is thus possible to analyze both local and international implications of government actions that
contradict constitutional and legal provisions.

13
Approaches to the Study of Politics
Basically, approaches to the study of politics can be seen from two major perspectives, namely;
the traditional approach and the behavioural approach. These approaches can further be
discussed by breaking them into sub-approaches or techniques associated with each of the two
broad approaches.
Traditional Approach to the Study of Politics
The Traditional approach has its roots in the writings of ancient political philosophers and
Medieval Thinkers. The same approach was adopted in analyzing political phenomena till about
1900. The traditional approach to the study of politics is anchored on other sub-approaches or
methods including:
i. Institutional Approach: This focuses on the structure and institutions of government like
the legislature, executive, judiciary, bureaucracy, etc.

ii. Philosophical Approach: This focuses on the writings of political thinkers and their ideas
on political power, sovereignty, legitimacy, and other topical issues about the state. The
emphasis here is always on the ideal situation or what ought to be.
iii. Historical Method: This emphasizes the relevance of past events to contemporary
political developments.

iv. Legal/Constitutional Approach: This focuses on the legal framework of government

including the powers and functions of government and its agencies.

Most criticism and attacks launched against traditional approach came from the so
called behaviouralists. The traditional approach for example was criticized on the ground that
its methods – the institutional, historical, philosophical, and legalistic are unscientific and
therefore handicapped of explanatory and predictive capability. The approach according to the
emerging behaviouralists, is normative, descriptive and lacks empiricism. Traditionalism, it is
argued, ignores formulation, testing and validation of hypotheses, while its theoretical
speculation overshadows systematic investigation, the hallmark of science. The traditional
approach because of its value laden and low level of generalization is said to have no
explanatory and predictive power.
Despite the above criticism of traditional approach to politics, its importance to political
analysis cannot be ignored, even in the modern time. The approach co-exists with other
approaches in harmony and symbiotically, to analyze political phenomena.

Behavioural Approach
Behaviouralism simply put is “the study of politics that focuses on political behaviour and
embraces the scientific method”. This represents a departure from the earlier approach to the
study of politics, i.e. the traditional approach, which has been criticized and condemned on the
ground of its inadequacy to cope with changing circumstances and contemporary demands for
organized knowledge. The behavioural approach is thus identified by its emphasis on new
method, new tools of analysis. It is a technological innovation in political analysis.

14
 Behaviouralism no doubt came as a challenge to the traditional approach which was fast
becoming obsolete and unpopular among political scientists. There was a growing discontent
among political scientists who believed that political science like natural science must be
studied scientifically.
They call for a more rigorous and dynamic approach that will replace the traditional approach.
The behavioural approach is characterized by the following:

i. It employs the scientific method to the study of politics.

ii. Its object of study is man (individual) and his behaviour in society

iii. It adopts inter-disciplinary method by using techniques already developed by other social
science disciplines like sociology, economics, etc.

iv. Its ultimate is to develop theories capable of explaining political issues and not just mere
description of those issues.

v. It seeks to make the study of politics more scientific by encouraging the use of methods
and techniques used in pure science disciplines like mathematics, statistics and computer.
The major tenet of behaviouralism is facts finding through a non-biased technique that
emphasizes scientific methodology. Thus, the contributions of behaviouralism to the study of
politics are two-fold – refinement of tools and techniques of analysis and theory building. It is
therefore not surprising that behaviouralists in their own limited fashion have been able to
develop theoretical frameworks and models of analysis capable of explaining and predicting
political phenomena and actions. It should be noted that many contemporary frameworks of
analysis in political science like the systems analysis, structural functionalism, group theory,
elite theory, game theory, etc. were offshoot of behavioural revolution in the study of politics.

TOPIC 2: MAJOR CONCEPTS IN POLITICS

Introduction to Contents

• Power: meaning and sources

• Influence: meaning and relations to power

• Authority: meaning and types

• Sovereignty: meaning, types and limitations

General Introduction
An in-depth understanding of the subject matter of politics no doubt requires a proper

15
interpretation and application of its central organizing concepts like power, influence, authority,
legitimacy, democracy and sovereignty. These concepts are so inextricable intertwined with the
subject matter of politics such that every topical issue in political science can hardly ignore
their relevance, at least, from their conceptual points of view.

1. Power
Although there are several perspectives to the definition of power, the concept of power is
popularly conceived in political science as the ability of one person to compel or influence
another to do what he would otherwise not do. When “A” makes “B” to do or act the way he
would not have done under normal circumstances, it means “A” has power over “B”. Thus,
power is the capacity to control the behaviour of others against their wishes or the ability of one
person a group of persons to realize his/their will against the resistance of others. The
enforcement of power may be either negative (through imposition of punishment or sanction or
the threat of it) or positive (through reward or promise of it). Political power on the other hand
is the ability of the government to enforce compliance with its decisions against resistance from
any individual or group in a state.
Sources of Power
The sources of power in a given society are many. They include: (1) the constitution; (2)
inheritance; (3) education; (4) wealth; (5) charisma; (6) naked force or coercion.

2. Influence
Power and influence are often used interchangeably to mean the same thing. This
however is not surprising because both power and influence seek to ensure desired change in
the behaviour of another. Influence for instance, is often referred to as that quality of power
which leads to the change desired by the subject in the behaviour of a victim without the use of
force by subject. It is power that is devoid of force or the threat of force. One of the essential
characteristics or dimensions of power identified by Nnoli is, influence. By this, he says that A
influences B by causing him to change his actions in some ways. Influence unlike power is less
dependent on force, rather, relationship of influence are achieved through persuasion,
inducement or recognition of benefits of co-operation.
Ologbenla (2000) summarizes relationship of influence between individuals and groups in
the following words:
‘A’ has influence over ‘B’ within a given scope up to the extent
that ‘A’ without resulting to the use of threat or of severe
deprivations causes “B” to change his course of action. This
means that influence is sanction free but power goes with
sanction.

16
3. Authority
Authority has been variedly defined as ‘the right to command and compel obedience”
“a sanctioned power” and “the right to rule”. It happens when A (who is a subordinate)
acknowledges the right of B (who is a superior) to give order. In other words, relationship of
authority is hierarchical. The hierarchical nature of authority was pointed out by Nnoli (1986)
when he observes that, authority is “that power associated with a hierarchy of human
relationships, which enables those higher up in the hierarchy to command those lower in the
hierarchy, and which compels those lower in the hierarchy to obey the commands of those
higher up.”
Not all authority can be described as political, for authority exists in all human
organisations like the family, church and business organisations. Political authority is thus “that
authority whose power derives from state power.” Hence, political authority is that legal right
to direct and command people. In democracy, political authority is vested in a government
through elections, hence, the government through making and enforcement of law influences
the conduct of its citizens. The manifestation of political authority may have certain phenomena
of power, thus making it difficult to differentiate political authority from political power.
However, a major difference between authority and power is that authority is less dependent on
coercion (force). Authority depends more on persuasion and legal recognition to enforce
compliance, but where these fail, institutionalized or formal power (force) may be used.
Types/Sources of Authority
Max Weber in his attempt to find out the basis of legitimacy or “reasons why individuals
throughout history have obeyed their rulers,” identifies three types of authority. They are:
traditional authority, charismatic authority and legal rational authority.
Traditional Authority
An authority based upon the customs and traditions or values of a society. Ascendancy to
authority is by inheritance or by virtue of one being a prince or member of a royal family.
“Time, precedent and the authority of tradition gave rulers their legitimacy in the eyes of the
ruled”. Traditional authority according to Weber is problematic because it is not always one
gets an intelligent and capable ruler. Once in a while, the reverse may be the case hence; one
cannot guarantee the effectiveness and continuity of such system. The system thus, cannot
ensure stability, order and predictability because it lacks basic necessities for the sustenance of
modern civilization. The authority of the leader for example could be challenged as people
advance in knowledge and civilization.
Charismatic Authority
An authority “based upon the personal qualities and the attractiveness of the leaders.”
Charismatic leaders are often gifted with extraordinary, almost superhuman qualities, and with
these they exercise authority. “Military leaders, warrior chiefs, popular party leaders, and
founders of religions are examples of such individuals.”
Charismatic authority is defective according to Weber because of its short life span.
Authority is built only around the leader, and when he dies the authority goes with him.

17
Charismatic authority is not transferable and thus cannot withstand stress and continuity in
administration. It lacks the ability to operate over a long time.
Legal – Rational Authority
An authority based on “a belief in the legitimacy of the pattern of normative rules and
the rights of those elevated to authority under such rules to issue commands”. It emphasizes
obedience based on “legally established impersonal set of rules, rather than to a personal ruler”.
Legal – rational authority vests power in the office rather than in the person who occupies it;
thus anyone can rule as long as he or she comes to office according to the rules.
Legal – rational authority is built on a well thought of and accepted rules and regulations
by all or majority of the people. The rules are meant to guide the behaviour of both the leaders
and the led. It follows therefore that what the people obey is the law not the person operating
them, the office and not its occupant. The legal rational authority according to Weber will
guarantee order, stability and continuity.
4. Legitimacy
‘Legitimacy’ and ‘Authority’ are two concepts with similar meaning. Rod Hague et al,
(1992:19) refer to legitimacy “as the rightful power” which by implication shares a similar
meaning with authority which we have earlier defined as “the legal right to direct and
command.” It has also been argued that legitimacy is the transformatory link between power
and authority. Hence, power is transformed to authority through legitimacy. The two concepts
can however be differentiated. While legitimacy is normally used in discussing an entire system
of government, authority on the other hand, often refers to specific positions within a
government. “Thus, we tend to speak of the legitimacy of a regime but the authority of an
official” (Hague et al. 1992:19)
According to Magstadt (2011:6) “the term legitimacy usually implies a widely
recognized claim of governmental authority and voluntary acceptance on the part of the
population(s) directly affected”. Legitimacy is therefore the recognition and approval of the
rule of a government by the people. It encompasses a combination of obedience and
psychological support to the government by the citizens. In democracy, legitimacy is conferred
on a government through election. Based on the lack of the above, it is often said that military
regimes are illegitimate. However, the crisis of the legitimacy faced by a military regime often
last for a short period, after which the military legitimizes itself. The same is applicable to other
forms of ascension to political authority, other than democratic means.

5. Sovereignty
Meaning and Etymology
The term ‘sovereignty’ is said to be derived from the Latin word ‘superanus’ which means
supreme or paramount. (Agarwal, 2006:155); Asirvatham and Misra, 2006:287). Sovereignty
is generally conceived by scholars as the supreme and legal authority of a state over its internal
and external affairs. Internally, the state has supreme authority over every person and all
associations, being political, economic, social or religious within its boundaries and can as well
make and enforce laws to regulate their activities. These laws are irrevocably binding to the

18
extent the state enforces them with all coercion it cares to employ. The state in this sense gives
orders to all and receives orders from none. Externally, the state is a politically independent
entity, with the supreme authority to conduct its affairs vis-à-vis other sovereign states and
international bodies without any external control.
The individual or a body, whether in form of institution or agency, that exercise the supreme
power of the state, is the sovereign. And a state is said to be sovereign when such state is able
to conduct its affairs independently without any external control. Thus, sovereignty as a
political concept, has both internal and external connotations.
Sovereignty has been variedly defined by scholars and authors alike. According to Bodin, the
first western writer to give a modern and systematic definition of the concept, sovereignty is
“the supreme power of the state over citizens and subjects unrestrained by law”. Grotius on the
other hand defined sovereignty as “the sovereign political power vested in him whose acts are
not subject to any other and whose will cannot be over-ridden”. Duguit, on his own says that
sovereignty is “the common power of the states… the will of the nation organized in the state…
right to give unconditional orders to all individuals in the territory of a state”. Sovereignty to
Jeilineck, is “that characteristics of the state by virtue of which it cannot be legally bound except
by its own or limited by any power other than itself” (see above definitions in Agarwal,
2006:156). Although, defined from different perspectives, these definitions of sovereignty as
given above, unquestionably presents the state as absolute, all-encompassive law-making and
law-enforcing entity, with unlimited power over individuals and associations within its
boundaries. Little wonder then, that Professor Laski’s definition of the state as “a territorial
society divided into government and subjects claiming within its allotted physical area, a
supremacy over all other institutions” is widely acceptable.
Types of Sovereignty
Sovereignty is of six major types, which can be explained in three pairs namely:

1. Legal and Political or Popular Sovereignty: The legal sovereignty is that person or body
vested with the power to make binding laws in a state. In Great Britain for example, the
legal sovereignty resides with the parliament, while in modern democracy, legal
sovereignty is located in the legislature, and to some extent other arms of the government.
Legal sovereignty in a monarchical government resides with the King or the Queen. The
political or popular sovereignty on the other hand, resides with the people – the electorate.
Popular sovereignty is thus, the right of the electorate to decide who should be their leaders
and representatives through elections.
2. Internal and External Sovereignty: Internal sovereignty refers to the supreme power of
a state over its internal affairs. This it does by making laws and enforcing them with all its
coercive machinery. External sovereignty on the other hand refers to the recognition of a
state’s supreme authority over its affairs by the international community. By this, the
independent status of a state is recognized by nations of the world, while undue interference
in a state’s affairs is unacceptable.
3. De jure and De facto Sovereignty: De jure sovereignty is one in which the sovereign
power in a state is based on law and as such derived from the popular sovereignty or
legitimacy. De facto sovereignty on the other hand is one in which the sovereign power in

19
 a state is derived through unlawful or illegal means such as coup d’état, revolution or
invasion. However, this does not erode the power of the sovereign. Sovereignty remains a
matter of fact.
Limitations of Sovereignty
The traditional notion of sovereignty as unrestrained, unlimited and irreversible power of the
states over its territories has gradually given way over years to a new and modern view. Practical
experiences of states interaction with people and their environment had shown that no modern
state could wield such absolute, indivisible or irreversible power in the face of technological
advancement, economic interdependence, military might and requirements of democratic
governance. Today, the sovereign power of a state within its territory is constantly challenged
and limited by a number of factors, including the following:
(1) The internal public opinion of the people: This is the aggregate views of the people in a
country on any issue of national interest. This can influence or even change the decision of
the government in a state.

(2) The international public opinion: This is the aggregate views of the international
community on a particular issue of international interest. This may influence or change the
decision or action of the government of a particular state.

(3) The supremacy of the constitution of a country coupled with the observation of the rule of
law can also serve as a limitation to the supreme power of a state. No individual or public
officer acts contrary to the provision of the constitution.
(4) International laws and agreements (treaties) signed with other sovereign states of the
world and foreign bodies: States abide by international law and are thus constrain from
acting contrary to internationally agreed upon standards.
(5) Regard for traditions and customs of a particular community in a state can restrain the state
from exercising its sovereign power.

(6) The membership of a state in international organizations such as the UNO, OPEC,
ECOWAS, etc could limit the exercise of its sovereign power through the organizations’
regulative policies and resolutions.
(7) The economic dependence of a state on other states of the world through foreign aids and
technical assistance could limit the sovereign power of the recipient state.

(8) Technological and military dependence of a country on other countries can limit the ability
of such countries to take decisions on certain issues without external consultation.

(9) The popular sovereignty of the electorate to decide who should be their leaders during
elections may serve as a constrain to a government in taking certain decisions.

(10) Diplomatic immunity. The activities of certain individuals including ambassadors that
are granted immunities can limit the sovereign power of the state.

20
(11) Geographical location – Land-locked countries and nearness to other states may restrict
such countries from taking independent actions, which in one way or the other are contrary
to the neighbouring states.
6. Democracy
Democracy is commonly defined as “the government of the people, by the people and for the
people”. It is a system of government under which the people exercise the governing power
either directly or indirectly through their elected representatives.
Some of the characteristics of a democratic government include: (1) periodic election, (2)
universal adult suffrage, (3) competitive party system, (4) free and fair election, (5) majority
rule, (6) independence of the judiciary, (7) rule of law, (8) popular sovereignty, etc. Democracy
has its advantages and disadvantages.

Summary

- Power is the ability to compel others against their wishes.

- While power relies on coercion, influence is less dependent on force.

- Authority is the legal right to direct and command.

- Sovereignty is the supreme and legal authority of a state over its internal and external
affairs.

TOPIC 3: State, society and nation

Introduction to Contents

• Meaning and characteristics of state

• Liberal and Marxist views of the state

• Theories of origin of the state

• Nation

• Society

General Introduction
The concepts of state, nation and society are often used interchangeably even by scholars and
authors, whereas, there exist clear-cut destruction among them. A clearer understanding of the

21
distinction among these concepts further helps one to appreciate the limit of political element
in any phenomenon of study in political science.

Meaning and Characteristics of State

A state is a definite territory inhabited by a group of people with an organized government of
which actions are autonomous or independent of other states of the world. From the definition
above; it is clear that a state is characterized by four major elements namely;
1. Definite territory or definite land area of its own.

2. Population/people residing on the earth’s surface.

3. An organized government which maintains law and order.

4. Sovereignty, which is the supreme and legal right of the state over its affairs.
Liberal and Marxist Views of the State
Generally, two major schools of thought exist on the concept of state. These are the liberal and
the marxist perspectives both of which view the concept of state from opposite direction. Thus,
while the liberal scholars conceive of the state as a neutral institution, an impartial umpire or
neutral arbiter between the contending forces or classes within the society, the marxian scholars
perceive of the state as a partial institution which takes side with the capitalist class and thus
use it as an instrument of oppression to dominate the masses.
Theories of Origin of the States
The emergence of the state as a force to reckon with has been subjected to different theoretical
postulations, among which are: (1) The Divine Theory (2) The Social Contract Theory (3) The
Brute Force Theory (4) The Natural Theory, etc.
Nation
A nation is “a group of people which share common ancestry, common culture, a common
religion, a common territory, a common government”. There is homogeneity of socio-cultural
affinity in a nation unlike state where it is not compulsory for members to have common or
related blood, common language, common historical tradition or a common custom. In fact,
most modern states are characterized by heterogeneous socio-cultural affinity.
Society
The term society is a much wider range of activities than both the state and political system. It
is the entire web of social relationship or whole range of human activities and collective
association, including the family, the caste, the church, etc. which influence social life. Society
is different from the state in many ways including: (1) Society is wider than the state (2) The
state possesses sovereignty while society relies on moral persuasion to enforce compliance, etc.
Summary

- The state is generally defined by its four major elements namely: definite territory,
population, organized government and sovereignty.

22
 - Scholarly opinion on the concept of state is dichotomized between the Liberal and the
Marxian schools of thought.

- The concepts of state, nation and society are clearly not the same, although, they are often
used interchangeably.

The State Defined

We make haste to say that the state by international standard does not refer to the component
units within a country (e.g. Lagos state, River state, Ogun state, Adamawa state or Akwa Ibom
state as we have it in Nigeria). A state is defined by its four major characteristics, namely,
population (people), government, territory and sovereignty. Thus, we can define a state as a
definite territory inhabited by a group of people with an organized government of which actions
are autonomous or independent of other states of the world.
Characteristics of a State
1. Definite Territory

Every state is located on a particular area of earth’s surface with a definite land area of its own,
and boundaries separating it from other states of the world. A state within this land limit or its
territory can explore all human and non-human resources to ensure its survival and self-
reliance. The geographical location of a country is also vital for its economic strength, survival
as well as military strength in international politics.
2. Population/People
Every state is inhabited by people, otherwise referred to as the citizens of that state. There is
no individual in the world that does not belong to the membership of a particular state. State
also exhibits peculiar characteristics as dictated by their citizens, and based on these, one can
differentiate state. This may include cultural differences, different languages, homogeneity and
heterogeneity, etc.
3. An Organized Government
Every modern state has an organized group of persons (government) that maintains
order through the making, implementation and adjudication of law. It should be noted that the
state and government are not the same, and for that purpose there is a clear line of distinction
between the two. For instance, while the state embraces the government and the governed, the
government on the other hand, is an agency (usually composed of few people) of the state.
Similarly, while the government of a state may change from time to time, the state always
remain permanent. Also, sovereignty which is a characteristic of the state (not government) is
always exercised by the government on behalf of the state.

The government may be differentiated from other social organisations by the following:

i. Comprehensiveness of its authority

ii. Binding decisions, and
iii. Legitimate monopoly of ‘life – and – death sanction’.
The government of every state is expected to perform major functions among which are:
making, administration and enforcement of law through its organs, protection of lives and

23
property of the people, defence of the state’s territories from external attacks, provision of
social amenities and infrastructural facilities for its citizens, etc.
4. Sovereignty
All independent countries are sovereign states. Sovereignty is the right of a state to make and
enforce laws within its territorial limits without any internal or external interference. It is the
supreme authority of a state over its internal and external affairs.
Existing Viewpoints on the Concept of the State
Professor Nnoli (1986: chap 2) has identified three different perspectives from which the
concept of the state has been defined by authors and scholars. These according to him include:
the legal definition of the state, the philosophical definition of the state and the dialectical view
of the state. The legal definition of the state, according to him, is seen from the angles of the
four characteristics of the state namely: “population, government, territory, and the monopoly
of force within the territory (i.e., sovereignty).” This view of the state as a legal entity is further
substantiated by Andrew Vincent (1992:42) in the following words:

The state... has a geographically identifiably territory with a body

of citizens. It claims authority over all citizens and groups within
its boundaries and embodies more comprehensive aims than
other association. The authority of the state is legal in character
and is usually seen as the source of law. It is based on procedural
rules, which have more general recognition in the society than
other rules. The state also embodied maxima control of resources
and force within a territory.

The philosophical definition of the state, according to Nnoli (1986:21) “describes the
necessary and sufficient characteristics of the ideal state, the good state or the perfect state”
from the view point of several political philosophers, such as Plato, Aristotle, the church fathers
(Aquinas and Augustine), Hobbes, Locke, Hegel and Marx to mention just few. We categorize
the view point of these political philosophers into three, namely:

i. Those that perceive the state as being “design to harmonize the various necessary part
of society” (Plato, Aristotle, Aquinas etc.)

ii. Those that view the state as a product of the “expression of the social contract” (Hobbes,
Locke and Rousseau), and

iii. Those that view the state as a product of the struggle between certain conflicting social
forces in the world” (Hegel and Marx)
The Liberal and Marxist Views of the State
Most often than not, scholars and authors attempt to group the definitions of state into two
broad categories – Liberal and Marxist perspectives, with each denoting the role of the state in

24
the society and its relative level of autonomy from social classes. Weber in Politics as a
Vocation popularly presented the liberal view of the state. Weber emphasizes three aspects of
the state; the territoriality, its monopoly of means of physical violence; and its legitimacy. Thus,
he sees the state as those social institutions claiming a monopoly of the legitimate use of force
within a given territory. In a similar tune, Laski (1935) defines the modern state as “a territorial
society divided into government and subject, claiming within its allotted physical area, a
supremacy over all other institutions”. The state in this sense is a body which gives order to all
and receives order from none (Pickles, 1979:39).
Liberal definitions of the state posit the view that the state is nothing but a neutral
institution for preventing one man from infringing the rights of another (Herbert Spencer, 1820
– 1903). Its function is to mediate and reduce conflict and tension between the different sectors
of society. This, it does through the making and enforcing laws, recognizing and guaranteeing
the rights of persons, including freedom of religion (Barker, 1961). The state in this sense, and
as generally conceived by empirical pluralists, is an impartial umpire or a neutral arbiter
between the contending forces (or classes) within the society (Dahl, 1971; Schumpeter, 1943).
The above discussion of the state as a neutral arbiter was succinctly articulated in the words of
Dorothy Pickles (1979:49)

The state was regarded as a kind of umpire, standing at the

ringside watching the forces of competition creating a society
divided into rich and poor. Most people felt that it was natural
and inevitable for some to be rich and privileged and others to be
poor and miserable and that the state ought not to interfere with
this natural state of affairs, except to ensure conformity with
some rudimentary rules of the game.

The primary Marxist view of the state finds the most explicit expression in the famous
aphorism of the communist manifesto: “The executive of the modern state is but a committee
for managing the affairs of the whole bourgeoisie” (Marx and Engel), and political power is
“merely the organized power of one class for oppressing another “(Milliband, R. 1965). The
state in this sense is an instrument of oppression and domination – a machine used by the
capitalist to keep the working class and the poor in subjugation. The instrumentalist view of the
state argues that “the ruling class uses the state as its instrument to dominate society by virtue
of interpersonal ties between, and social composition, state officials and economic elites”
(McLean 1996: 475). Marx argues that the state came to a certain stage of economic
development which was related to the spit of society into classes. To this, Engel has added that,
the state is a historical product and a manifestation of the irreconcilability of classes. According
to him:

The state is, therefore, by no means a power force of society from

without; as little is it ‘the reality of the ethnical idea’, the ‘image
and reality of reason’ that Hegel maintains. Rather it is a product

25
 of society at a certain stage of development; it is the admission
that this society has become entangled in an insoluble
contradiction with itself, that it has split into irreconcilable
antagonism which it is powerless to dispel. But in order that this
antagonism, these classes with conflicting economic interest,
might not consume themselves and society in fruitless struggle,
it became necessary to have a power, seemly standing above
society, that will alleviate the conflict and keep it within bounds
of ‘order : and this power, are reason out of society but placing
itself above it, is the state.

Since the state arose from the need to hold class antagonism in check, “it is ,as a rule, says
Engel, that “the state of the most powerful, economically dominant class, which through the
medium of the state becomes also the politically dominant class and thus acquires new means
of holding down and exploiting the oppressed classes”. (Engel, 1977: 168). Ralph Miliband
(1973) in his most celebrated work The State in Capitalist Society re-echoed the Marxist
instrumentalist position of the state in advanced capitalist societies, but adds that the state
dominance is exerted subtly through ideological hegemony (Milliband, 1973; Jessop, 1983;
Carnoy; 1984).
Greatly influenced by the works of the Italian Marxist Antonio Gramsci (1891 - 1937)
and Louis Althusser (1918 - 1990), Nnicos Poulantzas (1936 - 1979) contribution to the concept
of ‘relative autonomy’ of the capitalist state was a major landmark in the debate of the role of
the state in capitalist societies. For Poulantzas, the state is a regional sector of the capitalist
structure, and is understood to have a relative autonomy from capital. The “capitalist state best
serves the interest of the capitalist class only when ruling… class is not the politically governing
class” (Poulantzas, N. 1973).
Theories of Origin of the State
The emergence of the state as a force to reckon with has been subjected to different theoretical
postulations, among which are:

1. The Divine Theory

2. The Social Contract Theory

3. The Brute Force Theory

4. The natural Theory

Nation
The term ‘nation’ has often been used interchangeably and ambiguously with state that one
may think that no difference exists between the two concepts. The confusion may however be
attributed to the fact that both nation and state share certain features such as definite territory;
a government and people. This does not suggest that a distinction cannot be drawn between
state and nation. A nation is defined as “a group of people which share common ancestry,
common culture, a common religion, a common territory, a common government”. In short

26
there is homogeneity of social-cultural affinity. We can thus identify some unique
characteristics of a nation as:
i. A common or related blood, ii.
A common language,
iii. A common historical tradition, iv.
A common customs and habits.
We can have as many as possible numbers of nations within a state. For example, the Yorubas,
the Igbos, the Hausas, the Ibibios, the Efiks, etc. all constitute nations within the Nigerian State.
We can thus differentiate a nation from a state on grounds that:
i. While sovereignty is a characteristic of the state, nations are not necessarily characterized by
sovereignty. Hence, nations are not sovereign entity; they operate within a sovereign state. ii.
Nations are characterized by homogeneous socio-cultural affiliation such as common history,
language, habit, culture, etc. This is in sharp contrast to a state where it is not compulsory that
the people must share same identity like common culture, language, religion, etc.
In fact, what is obtainable in most states like Nigeria is heterogeneous (diverse) culture.
However, this is not to suggest in any way that some states do not exhibit some level of
homogeneity. The states with homogeneous culture or those states that have been able to play
down the negative impact of cultural heterogeneity or diversity, with emphasis laid on
homogeneous ideals may be referred to as nation-state. Modern states are often referred to as
nation-state.
Society
The term society is used to cover a much wider range of activities than both the state and
political systems. As a matter of fact, the state is only a part of the society which existed as
tribes long before civilization and the emergence of political organization of the state.
Society is the entire web of social relationship or whole range of human activities and
collective association (non-state associations) like the family, the caste, the church, etc. which
influence social life. It also encompasses social forces like custom and tradition, imitation and
competition which are not created by the state but may be protected by it.
Laski defines society as “a group of human beings living together for the satisfaction of their
mutual wants”. Society has also been defined to mean “every kind of degree of relationship
entered into by man, whether these relations be organized or unorganized, direct and indirect,
conscious or unconscious, cooperative or antagonistic, it includes the whole issue of human
relations and is without boundary or assignable limits”.
The state and society share common features such as people and moral purpose. Although, the
early Greek political thinkers like Aristotle, Plato, etc. made no distinction between the state
and society, both are not identical. The state has been distinguished from society in the
following ways.

1. The state is a political organization, smaller than the society, yet, holds the society
together. Society is a social organization consisting of different groups and social
relationship of which the state is one.

27
 2. Society exists before the state – it “precedes the state just as it precedes the family, the
church, the corporation, the political party” and other political organizations associated
with the state.

3. The state possesses sovereignty and employs its coercive machinery like the police,
courts, army to get its collective will to be executed, society does not possess
sovereignty, it relies on moral persuasion or influence or social ostracism to enforce
compliance.
4. The state exercise authority through laws made and enforced by organized government,
society exercises authority largely through custom.

5. The state has identifiable boundaries and structures with centralized authority, society
consists of rather numerous interest groups and relationships with overlapping and
amorphous structure.
Fig. 3.1 Government, state, political system and society

SOCIETY
THE POLITICAL SYSTEM
THE STATE
GOVERNME

Source: Hague, R. (Harrop, M. and Breslui, S. (1992:5), see references to Module 2.

TOPIC 4: The structure and organization of government

Introduction to Contents

• Meaning and functions of government

• Organs of government: legislature, executive and judiciary

• Functions of the three organs of government, etc.

28
General Introduction
The functions of modern government are usually carried out through its three major organs –
the legislature, the executive and the judiciary. Apart from their primary functions (i.e. law-
making, law implementation and law-adjudication) as performed by the legislature, the
executive and the judiciary respectively, each of them also performs a long list of functions
which sometimes overlap.

Government: Meaning and Functions

Government is the machinery set up to manage the affairs of a state. It is a body of persons and
institutions, which controls the administration of a state through enactment, enforcement,
interpretation and adjudication of law. Government, according to Magstadt (2011:17) “is a
human invention by which societies are ruled and binding rules are made”, it consists of
“persons and institutions that make and enforce rules or laws for the larger community”.
Government could assume different forms or types including presidential and
parliamentary types of government, or ideologically leaned towards capitalism, socialism,
democracy, totalitarianism, etc. Governments have also been structurally arranged to reflect
either the unitary or federal structure. Whichever form/type or arrangement a government
assumes, governments, the world over, are known to perform the following functions:
1. The government makes, administers and enforces law in a state through its major organs:
the legislature, the executive and the judiciary respectively.

2. The government through the instrumentalities of law enforcement agencies such as the
police maintains law and order and protects lives and property.

3. The government through its external affairs ministry and its diplomatic missions abroad
maintains friendly diplomatic relations with other states of the world, and promotes and
protects its country’s good image and citizens abroad.

4. The government through the military defends the territorial integrity of the state and
protects it from external aggression or attack.

5. The government provides social amenities such as electricity, pipe borne water etc., as well
as infrastructural facilities such as roads, bridges, etc., for its citizens’ comfort and the
country’s development.

6. The government also enhances the economic development of the country by providing
infrastructural facilities and job opportunities for its citizens.
It is generally agreed among scholars that the functions of government are carried out
through its three major branches or organs – the legislature, the executive and the judiciary. We
may examine them one after the other.

29
The Legislature
The legislature is the organ of government primarily responsible for making laws in modern
societies for a particular country. The legislature is of two major types namely, the unicameral
legislature and the bicameral legislature. The unicameral legislature is a legislature with only
one chamber, while the bicameral legislature is a legislature with two chambers usually referred
to as the upper house and the lower house. In the United States, Britain and Nigeria, the lower
house is called the House of Representatives, the House of Common and the House of
Representatives respectively while the upper house is referred to as the Senate in United States
and Nigeria and as the House of Lords on Britain. Both houses are collectively referred to as
the Congress in the United States, the Parliament in Britain and the National Assembly in
Nigeria.
Apart from its law-making functions, the modern legislature also perform secondary
functions, including the following:

1. It amends the constitution of a country whenever situation demands

2. It controls a country’s public finance through the determination of ways of raising and
spending public money and the approval of the executive proposed budget.

3. It investigates and checks the abuse of power delegated to other bodies.

4. The legislature approves the appointment of people to important public offices such as
ministers, ambassadors, etc.

5. It educates the public on any government policy or action and serves as a representative
body that speaks on their behalf.

6. The legislature controls the executive through the approval of government major policies
such as declaration of war, state of emergency, etc.

7. It approves treaties or agreement signed with the foreign bodies (sovereign states and
international organizations).

8. It checks other organs of government through impeachment, passing of vote of no

confidence and removal of judges.

9. The legislature also delegates law-making power to other bodies.

10. It serves as a forum for the discussion of sensitive political grievances and other matters of
public interest and it provides a medium through which people participate in government
by electing their representatives to the parliament.
11. In some countries such as Britain, the Upper House of the legislature (the House of Lords)
acts as the final court of appeal.
The lawmaking function of the legislature is carried out through a process which involves six
basic stages. These are:

30
1. The First Reading: This is the first stage of law-making process. Here, the draft bill is
merely introduced to members of the legislature by the clerk of the House who reads out
the title of the proposed law. No discussion of the bill takes place at this stage; members of
the House however go home with the bill already printed out in leaflets for close study
while they prepare for the date of the second reading.
2. The Second Reading: The content and purpose of the bill is explained to the House by
whoever presented it during the second reading. A debate is held whether or not the bill be
read the second time to members. If members voted in favour of reading the bill the second
time it proceeds to the next stage, but if members voted against its second reading, the bill
dies automatically. At this stage, no amendment to the bill is proposed or made.
3. The Committee Stage: This is the third stage of law-making process. In this stage, the bill
is sent to the committee of the whole House or a standing committee of the House for close
scrutiny and extensive discussion during which amendments are proposed and made.
4. The Report Stage: In this stage, the committee reports back their findings to the House
while the content of the proposed law (bill) is read to the House in its amended form.

5. The Third Reading: This is the fifth stage of law-making process which usually represents
the last stage of the legislature involvement in law-making process. The bill is subjected to
a more critical look and further alteration in case of errors detected during drafting and
amendment. The bill is later presented to the executive for presidential assent before it
finally becomes law.
6. The Presidential Assent: This is the final stage of the law-making process. A bill does not
become a law until the president has given his assent. However, a vetoed bill by the
president automatically become law when a 2/3 majority of the legislature voted in its
support.

The Executive
The executive is the organ of government primarily saddled with the responsibility of
implementing government policies. The executive is the sole administrative machinery of any
government. It includes the bureaucracy – ministries and parastatals and government agencies
like the police, the armed forces, etc.
The executive can be classified on the basis of number of rulers into three major types
namely, the single executive, the dual or bicephalous executive and the collegial or plural
executive. The single executive exists in a state where only one person assumes both the
executive and ceremonial functions of the state. A single executive type exists in a presidential
system of government. A bicephalous executive exists in a parliamentary or cabinet system of
government where the functions of government are shared between two rulers – the Head of
state and the Head of government who perform the ceremonial and governmental functions
respectively. More than two leaders exist in a state with a collegial executive.
The following are the functions performed by a modern executive

1. It implements or enforces laws made by the legislature and other bodies through its agencies
like the police, the armed forces, the civil service, etc.

31
2. The head of the executive (the president) gives his assent to bills before they become laws.

3. The executive decides and formulates the country’s foreign policy

4. The executive through the police and other law enforcement agencies maintains law and
order in the country

5. The executive through the armed forces and other security agencies defends the country’s
territory against any external aggression.

6. The executive through delegated legislation makes law

7. The executive through administrative tribunal and the exercise of prerogative of mercy by
the president sometimes perform judicial functions

8. The executive controls a country’s trade (i.e. import and export) and transacts business with
other countries of the world.
Because of its overlapping functions which cut across other two organs of government,
the power of modern executive is said to have increased at the expense of other two organs of
government such that its power undermines or unnecessarily interferes with the functions of
both the legislative and the judiciary.
The following are responsible for the increased power and functions of the modern
executive:

1. Delegated Legislation: The executive through the process of delegated legislation makes
enforceable laws which by implication increased the power of the executive above its
traditional law-implementation function and at the same time constitutes an encroachment
on the law-making function of the legislature.
2. The power of the president to veto parliamentary bill undermines the law-making function
of the legislature.

3. The need for the president to give his assent to any bill before it becomes a law makes the
executive a partner in the law-making process

4. The power of the executive to initiate bill for the parliament enables it to exert considerable
influence in the law-making process

5. The power of the president to appoint judges enables the executive to make undue
interference in judicial activities

6. The power of prerogative of mercy or granting of amnesty as exercised by the president

enables him to exercise judicial influence

7. The existence of Administrative and Tribunal courts as set up by the executive to try certain
cases are primarily judicial responsibilities.

32
8. The control of the armed forces and the police by the executive gives it an influential power
over other organs of government

9. The influence of the party (which itself is a supportive institution to the President) on
government policies and programmes .

10. The dependent nature of the other organs on the executive for funds and patronage.
The Judiciary
The judiciary is the organ of government primarily responsible for the interpretation of laws
and adjudication of cases between individuals and governments. The judiciary is said to be the
last hope of the masses; the branch of government saddled with the responsibility of protecting
individuals rights, whether rich or poor. In order to perform its functions without fear or favour,
the judiciary in democratic societies must exhibit the following features:
1. Impartiality: The judiciary in order to promote equality among people must necessarily
be impartial.

2. Permanence: The judicial institution must remain permanent, irrespective of government

in power. This enables it to ensure impartiality

3. Political Neutrality: Judges are not expected to engage in partisan politics. This enables
them to be politically neutral to successive governments.

4. Professionalism: The judiciary comprises of judges, magistrates, etc, who are experienced
and legal experts in various aspects of the law.

5. Stable Tenure of Office: Judges stay in office so long as they are in good health, upright
and non-corrupt.

6. Due Process: This is usually a laid down procedure called precedence which guides the
operation of the judiciary

7. Judicial Immunity: Judges are immune against criminal or civil litigation in the course of
performing their official duties

8. Independence: The judiciary is made free of the legislature and executive undue influences

9. Code of Conduct: The judiciary, like other professions, has a code of conduct, which
guides its activities.
The judiciary performs the following functions in a state.

1. The judiciary settles disputes between individuals and the government

2. The judiciary interprets the law and determines its meaning

3. The judiciary administers judgements by punishing law-breakers

4. The judiciary protects the fundamental human rights (individual liberty) of the citizens.

5. The judiciary indirectly makes law through the process of judicial precedent or case law.

33
6. The judiciary through its power of judicial review interprets the constitution and as such
can declare any act of the legislature or the executive as unconstitutional, ultra-vires or null
and void where such action contradicts the provision of the constitution.

7. The judiciary gives advice to the president on matters regarding the use of prerogative
power and other legal matters.

8. Disputed electoral results on the presidential and legislative elections are decided by the
judiciary

9. The judiciary also performs other miscellaneous functions like swearing of affidavits,
granting licenses, performing marriages, etc.

TOPIC 5
Constitution and constitutionalism

Introduction to Contents

• Meaning and importance of a constitution

• Sources and types of constitution

• Meaning of constitutionalism and Features of a constitutional government

• Separation of powers: meaning and operationalization

• Checks and balances

• Rule of Law: meaning and limitation

General Introduction
Modern day governments tend to be democratic. In order to realize this, the
administration of the affairs of a state by the government is usually guided by agreed upon rules
and regulations (constitution) which are strictly adhered to by leaders (constitutionalism).
Besides, other constitutional provisions like the doctrines of separation of powers and checks
and balances and the notion of rule of law also help to entrench democratic values and ensure
limited government in a state.

34
Meaning and Importance of a Constitution
A constitution is defined as “the system or body of fundamental principles according to which
a nation, state or body politic is constituted and governed”. A constitution serves several
purposes in a state, including (1) serving as a guide to leaders and public office holders, (2)
checking dictatorial tendencies of a government, (3) safeguarding the fundamental human
rights of the citizens, (4) upholding democracy, (5) serving as guards towards maintaining law
and order, etc.
Sources and Types of Constitution
A constitution may be sourced through (1) convention, custom and tradition, (2) acts of
parliament, (3) historical experiences, (4) case law, etc. Constitutions have been classified into
written and unwritten constitutions, flexible and rigid constitutions, unitary and federal
constitutions.
Meaning of Constitutionalism and Features of a Constitutional Government
Constitutionalism, simply defined, is the strict adherence to, or compliance with the provision
of the constitution. The features of a constitutional government include: (1) popular sovereignty
of the electorate, (2) responsibility and accountability to the people, (3) independence of
judiciary, (4) respect to the notion of rule of law, etc.
Separation of Powers: Meaning and Operationalization
Separation of powers is the division of governmental powers among the three organs of
government – the legislature, the executive and the judiciary; in such a way that each of them
concentrates on a particular aspect of power assigned to it without necessarily overlapping into
the powers of other organs. The three organs are to be separated both in personnel and functions.
The doctrine of separation of powers proposes that each of these functions of government
(legislation, execution and adjudication) should be entrusted to a separate branch of government
(the legislature,
the executive and the judiciary, respectively).
Separation of powers operates differently in the presidential and parliamentary systems
of government. In a presidential system of government, for instance, there is a clear-cut
separation. The reverse is the case in parliamentary system where there is fusion of powers.

Checks and Balances

Checks and balances simply mean using power to check power. It is the process by
which the three organs of government check one another’s excesses by using their constitutional
powers. The executive for instance, can check the legislature’s arbitrary law by preventing it
from becoming a law through its power to veto bills, while the legislature can check the
executive financial extravagancies through its power to approve the executive financial budget.
The judiciary on the other hand can check both the executive and the legislature by declaring
their actions unconstitutional when such actions are contrary to the provision of the constitution.

35
Rule of Law: Meaning and Limitations
The Rule of Law is the supremacy of the constitution as against any form of arbitrariness
in government. Professor A. V. Dicey (the greatest advocate of the concept) in his analysis of
rule of law based his explanation on the following:
(i) That the law of the land is supreme; (ii) That everybody is equal before the law or there
should be impartiality in the administration of justice; and (iii) That the constitution recognizes
the fundamental human rights of individuals.
The application of the rule of law can be limited by many factors, including: (1) Immunity
accorded to certain personalities such as ambassadors, members of diplomatic corps etc. (2)
The type of government in operation; (3) Emergency period such as imposition of curfew, time
of war or crisis during which the liberty and freedom of individuals are curtailed; (4) Arbitrary
use of powers by the law enforcement agents; (5) Non-independence of the judiciary from
undue influences of the executive and the legislature; (6) The integrity of the judge; (7) Delay
of Justice; (8) The customs and tradition of the people; and (9) Poverty and Ignorance.
Summary

- A constitution is the fundamental laws and guiding principles and regulations by which
a country is governed.

- Constitutionalism ensures limited government and compliance with the provisions of

the constitution.

- Other constitutional provisions that help to ensure limited government or uphold the spirit
of constitutionalism include the doctrines of separation of powers and checks and balances
and the notion of rule of law.

Constitution Meaning
Perhaps, we should begin with the saying that all modern states, excluding those under
military dictatorship, are governed by some agreed upon rules which serve as the guiding
principles to those in authorities. These fundamental rules, whether written or unwritten, legal
or extra-legal, flexible or rigid, are called constitution. This suggests that a constitution contains
the fundamental principles or rules including those that state the fundamental objectives of a
state, the powers and functions of leaders, the organs of government and their limits,
fundamental human rights, liberties, duties of citizens, etc. Let us examine some scholarly
definitions of constitution and see the extent they agree with the above description.
The Oxford English Dictionary defines a constitution as “the system or body of
fundamental principles according to which a nation, state or body politic is constituted and
governed” In similar direction is the definition of a constitution offered by the Weber’s
Dictionary as “the fundamental, organic law or principles of a nation, society or other organized
body of men, embodied in written documents or implied in institutions and customs.
Paraphrasing K. C Wheare (1963), Anifowose (1999:157) has the following to say of a
constitution:
A constitution may be defined as a collection of norms or standards
according to which a country is governed. It contains statements

36
 intended to define the relations between rulers and ruled, the basic
institutional frameworks of government, the rights and duties of
citizen, and many important procedures to be followed in connection
with those matters. The constitution defines the conditions for the
exercise of legitimate powers and the units of these powers.

Many other definitions of constitution given by several scholars are in consonance with
the definitions above, even though, they may vary.
Importance/Functions of a Constitution in a State
The following are the importance of a constitution in a state:

1. It serves as a guide to the leaders and public office holders in a state.

2. It states the fundamental objectives and directive principles of a state policy by stating the
state political, economic, socio-cultural and foreign policy objectives.

3. It serves as a check on dictatorial tendencies of a government.

4. It serves as a means of safeguarding the fundamental human rights of the citizens

5. It specifies the duties and obligations of citizens in a state

6. It allocates functions and powers to the levels of government as well as the three organs of
government

7. It helps to uphold democracy by specifying the mode of ascension to political power,

observation of rule of law and spirit of constitutionalism.

8. A constitution may state the form of government, party system etc. in a state

9. It serves as a guard toward maintaining law and order

Sources of a Constitution
The sources of a constitution may include:

1. The convention, customs and tradition of the people.

2. The acts of the parliament as passed over years.

3. Negotiated historical documents as agreed upon by the people or their representatives.

4. Historical experience such as colonialism, civil war, revolution, etc.

5. Commentaries written by constitutional lawyers, politicians and historians.

6. Case law or precedents which constitute courts’ decisions on constitutional

matters which from time to time were brought before them which now have legal backing.
(Awofeso, 2006)

37
 Types of Constitution
Several types of constitution have been identified since ages; these are: written,
unwritten, rigid, flexible, federal, unitary, parliamentary and presidential constitutions. It is
much more convenient to discuss them in pairs.
The Written and Unwritten Constitutions:
By written constitution, we mean those fundamental principles and laws by which a
state is governed are clearly written in a single or series of documents to which reference can
be made. The United States, Canada, Soviet Union, Germany and Nigeria including “all the
constitutions of the newly independent Commonwealth countries are written” (Price, 1970:54).
An unwritten constitution on the other hand, does not imply that no part of the constitution is
written, or all parts are unwritten. It simply means the majority aspect of the constitution are
agreed upon customs, usages and conventions which are usually unwritten, but a few aspect of
the constitution may be written but found in scattered documents. A good example of an
unwritten constitution is the British Constitution which relies mainly on the unwritten aspect of
the constitution but still refers to several other documents such as: the Magna Carta Act, 1215;
Bill of Rights, 1689; Act of Settlements, 1701; Parliament Acts of 1911 and 1949 which were
all written.
It must be noted that the distinction between the written and unwritten constitutions
are not exclusive, as both have their unwritten usages and written documents respectively. Both
can however be distinguished on the basis of their codification or otherwise.
The Rigid and Flexible Constitutions:
Both the rigid and flexible constitutions may be distinguished on the basis of their
amendment procedure. While a rigid constitution requires a special procedure which is usually
considered difficult or cumbersome, the one of a flexible constitution is relatively easy. For
instance, both the 1979 and 1999 Constitutions of Nigeria require a two thirds (2/3) majority of
the National Assembly members in favour of the amendment of any section of the constitution
and its ratification by a two-thirds majority of the 36 State Assemblies. Such a requirement no
doubt, is not easy to realize, except where there are general agreements over issues concern.
Most written constitutions are also rigid. The procedure for amending a flexible constitution
including that of Britain, Italy, New Zealand and Finland, are said to be easy because it requires
only a simple majority in the parliament to effect changes in the constitution. That a constitution
is flexible does not suggest that amendment must be often or frequent. In fact, some rigid
constitutions have been frequently amended more than the British constitution which is flexible.
The Unitary and Federal Constitutions:
Both the unitary and federal constitutions may be distinguished on the basis of the structure of
government in a state, with regard to whether it is a unitary or a federal structure. In a unitary
state, governmental powers are consolidated in a single authority. The central government, who
decides what power can be allocated to other levels of government; can also increase or
decrease or even withdraw the powers given to these levels of government. Thus, the
constitution in unitary states concentrates power in the central government and equally permits
the central government to allocate power the way it desires. A federal state on the other hand

38
presupposes at least, two levels of government which are autonomous in their spheres of
jurisdiction. The constitution in such states divides powers between the federal and its
component units on the basis of exclusive, residual and concurrent lists. Under this
arrangement, the constitution is supreme, while no level of government can revoke the power
of the other. United States, Canada, Switzerland, Australia and India are good examples of
federal states with federal constitution. Since 1954 when Nigeria attained federal status,
subsequent constitutions - the 1960, 1963, 1979 1989, 1995 (Draft) and 1999 Constitutions
were all federal. Most federal constitutions are also written.
The Parliamentary and Presidential Constitutions:
A parliamentary constitution divides power between the head of government, usually
the Prime Minister who exercises real executive power of the state and the ceremonial head,
the Queen or king as in United Kingdom or the President as in Nigeria between 1963 and 1966.
The constitution also allows the fusion of the executive and the legislature and permits the
parliament to pass a vote of no confidence to the cabinet whenever the government fails in
major policies.
The Presidential Constitution on the other hand, concentrates power in a single
executive, the president, who combines the governmental and ceremonial functions. The
president can however, delegate some of these functions to the Vice President. The constitution
also upholds strict separation of powers between the legislative and executive arms of
government. The president can also be impeached by the legislature.
Constitutionalism
Constitutionalism, simply defined, is the strict adherence to, or compliance with the
provision of the constitution. It ensures limited government; hence, it serves as a restraint to the
power of the government. Constitutionalism is said to exit “when government institutions and
political processes are effectively constrained by constitutional rules” Haywood (2007:321)
defines constitutionalism broadly as “a set of political values and aspirations that reflect the
desire to protect liberty through the establishment of internal and external checks on
government power”.
Features of a Constitutional Government
For any government to lay claim to being constitutional or observing the principle of
constitutionalism, such government must necessarily comply with the under-listed:

1. Popular Sovereignty of the electorate – that is, the right of the people to determine their
leaders through election lies with the people.

2. The government should be made responsible and accountable to the people for all its
actions.

3. The rules guiding political activities should be respected and strictly observed.

4. The independence of the judiciary should be guaranteed

5. The notion of rule of law should be respected

39
Separation of Powers
Separation of powers is the division of governmental powers among the three organs of
government – the legislature, the executive and the judiciary; in such a way that each of them
concentrates on a particular aspect of power assigned to it without necessarily overlapping into
the powers of other organs. The three organs are to be separated both in personnel and functions.
The doctrine of separation of powers according to Haywood (2007:339) “proposes that each of
these functions of government (legislation, execution and adjudication) should be entrusted to
a separate
branch of government (the legislature, the executive and the judiciary, respectively)
The French political thinker Charles Louis Montesquieu (1689-1755) who popularized
the doctrine of separation of powers argues that in order to protect individual liberty and prevent
tyranny or dictatorship, governmental powers must not be consolidated in a single body or one
authority. This according to him is because, “power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts
absolutely”.
The Operationalization of Separation of Powers
Separation of powers operates differently in the presidential and parliamentary systems
of government. In a presidential system of government, for instance, there is a clear-cut
separation of powers because of the following practices:
1. The president appoints his ministers who are individually responsible to him, but not to the
legislature

2. The president and his cabinet are not members of the legislature as well as the judiciary

3. The independence of the judiciary is guaranteed and the judiciary is separated from the
executive and the legislature

4. The law-making functions are performed by the legislature while the executive and
judiciary implement and interprets law respectively.

5. There is less interference in the work of an organ of government by another

6. The practice of checks and balances in operation

Unlike the presidential system of government, what we have in a cabinet system of
government is a fusion of powers. This is so because of the following reasons:

1. Members of the cabinet (executive) are also members of the parliament (legislature)

2. In Britain, the House of Lord which is the upper house of legislature is also the highest
court of appeal.

3. Also, in Britain, the Lord Chancellor who is a minister and part of the executive presides
over the court of appeal as well as being a member of the legislature, thereby combining
the functions of the three organs of government.

40
Checks and Balances Meaning
Checks and balances simply mean using power to check power. It is the process by
which the three organs of government check one another’s excesses by using their constitutional
powers. The executive for instance, can check the legislature’s arbitrary law by preventing it
from becoming a law through its power to veto bills, while the legislature can check the
executive financial extravagancies through its power to approve the executive financial budget.
The judiciary on the other hand can check both the executive and the legislature by declaring
their actions unconstitutional when such actions are contrary to the provision of the constitution.
The power of the modern executive, as earlier observed in chapter three, is said to have
increased such that it undermines the power of the other organs of government. Despite this,
the legislature and the judiciary still observe some checks on any possible arbitrary use of power
by the executive.
The legislature for instance, can check the abuse of power of the executive in many ways. These
include:

1. The power to delay or cut down or reject the executive financial bill on a particular project
when the legislature is convinced that such project is not in the public interest.

2. Major policies and bills of the executive require legislative approval before
implementation. The legislature may withhold its approval if such policies or bills are not
in the public interest.

3. The power of the legislature to approve any treaties or agreements entered into with other
countries or international organizations by the executive

4. The appointment of ministers, top civil servants and ambassadors by the president (the head
of executive) are usually subject to legislative approval to farstall favouritism and
marginalization.

5. The legislature through a two-thirds majority can pass into law a vetoed bill by the president
if convinced that the law will benefit the general masses.

6. The head of the executive (the president) can be removed from office by the legislature
through a process of impeachment on ground of gross misconduct.

7. The executive (president) cannot declare a state of emergency or war without the approval
of the legislature.
Rule of Law
The rule of law in the words of Haywood (2007:326) “is the principle that the law should
‘rule’ in the sense that it establishes a framework to which all conduct and behaviour conform,
applying equally to all the members of a society, be they private citizens or government
officials”.
The Rule of Law is the supremacy of the constitution as against any form of arbitrariness
in government. Professor A. V. Dicey (the greatest advocate of the concept) in his analysis of
rule of law based his explanation on the following:

41
i. That the law of the land is supreme;

ii. That everybody is equal before the law or there should be impartiality in the
administration of justice; and
iii. That the constitution recognizes the fundamental human rights of individuals.
Limitations to Rule of Law
The following are the problems (limitations) associated with application of the rule of law:

1. Immunity accorded to certain personalities such as ambassadors, members of diplomatic

corps etc. puts them in positions above the law and makes them superior to other citizens.

2. The type of government in operation. A totalitarian or military regime for instance hinders
the successful application of the rule of law with regard to respect for human rights.

3. Emergency period such as imposition of curfew, time of war or crisis during which the
liberty and freedom of individuals are curtailed.

4. Delegated legislations. These are laws made by bodies other than the legislature. But under
normal condition of due process of law, only the elected representatives of the people (the
legislature) should make law for the people. The reverse is the case with delegated
legislations.
5. Arbitrary use of powers by the law enforcement agents leads to the violation of individual
rights.

6. Non-independence of the judiciary from undue influences of the executive and the
legislature prevents it from protecting the rights of individuals.

7. The integrity of the judge. A dishonest and corrupt judge cannot be impartial in his
adjudication of cases.

8. Delay of Justice. It is often said that justice delay is justice denied. The continuous
detainment of an accused person without passing judgement on him is contrary to the
principle of habeas corpus.
9. The customs and tradition of the people may serve as a constraint to effective
implementation of equality of all.

10. Administrative and special Tribunal Courts. These are set up by the executive to try certain
cases. This practice is against the principle of due process of the law. The trial of cases is
an exclusive function of the judiciary not the executive.
11. Poverty and Ignorance: Both poverty and ignorance can make a person a victim of
arbitrariness. A person who does not know his rights cannot seek redress for justice in the
court of law whenever his rights are violated. Also, a person who knows his rights may not
be able to afford the service of a lawyer; hence, he may not be able to seek redress in the
court of law.

42
The Need to uphold the Rule of Law in a State
It is necessary to uphold the principle of rule of law in a country in order to ensure the
following:

1. To safeguard or guarantee the individual fundamental human rights as entrenched in the

constitution of the country.

2. To guarantee the equality of all citizens before the law.

3. To guide against dictatorial tendencies of rulers or despotic rule so that the actions of leaders
will conform to the provision of the law of the state.

4. To protect the citizenry from arbitrary rule such as detention without trial.

5. To ensure that citizens have access to court to seek redress

6. To guarantee the supremacy of the law over all irrespective of status or position

7. To ensure that law and order are easily attained in the state.

TOPIC 6: Types/forms of government

Introduction to Contents

• Monarchial form of government

• Republican form of government

• Military dictatorship

• Democratic form of government

• Presidential system of government

• Parliamentary system of government

• Unitary system of government

• Federal system of government

• Communalism

• Feudalism

43
 • Capitalism

• Socialism

General Introduction
The human society has witnessed diverse forms of government since time immemorial to
tackle emerging problems and challenges of their time. For instance, it is fashionable today to
practice democratic system because many countries preferred to be regarded as such. Likewise,
many structural arrangements within democratic setting have equally produced several types
of government (e.g. presidential, parliamentary, unitary, federal, etc. systems) in many
countries. The same applies to ideological leanings of socio-economic formations like
capitalism and socialism practice by many countries. Yet, few other forms of government had
existed in the past, while others (monarchial for instance) are gradually fading away or
becoming less important. However, the general practice today is to witness a combination of
two or more of these forms or types of government in a country.
The Monarchical form of Government
The monarchial system of government is a form of government headed by a king or a
queen in whom the overall sovereign power of the state resides. There are two major types of
monarchy – the absolute and the constitutional monarchy. The absolute monarchy is an ancient
form of government in which the monarch (King or Queen) has absolute power. His powers are
not limited by any constitutional provision. The constitutional monarch on the other hand
derives his power from the constitution and as such cannot arrogate more powers to himself
than what the constitution specifies. His actions are limited by constitutional provisions.
Republican form of Government
Republicanism or a republican state is one in which the Head of State is popularly
elected by the people of a sovereign state either as a ceremonial or an executive president for a
fixed term of office. This is in sharp contrast to monarchism or a monarchical state where the
King or the Queen rules for life and ascends political authority through hereditary. The features
of a republican state include among other: (1) The head of state, that is, the president is
popularly elected by the people for a fixed term of office, (2) A republic must be politically
sovereign or independent, (3) Members of the legislature are directly elected by the people, (4)
Governmental functions are usually carried out by officials and not by traditional rulers.
Military Dictatorship
Military rule, in whichever form, is illegitimate and an aberration. This assertion is
confirmed by the following characteristics of a military regime: (1) Rule by force/Non-
democratic (2) No fixed term of office (3) Suspension of the Constitution (4) Rule by decrees
and edicts (6) Curtailment of Fundamental Human Rights, etc.

44
Democratic Form of Government
Democracy is commonly defined as “the government of the people, by the people and
for the people”. It is a system of government under which the people exercise the governing
power either directly or indirectly through their elected representatives.
Some of the characteristics of a democratic government include: (1) periodic election, (2)
universal adult suffrage, (3) competitive party system, (4) free and fair election, (5) majority
rule, (6) independence of the judiciary, (7) rule of law, (8) popular sovereignty, etc. Democracy
has its advantages and disadvantages.
Presidential System of Government
A presidential form of government has a single chief executive in whom both the
government and ceremonial function reside. The following are the features of a presidential
system of government: (1) the president is both the head of state and head of government; (2)
ministers are not members of legislature; (3) There is separation of powers and checks and
balances; (4) Ministers are individually responsible to the president; (5) The president is
removed through the process of impeachment; (6) the president is popularly and directly elected
by the electorate; and (7) The president can appoint his ministers from anywhere;
Parliamentary System of Government
The features of a parliamentary system of government include among others: (1) the
head of state is different from the head of government; (2) The ministers are also members of
the legislature; (3) There is fusion of powers, etc.
Unitary System of Government
A unitary system of government is one in which all governmental powers in a state are
concentrated in a single authority – the central or the national government. A unitary system
has the following advantages: (1) It is more economical to run, (2) It promotes national unity
and strong government, (3) Decisions on national issues are reached quickly, (4) It encourages
the uniform development of the whole country, etc.
The unitary system has the disadvantages of: (1) the possibilities of being transformed into a
dictatorship, (2) suppressing minority rule, (3) discouraging the spirit of healthy competition,
(4) promoting uneven development of the entire country, etc.
Federal System of Government
Federalism is a form of government with at least two levels of government – the central
and the regional governments, which are autonomous and coordinate in their areas of
administration. A federal system (1) promotes unity in a multi-ethnic and culturally diverse
society, (2) promotes healthy economic competition among the component units of the
federation, (3) gives room for independent administration of states according to the socio-
cultural and religious affiliation of that environment, (4) encourages greater participation of the
local people in politics and decision-making process, etc.
Some of the disadvantages of federal system of government include: (1) The system is
very complex and more expensive to run, (2) Decisions on national issues are often delayed for

45
reasons of consultation and lack of proper coordination before their implementation, (3) breads
divided loyalty in a multi-ethnic society and promote, ethnicity or tribalism which can
jeopardize the unity of the country, etc
Communalism
Communalism is the earliest form of government where the people regarded themselves
as one and equal and as such worked toward the common goal of the community. The system
emphasized brotherhood and togetherness. The features of communalism include: (1) common
goal, (2) common ownership of land and other means of production, (3) collective production
of goods and services, (4) division of labour based on age and sex, etc.
Feudalism
Feudalism is a social formation or a form of government based on land ownership by a
few members of the society (the feudal lords) while the majority of the people (the serfs), in
order to survive work on the land.
The major characteristics of feudalism are: (1) Social relationship in a feudal society is
based on land ownership (2) Ownership of land is by few powerful and influential individuals,
(3) The land is the major factor of production, (4) The land is hired out to majority members of
the society (the serfs) to work on and remit certain percentage of the proceeds made on the land
to their owners, (5) There is class domination and exploitation of the lower class (the serfs) by
the upper class (the feudal lords).
Capitalism
Capitalism is a political ideology or economic system in which the means of production
are owned and controlled by private individuals or business association. It emphasizes
liberalism and individualism.
The following are the features of capitalism: (1) Private ownership and control of means
of production, (2) Production of goods and services are based on profit expectations, (3) Free
enterprise, (4) Free market operation, (5) Consumer sovereignty, etc.
Socialism
Socialism is a political ideology or economic system in which all the means of production are
owned and centrally controlled by the state.
The features of socialism include: (1) Public ownership of the means of production, (2)
Production of goods and services are based on societal need, not on profit expectation, (3)
Distribution of goods and services are based on need, want or ability, (4) The economy is
centrally planned by the state (5) Effective control of the market (forces of demand and supply)
by the state, etc.
Summary

- Several forms of government currently exist, while few others existed in the past or are
gradually fading away.

- Each of these forms of government has its peculiar features, advantages and disadvantages.

- Types of government can be classified on the basis of the source(s) of power, types of
executive, power distribution/structural arrangement or means of production.

46
The criteria used for the classification of government into different forms vary from one
scholar/author to another and change from time to time throughout ages. Aristotle, for instance,
classified the 158 Greek City-States then in existence into six on the basis of number of rulers.
The six forms of government were further arranged into pairs accordingly.
1. a. Tyranny
Rule by one person
b. Monarchy

2. a. Oligarchy
Rule by few
b. Aristocracy

3. a. Democracy
Rule by many
b. Polity
In his conclusive analysis, tyranny, oligarchy and democracy are forms of government by one,
few and many respectively, but in private interests. On the other hand, monarchy, aristocracy
and polity are forms of government by one, few and many respectively, but in public interests.
Traditionally, political scientists choose to distinguish between republican form of
government (that is, a form of government in which sovereignty ultimately resides in the
people) and monarchies or tyrannies. In recent times, government has also been distinguished
on the basis of institutional formation such as presidentialism, parliamentarianism, unitarism
and federalism, as well as on the basis of political economy such as capitalism and socialism.
For clarity, we prefer to use four simple criteria as basis for classification of government into
different forms or types.

Classification of Government on the Basis of Source(s) of Authority

The Monarchical form of Government
The monarchial system of government is a form of government headed by a king or a
queen in whom the overall sovereign power of the state resides. There are two major types of
monarchy – the absolute and the constitutional monarchy
The absolute monarchy is an ancient form of government in which the monarch (King
or Queen) has absolute power. His powers are not limited by any constitutional provision. His
utterances and actions are always correct while his laws are binding on his subjects. The
constitutional monarch on the other hand derives his power from the constitution and as such
cannot arrogate more powers to himself than what the constitution specifies. His actions are
limited by constitutional provisions.

The features of a monarchy form of government include:

47
(1)Government by one individual

(2)Political authority is acquired through hereditary or royal families.

(3)The Monarch rule for life

Republican form of Government
Republicanism or a republican state is one in which the Head of State is popularly
elected by the people of a sovereign state; either as a ceremonial or an executive president for
a fixed term of office. This is in sharp contrast to monarchism or a monarchical state where the
King or the Queen rules for life and ascends political authority through hereditary.
Today, virtually all republics are democratic republics with elected representatives and
fixed terms for office holders. Nigeria became a republican state in 1963. Although, Dr. Nnamdi
Azikiwe, the first ceremonial president was not elected. This is because there was a special
clause in the 1963 constitution which allowed the incumbent Governor-General (who then was
Dr. Azikiwe) to automatically ascend the office of presidency.
The following are the features of a republication state:

1. The head of state, that is, the president is popularly elected by the people for a fixed term
of office.

2. A republic must be politically sovereign or independent.

3. In a republican state, members of the legislature are directly elected by the people.

4. Governmental functions are usually carried out by officials and not by traditional rulers.

5. The constitution of a republican state is usually consented to by the people or their

representatives.

6. The principle of popular sovereignty of the people is strictly adhered to in a republican

state.

7. The notion of rule of law is also highly observed.

8. There is political and legal equality of all.

Military Dictatorship
Military rule, in whichever form, is illegitimate and an aberration. This assertion is
confirmed by the following characteristics of a military regime:
1. Rule by force/Non-democratic: Since the military always come to power through force
otherwise known as coup d’état, it has been argued that their government is undemocratic.
This is because an important feature of democracy is elective principle.
2. No fixed term of office: Unlike the civilian regime, the military regime does not have a
fixed term of office. The military government relinquishes power whenever it feels to do
so.

48
3. Suspension of the Constitution: The first thing the military does after seizing power is to
suspend the constitution and legitimize their regime as the ruling government.

4. Rule by decrees and edicts: After suspending the constitution, the military makes law by
decrees and edicts at the federal and state levels respectively.

5. Autocracy: The military government is always autocratic and dictatorial. This is because
they do not owe their existence in government to the electorate hence, they should not be
accountable to them.
6. Curtailment of Fundamental Human Rights: Freedom of association and assembly as in
the case of formation of political parties and pressure groups, the freedom of the press are
most often curtailed under the military regime.
7. Non-Separation of the Executive from the Legislative arm of Government: The
military under normal condition is a part of the executive. But under a military regime, the
same body makes laws through decrees and edicts and implements them.
Frequent takeover of government by the military is a common feature of Third World
countries, especially, in Africa and Latin America where several cases of coup d’état have been
witnessed. A combination of several factors has been attributed to this occurrence. These
include:
(1) Maladministration and mismanagement of the economy

(2) Embezzlement, bribery and corruption

(3) Electoral Malpractices on the part of the politicians

(4) Total breakdown of law and order (political unrest) arising from riots, inter-party conflicts,
violent demonstrations etc.

(5) Ethnic rivalry among the various ethnic groups

(6) Disregard for the principle of rule of law, such as arbitrary arrest, abuse of power and non-
respect for the principle of constitutionalism

(7) Non-regard to public opinion by the government

(8) The desire of the leaders to entrench themselves in office for life.

(9) The desire to taste power by the military

(10) External or foreign influence

Democratic form of Government
Democracy is commonly defined as “the government of the people, by the people and
for the people”. It is a system of government under which the people exercise the governing
power either directly or indirectly through their elected representatives.

49
 Democracy originated in Greece in its direct form and later spread to other parts of the world
in a modified and indirect form, hence, the two major forms of democracy – the direct and the
indirect democracy.
Direct democracy is one in which every qualified adult take part in decision making
directly while the indirect democracy refers to a situation whereby every qualified adult
participate in decision making indirectly through their elected representatives.
The characteristics of a democratic form of government include:

1. Political leaders are elected into office periodically as specified by the constitution – either
every 3 years, 4 years or 5 years as the case may be.

2. There is universal adult suffrage or unlimited franchise. Thus, franchise is not restricted
either on the basis of income, sex or property

3. There is competitive party system – i.e. there are more than one political party competing
for political offices.

4. Elections should be conducted in a free and fair atmosphere and the electoral results should
reflect the wishes of the people.

5. The popular sovereignty of the people must be recognized and respected at all times. Thus,
the electorate in the final analysis has the final say as to who should be their leaders.

6. It is the rule of the majority while at the same time recognizes and safeguards the rights and
interests of minorities.

7. The fundamental human rights of the people are provided and adequately protected.

8. The rule of law and the principle of constitutionalism are respected.

9. There is institutionalization of a fearless and autonomous judiciary, as well as uncensored

press.

10. The constitution is supreme.

Advantages and Disadvantages of Democracy
The advantages of democracy or a democratic government are:

1. Democracy ensures orderly transfer of power through periodic elections as guaranteed by

ballot box as against other forms of transferring power through coup d’etat, revolution, etc.
which are violent and disorder in nature.
2. Decisions in a democratic government usually reflect the wishes of the majority since the
majority of the people have the opportunity to participate in government decisions through
their elected representatives.
3. Democracy ensures the practice of, and respect for the principles of rule of law which
preaches impartiality and equality of all before the law.

50
4. Democratic governments safeguard the individual fundamental human rights such as
freedom of expression, association, conscience, assembly, etc.

5. Democracy ensures that rulers are made accountable for their actions while in office
through various means such as the power of recall, replacement of candidates at election
by the electorate, etc.
6. Democracy guarantees the supremacy of the constitution and upholds the spirit of
constitutionalism.
The disadvantages of democracy or a democratic government include:
1. The existence of many political parties and the accommodation of oppositions may lead to
instability in government.

2. It may lead to a situation often referred to as the ‘dictatorship of the majority’ where the
opinion of the majority is forced on the people while the minority opinion is ignored or
suppressed.

3. Its wide spread consultation and participation may lead to delay in taking decisions as in
the case of passing of year 2000 budget in Nigeria.

4. A country with high rate of illiteracy and poverty may find it difficult to uphold democratic
ideals and practices such as protection of individual fundamental rights and popular
sovereignty of the electorate because of people’s ignorance of the existence of those rights
and inability to seek redress in courts due to financial constraints, as well as selling of their
votes due to poverty
5. It is highly expensive to operate democracy or democratic government considering the
financial requirements for the organization of elections periodically, maintenance of
legislature and other political institutions.
Classification of Government on the Basis of types of Executives:
Presidential System of Government
A presidential form of government has a single chief executive in whom both the
government and ceremonial function reside. The following are the features of a presidential
system of government.
(1) In a presidential system of government, the president is both the head of state and head of
government.

(2) In a presidential system of government ministers are not members of legislature.

(3) There is separation of powers and checks and balances in the presidential system of
government.

(4) Ministers are individually responsible to the president in a presidential system of

government.

(5) The president is removed through the process of impeachment in a presidential system of
government.

51
(6) In a presidential system of government, there is no official opposition but institutional
opposition,

(7) In a presidential system of government the president is popularly and directly elected by
the electorate.

(8) The president can appoint his ministers from anywhere in a presidential system of
government.

(9) Party discipline is weak in a presidential system of government,

Advantages and Disadvantages of Presidential System
The following are the merits of the presidential system of government:

(1) It promotes stability in government and removes any ambiguity over the location of the
executive power of government.

(2) The practice of separation of powers gives room for effective checks and balances.

(3) The president through his power to appoint his ministers from anywhere has the opportunity
of selecting the best ‘brains’ for his cabinet.

(4) Responsibility is easily located in a particular person in a presidential system of

government.
The following are the demerits of the presidential system of government:

1. It has been argued that because the president can appoint his ministers from anywhere the
president may abuse this power by making his close associates his ministers. Their
appointment may also be based on favouritism.
2. The president can also become autocratic if no effective check is imposed on his power.

3. If the president is unable to secure majority support in the parliament, he may have to result
to lobbying so as to gain the support of the legislature on a particular policy. Lobbying itself
involves give and take which may force the president to forgo some important programmes
of the party.
Parliamentary System of Government
The following are the features of a parliamentary (cabinet) system of government:

1. In a parliamentary system of government, the head of state is different from the head of
government.

2. The ministers are also members of the legislature in a parliamentary system of

government.

3. There is fusion of powers in a parliamentary system of government.

52
 4. Ministers are collectively responsible to the parliament in a parliamentary system of
government.

5. The prime minister and his cabinet can be removed through vote of no confidence in a
parliamentary system of government.

6. There is official opposition in a parliamentary system of government.

7. The prime minister is appointed from the majority party in the legislature in a
parliamentary system of government.

8. Ministers are appointed from the party members (legislature) in a parliamentary system
of government.

9. Party discipline is very strong in a parliamentary system of government.

Advantages and Disadvantages of Parliamentary System
The following are the advantages of the cabinet system of government:

1. Due to the fact that the Head of State is separated from the Head of Government, the Head
of State is in a greater position to advise the Prime Minister on important political issues
with his wealth of experience. This practice enhances the quality of government policies.
2. The system promotes harmony and cooperation between the legislature and the executive.
This is because members of the executive are also members of the parliament. This situation
promotes understanding between the two organs of government hence it gives room for
stability in government.
3. The government is made accountable to the people through the power of the parliament to
pass a vote of no confidence to the cabinet.

4. The presence of a strong party discipline encourages effective coordination of the

legislature and the executive as well as the ruling party. This ensures the effective
implementation of the ruling party manifesto.
5. Also, the importance of parliamentary question time makes the government to be conscious
of what policy it should implement.

6. The principle of collective responsibility which applies to collective decision taking by the
cabinet is a pull of knowledge of various ideas.

7. The existence of an official opposition party or shadow government makes the ruling
government to be conscious of the existence of an alternative government. Also
constructive criticism from the shadow government helps to check the abuse of powers by
the ruling government.
The following are the disadvantages of the cabinet system of government:

1. The fusion of powers between the executive and the legislature is not convenient for
effective checks and balances.

53
2. The continuous passing of votes of no confidence to the cabinet by the parliament can make
the government to be unstable.

3. The system makes the executive arm of government to be too powerful. Hence, the cabinet
may easily turn itself to an autocratic one.

4. The idea of collective responsibility does not give room for individual initiatives.

5. The idea of appointment of ministers from the ruling party denies the government of
efficient and competent people to be appointed from outside the party.

6. The opposition party might out of envy criticize the policies, of the ruling government
unnecessarily. This may have a psychological effect on the functioning of the ruling
government.

7. In a multi-party state, the cabinet system encourages coalition government which may lead
to misunderstanding of purpose and objective between or among the collated parties. This
may lead to instability in government.
Classification of Government on the Basis of Power Distribution/Structural
Arrangement:
Unitary System of Government
A unitary system of government is one in which all governmental powers in a state are
concentrated in a single authority – the central or the national government.
The combination of the following factors is responsible for the adoption of unitarism in
any West African country:
1. It is more economical to run both in material and finance hence there is no duplication
of departments.

2. It promotes national unity and strong government as against tribalism and unhealthy
rivalry which are common features of federalism.

3. Decisions on national issues are reached quickly

4. It encourages the uniform development of the whole country

5. There is less political conflict of authority with regard to sharing of powers.

6. Unitarism is often adopted in a country because of its small population and its relatively
small size.

7. Unitarism is often adopted in a country because of its homogeneity in culture, language,

etc.

8. Limited natural and human resources can also make a country to adopt unitary system
of government

54
1.Most unitary constitutions are flexible hence; they can be easily amended to suit changing
circumstances and emergencies.
The combination of the following factors might prevent a country from adopting unitary
system of government:
1. It is easy to transform it to dictatorial or tyrannical form of government

2. It may lead to the suppression of minority interest

3. It discourages the spirit of healthy competition

4. It may lead to uneven development of all parts of the country

5. It may lead to the isolation of the local people from the central government

6. It is unsuitable for a country with a large population and large size

7. It may not be suitable for a country with heterogeneous culture, language, etc. (i.e. cultural
diversity)
Federal System of Government
Federalism is a form of government with at least two levels of government – the central
and the regional governments, which are autonomous and coordinate in their areas of
administration.
The advantages of federalism include:

1. It promotes unity in a multi-ethnic and culturally diverse society – unity in diversity

2. It promotes healthy economic competition among the component units of the federation.

3. It gives room for independent administration of states according to the socio-cultural and
religious affiliation of that environment

4. It is difficult for the national government to become dictatorial because of its high degree
of decentralization of powers.

5. It encourages greater participation of the local people in politics and decision-making

process. The disadvantages (problems) of federalism include:
1. The system is very complex and more expensive to run due to duplication of institutions
and ministries.

2. Decisions on national issues by the federal government are often delayed for reasons of
consultation and lack of proper coordination before their implementation.

3. The system may lead to unique development of the component units

55
4. It may bread divided loyalty in a multi-ethnic society and promote, ethnicity or tribalism
which can jeopardize the unity of the country

5. The possibility of conflict over the exercise of power between the national and the state
governments is most certain.

6. It may encourage unhealthy rivalry among the component units (the states) of the federation

7. It has been argued that federal constitutions are too legalistic and rigid, therefore, do not
adequately take care of emergencies.

8. There is also the problem of threat of secession or attempts to break away by some
component units of the federation.

9. Occasional boundary disputes among the component units and the fear of the domination
of minority groups by the major ethnic groups are also known problems of federal states.
Classification of Government on the Basis of Means of Production:
Communalism
Communalism is the earliest form of government where the people regarded themselves
as one and equal and as such worked toward the common goal of the community. The system
emphasized brotherhood and togetherness.
The features of communalism include:

1. Everybody in the community worked toward the common goal of the community.

2. The land and other factors of production were owned by the community

3. The wealth of the community was equally shared among the people. However, this was
based on individuals’ contribution.

4. There was collective production of goods and services.

5. There was direct democracy in which every adult participated in decision making process
as well as the implementation of the decisions.

6. Division of labour was based on age and sex

7. Goods produced were meant for subsistence consumption

8. There was absence of class exploitation.

9. The law of the land was supreme

Feudalism
Feudalism is a social formation or a form of government based on land ownership by a
few members of the society (the feudal lords) while the majority of the people (the serfs), in
order to survive work on the land. The feudal lords (a combination of the king, the knights and

56
lords) exploit the labour of the serfs who occupy the last position in the hierarchy of a feudal
government.
The major characteristics of feudalism are:

1. Social relationship in a feudal society is based on land ownership

2. Ownership of land is by few powerful and influential individuals

3. The land is the major factor of production

4. The land is hired out to majority members of the society (the serfs) to work on and remit
certain percentage of the proceeds made on the land to their owners.

5. There is class domination and exploitation of the lower class (the serfs) by the upper
class (the feudal lords)

6. The rights of individuals are easily and often violated.

Capitalism
Capitalism is a political ideology or economic system in which the means of production
are owned and controlled by private individuals or business association. It emphasizes
liberalism and individualism.
The following are the features of capitalism:

1. Private ownership and control of means of production

2. Production of goods and services are based on profit expectations.

3. Free enterprise: The right of individuals to enter or leave any business without any
restriction.

4. Free market operation: The prices of goods and services are determined by free operation
of the forces of demand and supply.

5. Consumer sovereignty: That is, the consumers (people) in the final analysis determine what
should be produced through their power to decide what to buy.

6. The state sees to the continuation and success of the capitalist system

7. There is highly developed occupational specialization, economic rivalries and competition.

8. There is class antagonism between the capitalist class (the bourgeoisie) and the working
class (the proletariat).
Merits and Demerits of Capitalism
The following are the merits of capitalism:

1. The system promotes efficiency, hard work and initiative

57
2. It promotes healthy competition and increased productivity

3. It encourages technological innovations

4. It encourages foreign investment as well as economic advancement

The demerits of capitalism are:

1. The system ensures unequal distribution of wealth among the people

2. It encourages exploitation of one class by another

3. Wastefulness of resources: Resources are not properly channeled toward the production of
essential goods and services hence, production is based on profit expectation, but not on
the basis of needs.

Socialism
Socialism is a political ideology or economic system in which all the means of production are
owned and centrally controlled by the state.
The features of socialism include:

1. Public ownership of the mains of production

2. Production of goods and services are based on societal need, not on profit expectation

3. Distribution of goods and services are based on need, want or ability

4. The economy is centrally planned by the state

5. Effective control of the market (forces of demand and supply) by the state

TOPIC 7: Political movements/ideologies

Introduction to Contents

• Meaning and types of ideology

• Anarchism

• Nationalism

• Liberalism

• Totalitarianism

• Nazism

58
 • Feminism

• Marxism

General Introduction
As a system of ideas held by individual or group, ideologies are usually proposed to
explain and justify a preferred socio-political and economic order. To attain this belief system,
strategy or processes and institutional arrangements are also offered by the belief holders. All
ideologies, whether radical e.g. (Marxism) or Liberal e.g. (Liberalism), revolutionary or
conservative tend to follow this order.

Meaning and Types of Ideology

Ideology is the manner of thinking of a person or a group of persons. It is a system of ideas
concerning social and political phenomena hold by an individual and group. Types of political
ideology include anarchism, nationalism, liberalism, totalitarianism, nazism, fascism, marxism,
etc.
Anarchism
Anarchism is a system of thought that rejects control by the government. It is a political idea
that preaches absence of the government.

Nationalism
Nationalism is an idea or a set of ideas or an ideology about nation. It is an act of political
consciousness or state of mind of a group of people who are primarily concerned about the
wellbeing of the collectivity, including the independence of their nation/country from foreign
rule. It is an extension of political idea of the nation and is inextricably linked with the modern
conception of a state.

Liberalism
A political ideology derived from the general belief that every individual can best decide
for himself on issues affecting him. Liberal ideology emphasizes individualism and upholds the
idea of individual liberty and freedom – it emphasizes strict limitation upon government to
ensure full freedom for the individual to serve his needs as he saw fit. Liberalism has both
political and economic implications. At the political level, liberalism is directly connected with
democracy, hence, liberal democracy or free competition for political power. At the economic
level, liberalism is also connected with capitalism or liberal economy (Laises-fairism).
Liberalism is popularly associated with John Locke.
Totalitarianism
Totalitarianism is a political ideology which preaches total control of citizens’ life by the state.
The characteristics of a totalitarian state include: (1) recognition of only one party by the state;
(2) control of weapons and the mass media by the state; (3) prohibition of all oppositional
groups, etc.

59
Nazism
Nazism is an ideology or a set of ideas founded in Germany in 1919 by Adolph Hitler (1889-
1945). Nazism is a political ideology that led to a movement that preached National Socialism
and military ambitions that stressed the use of war as the climax of human achievement and
national unity, and believed in national and social superiority of the German people over the
rest of the people in the world.
German Nazism has been characterized with five basic features, namely: (1) A
Totalitarian State, (2) A One-party State, (3) A “Volkstadt” (Folk State) .That is, superiority of
a social group or a race – the Aryan race, (4) Leader State i.e. the actions of the leaders were
above criticism thus, the leaders ruled dictatorially, (5) Reign of Power or Coercion by the state.
Fascism
Fascism is an ideology or a set of ideas founded in Italy by Benito Mussolini (1883-1945) to
justify his revolutionary movement and dictatorial leadership. Both nazism and fascism are
variations of totalitarianism.
Zionism
Zionism holds the belief that the Jewish population in order to achieve respect must be
gathered onto a single territory and control by a sovereign Jewish State. The State of Israel is
the result of Zionism. Zionism as an ideology has its roots in the age long humiliation and
extermination (especially, in Germany under Hitler) of Jews who were scattered all over
Europe.
Feminism
Feminism is both a critique and an ideology. As a critique, feminism opposes patriarchy that is
“a system of male authority, which oppresses women through the social, political and economic
institutions”. As an ideology, feminism is a belief system which preaches equal rights for
women and their emancipation from all forms of domination exerted by men. Feminism has
equally been regarded as both an intellectual commitment and a political movement that seeks
justice for women and the end of sexism in all forms.
Marxism
Marxism can be referred to as those socio-political and economic ideas of Karl Marx
which in time formed the basis for comprehensive social theory and political doctrine. Thus,
theories such as class theory, surplus value, etc. as well as political doctrines or ideologies like
socialism and communism have their modern usages directly related to the ideas of Karl Marx.
Hence, Marx is unquestionably considered the father of socialism and communism.
Summary

- Ideology is a system of ideas hold by an individual of a group about his/their socio-

political and economic environment.

- There are many types of political ideology, some of which are anarchism, nationalism,
liberalism, totalitarianism, feminism, Marxism, etc.

60
Ideology Defined
Ideology is generally defined as the manner of thinking of a person or group of persons.
Ideology according to the Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary is a “manner of thinking, idea,
characteristics of a person, group, et cetera, especially as forming the basis of an economic or
political system”. Aiken defines ideology as a “system of ideas concerning social and political
phenomena holds by an individual and groups”. The definition of ideology given by
Christenson (1975) is very comprehensive. Ideology according to him is
A belief system that explains and justifies a preferred political
order for society, whether existing or proposed and offers
strategy/processes, institutional arrangement, programmes for its
attainment.

Different types of ideologies have been proposed and adhere to over ages. They include:
Anarchism
Anarchism in the words of Dickerson and Flanagan (1982:70) “is a system of thought
that rejects, control by any group but particularly by the organized group we call the state or
the government”. Anarchism therefore, condemns any form of hindrance to human freedom
and liberty to excel as he wishes or desires. Hence, the government with all its paraphernalia of
authority to direct and command citizens’ behaviour in a state is rejected in its totality because
of its coercive influence on individuals. In this regards, Alexander Berkman (1964:10) declares
that “Anarchism teaches that we can live in a society where there is not compulsion of any kind.
A life without compulsion naturally means liberty; it means freedom from being forced or
coerced, a chance to lead the life that suits you best”. In order to achieve the desired society
Anarchists preach stateless societies and nonhierarchical social relationship; they advocate
voluntary association of individuals based on their understanding and highly developed sense
of co-operation.
Basic Tenets of Anarchism
The major tenets and beliefs of anarchism consist in the following assumptions based
on human nature, namely:
i. Men are benign by nature and only corrupted by government (Rousseau and Locke, resp.)

ii. The state is exploitative and oppressive (Marx) whereas society is natural and free (Plato
and Aristotle).

iii. Man is a social animal (Aristotle), fulfilled through voluntary co-operation, but frustrated
by all coercion (Rousseau).

iv. Reform ‘from above’ bear the imprint of the authority that initiates them, and are therefore
worthless.

v. Social change must be brought about through revolutionary action, ‘perhaps even violent
action’ (Marx and Lenin) (Scrunton, 1983:14-15).

61
Nationalism
Nationalism is an idea or a set of ideas or an ideology about nation. It is an act of political
consciousness or state of mind of a group of people who are primarily concerned about the
wellbeing of the collectivity, including the independence of their nation/country from foreign
rule. It is an extension of political idea of the nation and is inextricably linked with the modern
conception of a state. The encyclopedia international (vol. 12:442), defines Nationalism as:
A state of mind, a sense of belonging to a larger group sharing
common language, history and aspiration. These include a
feeling of responsibility for the destiny of a nation and a
willingness to help its future, primarily concerned with achieving
independence of their country from foreign rule.

Nationalism, according to Anthony Smith (1992:1114) is a term with four main usages. These
are:

1. As a general process of the formation of nations, sometimes called ‘nation-building’

(although that term often includes processes of “state-making)”;
2. As national sentiment or attitudes and consciousness of belonging to a nation, and
aspiration for its well-being, strength and security;

3. As a movement with political goals, the attainment or maintenance of the status of

nation and all that it implies, entailing one or more organizations and activities designed
to achieve those goals; and
4. As a doctrine or, more loosely, an ideology which places the nation at the centre of its
concern and which seeks its autonomy, unity and identity.

Liberalism
A political ideology derived from the general belief that every individual can best decide
for himself on issues affecting him. Liberal ideology emphasizes individualism and upholds the
idea of individual liberty and freedom – it emphasizes strict limitation upon government to
ensure full freedom for the individual to serve his needs as he saw fit. Liberalism has both
political and economic implications. At the political level, liberalism is directly connected with
democracy, hence, liberal democracy or free competition for political power. At the economic
level, liberalism is also connected with capitalism or liberal economy (Laises-fairism).
Liberalism is popularly associated with John Locke.
Totalitarianism
Totalitarianism is a form of government which seeks to control all aspects of the citizens’ life.
In a totalitarian state, there is no aspect of a citizen’s life that is regarded as private either
political, economic, social, religious or even family life. The government can legislate on any
of these aspects. A totalitarian state is authoritarian and dictatorial.
The following are the major characteristics of a totalitarian state:

1. The state recognizes only one political party, i.e. the government party

62
2. Any form of opposition or oppositional groups is prohibited

3. There is official ideology to which all citizens are expected to follow as in the case of Nazi
Germany, fascist Italy or communist states.

4. The mass media (radio, television, newspaper, etc.) is monopolized by the government to
avoid the spread of ideas that are contrary to the state ideology.

5. The government depends much on the use of force in order to achieve its objectives.

6. The economy of the state is centrally directed or controlled by the government.

7. The government monopolizes the control of weapons.

Nazism
Nazism is an ideology or a set of ideas founded in Germany in 1919 by Adolph Hitler (1889-
1945). Nazism is a political ideology that led to a movement that preached National Socialism
and military ambitions that stressed the use of war as the climax of human achievement and
national unity, and believed in national and social superiority of the German people over the
rest of the people in the world.

General Characteristics of Nazism

Apparadorai (1975) characterized German Nazism with five basic features, namely:

1. A Totalitarian State: The National Socialist Party believed in the philosophy of an

allinclusive and all-powerful state. “It offered answer to all questions, a solution to all
problems.” The state is, thus, an end in itself and individuals within the state were
subordinated to the will of the state. The individual had no fundamental rights, he had
only fundamental duties. Absence of freedom of speech and association and total
control of the mass media were common practices under Nazi Germany. “All trade
unions, and political parties, with the exception of the National Socialist Party, were
destroyed; (while) youth association, cultural, sport and recreational bodies,
cooperative societies were all brought under the influence of the state.” There were also
attempts to bring the church under the control of the state. At the economic realm, Hitler
favoured mixed economy with hostility towards the historical ruling class, whose rule
was to be replaced by that of the ‘leader’, that is, Fuhrer (leadership principles). The
survival of private ownership of the means of production and hostility to the labour
movement. Hitler introduced a centrally controlled agricultural scheme.
2. A One-party State: In practice, the emergence of a one-party state, as a necessary part
of the transfer to the state of the power thought necessary to ensuring the maximum
social unity. The National socialist Party was the only party declared by law as “the
bearer of the idea of the German state and inseparably connected with state.”
3. A “Volkstadt” (Folk State): A unique feature of German Nazism was its racial theory
based on two elements:

i. The “blood” of a social group, a race, determines its outlook and mode of thought; and

63
 ii. The Nordic or Aryan race (Nordicism or Aryanism), the family, the Germans belong is
superior to any other race. Thus, its racial purity must be maintained and prevented from
all racial contaminations. Consequently, “In Hitler’s thinking, the true Nordic Master
race could only develop if it were given ‘space’ and that means conquest of
Lebensraum” (living space) in Eastern Europe” as well as vesting in Nordic master race,
Herrensvolk, the right to occupy the living space. In Hitler’s doctrine, the arch enemy
of the Nordic race, and of all true races, was held to be the Jews. Thus, Hitler believed
that the world could only be made safe for the creation of a Master race by the total
extermination of Jews who were considered racial polluters and parasites.
Consequently, the Jews were systematically eliminated in large numbers by German
troops.
4. A “Leader State” The actions of the leaders were above criticism thus, the leaders
ruled dictatorially. They were always right. According to the principle of leadership,
Hitler as a Fuhrer presumably embodied within himself the ability to speak for the
entire German nation. Only Hitler could express the will of the German people. He also
provided religious as well as political values to the Regime.
5. Reign of Power/ Coercion: The state relied on coercion or forces to enforce strict
compliance with its ideals.
Fascism
Fascism is an ideology or a set of ideas founded in Italy by Benito Mussolini (1883-1945) to
justify his revolutionary movement and dictatorial leadership.
General Characteristics of Fascism
All fascist movements, irrespective of their uniqueness of style and organization, share
basic characteristics in terms of their:- 1. Doctrine and goals, and 2. Typical notions
The following are the characteristics of fascism:

1. Fascism postulated a unique identity different from those of left, right and centre.
Hence, fascism was anti-liberal, anti-communist, and also anti-conservative.

2. Ideologically, fascism represented an intense and radical form of nationalism with the
aim of creating a new nationalist and authoritarian state system

3. Although, they differed considerably among themselves on economic goals, all fascist
movements have in common the aim of organizing some new kind of regulated, multi-
class, integrated national economic structure variedly called, “national” corporate”
“national socialist” or “national syndicalist.”
4. All fascist movement aimed either at national imperial expansion or at least at a radical
change in the nation relationship with other powers to enhance its strength and prestige.

5. Fascist doctrines rested on a philosophical basis of idealism, vitalism and voluntarism,

and normally involved the attempt to create a new form of modern self-determined
secular doctrines (although several of the minor fascist movements were remarkably
religious in ethos).

64
 6. All fascist movements attempted to achieve mass mobilization, together with
militarization of political relationship and style.

7. They placed strong positive evaluation on the use of violence

8. In leadership, fascist movements exhibited a specific tendency toward authoritarian

characteristics and personal style of command.

9. A fascist – is a person who holds extremely reactionary ideals and favours dictatorship
Zionism
Zionism holds the belief that the Jewish population in order to achieve respect must be
gathered onto a single territory and control by a sovereign Jewish State. The State of Israel is
the result of Zionism. Zionism as an ideology has its roots in the age long humiliation and
extermination (especially, in Germany under Hitler) of Jews who were scattered all over
Europe.
Feminism
Feminism is both a critique and an ideology. As a critique, feminism opposes patriarchy
that is “a system of male authority, which oppresses women through the social, political and
economic institutions” (McLean and McMillan, 2003:196). As an ideology, feminism is a belief
system which preaches equal rights for women and their emancipation from all forms of
domination exerted by men. Feminism has equally been regarded as both an intellectual
commitment and a political movement that seeks justice for women and the end of sexism in
all forms. Feminists oppose discrimination policies against women in both public and private
spheres; they seek for equality of women in all ramification – political, economic, educationally
and opportunity wise. Feminist are noted to have advanced theories and perspectives on wide
range of issues including: the body, class and work, disability, the family, globalization, human
rights, culture, race and racism, reproduction, science, the self, sex, work, human trafficking
and sexuality.

Marxism
Marxism can be referred to as those socio-political and economic ideas of Karl Marx
which in time formed the basis for comprehensive social theory and political doctrine. Thus,
theories such as class theory, surplus value, et cetera, as well as political doctrines or ideologies
like socialism and communism have their modern usage directly related to the ideas of Karl
Marx. Hence, Marx is unquestionably considered the father of socialism and communism.
Marx’s contemporary and collaborator, Friedrich Engels, also contributed in no small
measure to the entire body of ideas today known as Marxism. This fact was rightly noted by
McLean (1996:312) in his remarks that:
It was Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels who formulated the
original ideas, concepts, and theories which became the
foundation of a doctrine which has since come to be known as
Marxism, but which they themselves designated as ‘scientific
socialism’.

65
 Marxism is a political idea and a movement extended from Marx’s political and
economic theory simplified in forms so as to improve and arouse the public consciousness in
order to revolt against and uproot capitalism and its exploitative tendencies.

TOPIC 8: Political Behaviour

Introduction to Contents

• Meaning, types and components of political culture

• Meaning and agents of political socialization

• Meaning of political participation

• How people participate in politics

• Why people participate in politics

• Obstacles to political participation

General Introduction
Studies in political culture, political socialization and political participation are the offshoot of
behavioural revolution in political science. The focus of these studies is man and his political
behaviour in his environment. Thus, individual attitudes, beliefs, emotion and orientations as
they influence their political actions such as political choice, political; participation or apathy,
etc. in a particular political system are major concern of political behaviour researches.

Meaning, Types and Component of Political Culture

Political culture is a set of attitude, norms, beliefs and orientations, which determine
and governs the political behaviour of people in any political system. It is “a set of attitudes,
beliefs and sentiments which give order and meaning to a political process and which provide
the underlying assumption and rules that govern behaviour in the political ideals and the
operating norms of a polity.”
Gabriel Almond identified three types of political culture namely, parochial political
culture, subject political culture and participant political culture. The major components of
political culture include: (1) Attitudes (2) Beliefs (3) Emotions (4) Norms (5) Orientations (6)
Social values, etc.

66
 Political Socialization: Meaning and Agents
Political socialization is the process through which the members of a society learn and inculcate
the political norms of that society. It is a learning process which educates the citizens of a given
state the totality of their political environment such as their political institutions, political
leaders, political emblems,
etc.
The agents of political socialization are those factors, which aid the learning process of people
in the understanding of their political environment. The agents include: (1) the family, (2) peer
groups, (3) the school, (4) political parties, (5) pressure groups, (6) mass media, (7) personal
experience and (8) role model. Meaning of Political Participation
Political participation “is the voluntary activities shared by members of a society in the
selection of their rulers and directly or indirectly involves themselves in the formation of public
policies”.
How People participate in Politics
There are various forms or ways people participate in politics. They include: (1) Voting
as electorate during elections, (2) Addressing people at campaign rallies, (3) Contesting for
elections as a candidate, (4) Attending campaign rallies and party meetings, (5) Holding public
or party offices, (6) Serving as party agent or party representative for a candidate during
elections at the polling station, (7 Joining a political party as a member, etc.
Why People Participate in Politics
Researches have shown that people participate in politics for different reasons. The reasons
among others include: (1) for economic and material well-being (2) to satisfy friendship and
social relation needs, (3) to understand the world and cause of events, (4) to seek power over
others, (5) to improve their self-esteem, etc.

Obstacles to Political Participation

The hindrances to individual political participation in a state may include social factors like
residence, age, sex, religion, race and education; psychological factors like individual
personality, social status and responsibility, economic and political factors.
Summary

- Political behaviour comprises of three major aspects of individual and group attitudinal
disposition namely, political culture, political socialization and political participation.

- Each has its impact on the attitude and behaviour of individuals and group in a particular
political system.

67
Political Culture
Meaning
Political culture is a set of attitude, norms, beliefs and orientations, which determine
and governs the political behaviour of people in any political system. Political culture according
to Almond and Powell (1966) is
the pattern of individual attitudes and orientation towards politics
among the members of a political system. It is the subjective
realm which underlies and gives meaning to political actions…
Political culture in the words of Lucian Pye is
“the set of attitudes, beliefs and sentiments which give order and
meaning to a political process and which provide the underlying
assumption and rules that govern behaviour in the political ideals
and the operating norms of a polity.”
From the above definitions it is clear that the political culture of any polity is composed of the
aggregate attitudes, beliefs, orientation, emotion and values of the society as related to its
political system and political issues, it does implies that, political culture as rightly observed
by Pye “is the product of both the collective history of a political system and the life histories
of the members of that system.”
Types of Political Culture
The types of political culture according to Gabriel Almond include:

(1) Parochial Political culture: This type of political culture exists in a country where majority
of the citizens know very little or nothing about their political environment and their leaders
and are not willing to participate in political activities. There is mass apathy in a country
where the political culture of the people is parochial.
(2) Subject political culture: This exists in a country where majority of the citizens understand
their political environment and have very good knowledge of their leaders but rarely
participate actively in political activities.
(3) Participant political culture: Majority of the citizens in a country with participant political
culture have very good knowledge of their leaders and understand their political
environment and are equally willing to participate in active politics.

The major components of political culture include: (1) Attitudes (2) Beliefs (3) Emotions (4)
Norms (5) Orientations (6) Social values, etc.

Political Socialization
Meaning
Political socialization is the process through which the members of a society learn and inculcate
the political norms of that society. It is a learning process which educates the citizens of a given

68
state the totality of their political environment such as their political institutions, political
leaders, political emblems, etc.
Agents of Political Socialization
The agents of political socialization are those factors, which aid the learning process of people
in the understanding of their political environment. The agents include:
1. Family
The family is the first contact a child comes into. The family has considerable and
sometimes exclusive influence on the child during his formative years. Many studies
have shown that the family, apart from its social-economic impacts on individuals also,
serves as an important transmitter of political attitudes Children began to acquire
feelings of national identification and loyalty and develop views about political
authorities and symbols before they begin schools. Here, the influence of the family on
the child is indirect. The child unconsciously picks attitudes towards authority, rules
and compliances from family members. In certain instances, there exist a clear-cut
similarities in the attitudes displayed among children in the same family towards
political party preference, partisanship and related attitudes. Studies have also shown
that politically involved individuals tend to be product of politically interested families.
The argument has been made that children from families that show great interest in
listening to news, reading newspapers and discussing political issues, tend to be more
politically active that the other. Hence, parental political interests or lacks of it, is one
of the most important factors determining whether or not an individual becomes
actively involved in politics.
A close relationship also exits between family structure and the child’s interest in the
political system. Studies have shown that “children who see the father as powerful tend
to be more informed and interested in political matters; (while) children who see their
mothers as the dominant authority in the family tend to be less interested in political
and acquire political attitudes at a later period than do children who see the father as the
dominant parent or see both parents as equal in authority” Studies have further shown
that girls at early age within the family show less political interest and awareness than
do boys do. Other available studies have examined the relationship between
disciplinarian family orientation and the possibility of a child acquiring authoritarian
attitudes and dictatorial tendencies; and the effect of broken homes or parental divorce
on the child later personality and political attitude.
2. Peer Group
Apart from the family, the peer group also exerts some influence on members’ political
attitudes. David Raesman and others in the ‘Lonely Crowd’ assert that the peer groups
are replacing parents and other authority symbols as most significant agents of
socialization. Eisentadt in his book From Generation made similar assertion that peer
groups or “age homogenous groups” are necessary supplements to the family for
socialization in complex modern societies. The peer groups no doubt have influential
impact on members political actions, such as voting, party and candidates’ preference,

69
 joining of political party and contesting at elections. The influence exerts on individuals
by their peer groups can be latent or manifest. Besides, such influence cuts-across all
stages of human socialization process-childhood, adolescence and adulthood. Thus, an
individual can be politically socialized by friends or peer groups both at early and latter
age of his life.
3. Educational Institutions the School
The school is the first major institution most children have experience with outside the
limited shell of the family. From the new contact a child learns submission to authority
and obedience beyond the family level, with the teacher acting as his first boss. The
school thus plays the greatest part in teaching attitudes, conceptions, and beliefs about
the operations of the political system. “While it may be argued that the family
contributes much to the socialization that goes into basic loyalty to the country, the
school gives content, information, and concepts which expand and elaborate these early
feelings of attachment.” In school, young children and adults are taught the need to
comply with rules and authority of the states, citizen rights and obligations, etc.
Political socialization in school is often more deliberate than that of the family and peer groups.
Here individuals are exposed to concrete political issues such as understanding the functions of
political institutions and process of government, rights and duties of citizens etc. this is however
not to say that teachings in school should ideally be partisan. In fact, the reverse is expected of
teachers who are to be non-partisan and less aligned in their teachings of political issues. Studies
have demonstrated that the more educated individual differ from the less educated in many
political respects. The more educated are also more likely to express a sense of trust on political
issues.
4. Social Groupings (Class and Race)
Social grouping such class and race also exert a lot of influence on their members with
reference to their political beliefs and actions. The social class an individual finds
himself by nature of his educational attachment, economic affluence and social status
sometimes dictate his interest and consequently, his actions and decisions on party
attainment, candidates to vote for, etc. In similar manner, racial groupings exert
considerable level of influence on their members.
5. Secondary Groups (Political Parties, Occupational Associations and Religious
Bodies) Secondary group such as political parties, occupational associations or pressure
groups and religious bodies in form or churches or mosques also play considerable role
in the political socialization of individuals. Both political party and pressure group
educate their members on vital capacity as ‘aggregator’ and ‘articulator, of their
members interests respectively. However, the extent to, which religious organizations
involve themselves in political behaviour of their members on political issues, very
form one country to another. The influence exerts by these agents of political
socialization are usually manifest and take place mostly at adulthood.
6. Communication Media
Media of communication such radio, television, newspaper and magazine also exert
some influence on individuals’ political behaviour mostly at adolescence and adulthood.

70
 Most a time these communication media disseminate information to individuals, which
subsequently enrich their political knowledge and consequently influence their political
decisions and actions.
7. Personal Experience and Role Model
Personal experience such as voting at election contesting at election, war and revolution
are already sources of individual political orientation and subsequent political beliefs
and actions. In similar manner, the importance of role model on children and
adolescents cannot be underestimated. At early part of their age children develop special
interest on individuals who have made history in their life time and subsequently,
consciously or unconsciously begin to emulate attitudinal disposition and orientations
of these individuals. This consequently, may mode their later year personalities towards
their preferred personalities. Thus, their political actions and decisions may toil the line
of their
‘role model’
Political Participation and Apathy Meaning
Political participation according to Maclosky “Is voluntary activities shared by
members of a society in the selection of their rulers and directly or indirectly involve
themselves in the formation of public policies. Political participation to Mayrom Weiner
is,
any voluntary – actions, successful or unsuccessful, organized or
unorganized, episodic or continuous, employing legitimate or
illegitimate methods, intended to influence the choice of public
policies, the administration of public affairs, or the choice of
political leaders at any level of government, local or national.

From the above definitions of political participation, it appears that those actions (e.g.
voting at elections, campaigning, contesting at elections) must voluntarily or willingly come
from the individuals before they can be described as active political participants. Otherwise,
any attempt aimed at coercing people to get involve in these activities is a contradiction of the
above definitions.
How People participate in Politics
There are various forms or ways people participate in politics. They include:

1. Voting as electorate during elections

2. Addressing people at campaign rallies

3. Contesting for elections as a candidate

4. Attending campaign rallies and party meetings

5. Holding public or party offices

71
6. Wearing of party badges and emblems

7. Serving as party agent or party representative for a candidate during elections at the polling
station.
8. Joining a political party as a member

9. Canvassing for party funds by appealing to members for financial assistance 10. Sponsoring
a political party financially and morally

Why do People in Politics?

Robert Lane, in Political Life asked the question: Of what use to a man is politics? In
other words, he was raising the question of why people participate in politics. He has however
suggested a lot of reasons for people political involvement. This according to him includes
rational and calculative reasons. Others include, social, psychological, as well as economic.
Graham Walla in his own contributions says that people participate in politics to pursue
their interest. This statement however, left many questions unanswered. For instance, one may
ask: what kind of interest?
Laswell attempting to answer this question says that people participate in politics as an
expression for the displacement of other things. He also says that people participate in politics
for the purpose of values such as: power, wealth, well-being, skill, enlightenment, affection,
etc.
Talking about economic factor, Laswell argues that men seek to acquire economic
material through political means. This is because economic resources influence political
participation to a significant extent. Some authors believe that people participation in politics
to meet three basic needs:
1. To understand the world and control events.

2. To get along with other; and

3. To express psychic tension

Robert Lane has summed up his view on why people participate in politics by representing
them with six needs. These are:

1. Men seek to advance their economic or material well-being, their income, their property
and their economic security through political means.

2. Men seek to satisfy their need for friendship, and easy social relations through political
mean.

3. Men seek to understand the world and the cause of events, which affects them through
observing and discussing politics.

4. Men seek to relief intra-psychic tensions directly arising from aggressive and sexual
impulses through political expression.

72
 5. Men seek power over others through political channel.

6. Men generally seek to depend and improve their self-esteem through political activities.

Obstacles to Political Participation

The following factors could serve as obstacles or hindrances to the political participation of an
individual in a state, therefore preventing him from participating in politics. These factors
include:
1. Social factors such as:

(a) Residence: The place one lives could either enhance or denies one participation in
politics depending on prevailing situations, e.g. closeness/farness
to polling stations, convenience/inconvenience, etc.

(b) Age: Young and middle age people are more likely to vote at election than elderly ones in
a state where people need to file out before voting.

(c) Sex: The rate at which male and female response to various aspects of political participation
differ from country to country and also determine by prevailing circumstances in individual
country. For instance, more male contest for political offices than female in Nigeria.
(d) Religion: Some individuals do not vote because their religious beliefs are against voting at
elections. People are also known to have voted along religious sentiments.

(e) Race: Countries, which are characterized by official racial discrimination, deny some
people on ground of colour from contesting and voting at elections etc. e.g. South Africa
before the collapse of apartheid regime.
(f) Education: Studies have shown that more educated persons are likely to exhibit their
political right than illiterates, and vice versa.

(g) Social Environment: Ones commitment and social activities could limit his active
participation in politics and vice versa.
2. Psychological factors such as:

(a) Individual personality and social status

(b) Individual responsibility with reference to his social and family commitment

(c) Individual state of mind such as alienation, distrust and hostility or involvement, trust and
confidence as the case may be.
3. Economic factors such as:

(a) The socio-economic status of individual in respect of affluence or poverty

4. Political factors such as:

(a) The type of suffrage whether limited or unlimited

73
(b) Legal enactment with reference to freedom of association or its restriction

(c) The type of government in operation – whether totalitarian or democratic

TOPIC 9: Political parties and electoral administration

Introduction to Contents

• Meaning, functions and types of political party

• Party systems, their advantages and disadvantages

• Differences between political party and pressure group

• Meaning, functions and types of election

General Introduction
Political party and election are two important democratic institutions in a state. The existence
of the former necessarily requires the institutionalization of the latter. Their absence in any
political system confers illegitimacy, thereby preventing effective citizen participation and
good governance.

Meaning, Functions and Types of Political Party

Political party is an organized group of persons with common ideas and ultimate aim to
capturing the machinery of the government so as to implement those ideas. Political party has
been described as “any group, however loosely organized, seeking to elect governmental office-
holders under a given label”.
Political parties perform several functions in a given society among which are: (1)
nomination of candidates for election into political offices, (2) articulation and aggregation of
interest, (3) recruitment and training of political leaders, (4) formation of government including
its policies and programme, etc. The types of political party include mass party, elite party,
ideological party, religious party, broker party and charismatic party.
Party Systems, their Advantages and Disadvantages
There are different types of party system, namely, one party system, two-party system and
multi-party system. One party system exists in a country where only one political party is
legally recognized by the state. One party system could be one party de jure or one party de
facto.

One party system encourages strong government, promotes national unity and rapid economic
development, prevents wastages among other advantages. On the other hand, one party system

74
is less accountable, promotes dictatorship, encourages violent change of government, it is
undemocratic, among other disadvantages of one-party system.

Two-party system exists in a country where two political parties have been wining
substantial number of seats in the parliament persistently. There may be other minor political
parties, but those parties are relatively insignificant, for they win little or no seat in the
parliament. The two-party system has the advantages of streamlining the choices of voters to
two alternatives, reduces the possibility of dictatorship, etc. The two-party system has the
disadvantage of promoting division of the country into two opposing and antagonistic groups,
non-suitability for heterogeneous society,
etc.
Multi-party system exists in a country where there are more than two political parties
and in which there is a fierce competition among the parties. Multi-party system provides for a
wide range of choice of programmes and candidates, makes dictatorship difficult for a single
party, protects the interests of various groups, etc. Multi-party system disadvantages include:
the tendency of leading to a coalition government, encouraging instability in government, etc.
Meaning, Functions and Types of Election
Election is the process through which people or the electorate selects their representatives into
the parliament and other public offices periodically.
The functions of election include: (1) provision of opportunity for periodic choice of
leaders, (2) means of making leaders accountable, (3) confers legitimacy on government, (4)
provides avenue for expressing and measuring public opinion, etc. Types of election include
direct and indirect elections, primary and general elections, bye election, simple majority and
absolute majority electoral systems; proportional representation, etc.
Summary

- Political parties are organized groups of people with the primary objective of winning
election and capturing state political power.

- Political parties are different from pressure groups in many ways.

- Election is the process through which people select their leaders or representatives into
political offices periodically.

- Election performs several important functions in a state and it’s of different types and forms.
Political Party Defined
Political party is an organized group of persons with common ideas and ultimate aim to
capture the machinery of the government so as to implement those ideas. Leon Epstein
describes political party as “any group, however loosely organized, seeking to elect
governmental officeholders under a given label”. Political parties have existed over ages under
authoritarian and democratic powers through elections and revolution. Haywood (2007:272)
defines political party as a group of people that is organized for the purpose of wining

75
government power, by electoral or other means. Whichever way conceived in democratic
societies.
Importance/Functions of Political Party
Political parties perform the following functions:

1. They nominate candidates and contest elections for public offices.

2. Political parties articulate and aggregate interests. These they do by integrating the diverse
interests of individuals and groups under a single umbrella and effectively present them to
the appropriate quarters.
3. They socialize or educate the people political (political socialization/political education)
bymaking them more enlightened on politically issues and actively participate in politics.

4. They provide avenue for recruitment of leaders and training of politicians as potential
personnel for the management of the state.

5. Political parties form the government of a state and therefore constitute a primary source of
state policies and programmes.

6. They form the basis for representation of diverse interests and groups in a society.

7. They perform unifying function, especially in a heterogeneous society with people of

diverse socio-cultural background, by uniting them together under a single umbrella.

8. The party in power forms the government of a state by organizing and staffing the
machinery of government as well as formulating and implementing government policies.
Besides, parties provide the avenue for peaceful change of government.
9. Parties provide an effective communication linkage between the government and the
people. Political parties also perform social function in the society. Economically, they are
also employers of labour.

Type of Political Party

The type of political party in any political system can be identified by the process of its
formation, structure, objectives membership, electoral performance, ideological leaning, etc. as
clearly indicated below.
The following are the types of political party:

1. Mass Party: This type of party usually draws its support from the general masses while
membership is open to all irrespective of status, educational attainment or wealth. No
restriction is placed on membership.

2. Elite party: Membership into this type of party is usually restricted to few rich, powerful
and influential individuals – the elite, in the society.

3. Ideological Party: An ideological party is sometimes called extremist party. Such party is
usually deep-rooted in an official ideology (either extreme right or left) to which every
person should be adhered to, and the refusal of which could attract one’s dismissal from the

76
 party. In most totalitarian states, such party seeks to control all aspects of the citizens’ life
and prohibits all official opposition. Communist and Islamic parties are good examples of
ideological parties.

4. Religious Party: Religious parties are in a sense ideological party, but are more inclined
towards religious beliefs, and mostly found in countries that practice state religion.

5. Broker Party: Broker party is also referred to as compromise party. This type of party is
less committed to a particular ideology and consequently, often appeals for support on the
basis of compromise of individuals and groups interests. Thus, the party becomes a broker
or a rallying point at which compromise could be reached among contending forces on
issues of vital national interest. This explains why such parties adopt moderate policies
when they eventually form the government.
6. Charismatic/Personality Party: This type of party is often formed and organized around
the personality of an individual, usually, the leader of the party.
Party Systems
Party system is identified by the number of political parties operating in a political system and
the power relations between or among them. Parties have been classified under the following
headings.
One Party System
One party system exists in a country where only one political party is legally recognized
by the state. One-party system can be one-party de jure or one party de facto. A one party de
jure is usually legally recognized by constitutional provisions and in which no other party is
permitted by law. De facto one party on the other hand, may exist alongside other parties, but
one party (usually the government party) as a matter of fact always win elections.
Advantages and Disadvantages of One-Party System
The following are the advantages of one-party system:

(1) It encourages strong government through a strong party organization and leadership.

(2) It promotes national unity and political stability by reducing the possibilities of conflict
among various groups.

(3) It promotes rapid economic development through effective mobilization of the people.

(4) It prevents unnecessary waste of money on other political parties.

(5) The absence of opposition parties gives room for quick decision on important issues.
The following are the disadvantages of one-party system:

(1) It limits the choice of the electorate as regard their candidates and party programme.

(2) It can easily degenerate to a dictatorship government

77
(3) It encourages violent change of government (coup d’etat, revolution), which is the likely
alternative to changing government in a one-party state.

(4) It is more difficult to make the government responsible and accountable to the people in a
one-party state.

(5) The system encourages incompetence and corruption on the part of the leaders

(6) The practice is undemocratic because of the absence of competitive parties.

(7) One-party system leads to the oppression of the people, especially, the minorities.
Two-Party System
Two-party system exists in a country where two political parties have been wining
substantial number of seats in the parliament persistently. There may be other minor political
parties, but those parties are relatively insignificant, for they win little or no seat in the
parliament. For instance, the existence of two-party system in the United States – The
Republican and the Democratic parties, or in Britain – the Conservative and the Labour parties,
does not mean that other parties do not exist. There are many other parties, but they rarely win
substantial seats in the parliament.
Advantages and Disadvantages of Two-part System
The following are the advantages of two-party system.

1. The voters are given the choice between two or more alternatives.

2. The possibilities of dictatorship government are reduced.

3. The interest of both the majority and the minority are adequately represented by the ruling
and the opposition parties.

4. The activities of the opposition party help to improve the policies of the ruling party.
Through the same means, the government is made responsible and accountable to the
people.

5. It gives room for stable and coherent government.

Operationally, two-party system simplifies and streamlines the electorate wide range of choice
to two. The following are the disadvantages of two-party system:

(1) The system is not economical for a poor country

(2) It may lead to the dictatorship of the majority

(3) It encourages tribalism, especially, in plural societies

(4) It may lead to the division of the country into two opposing and antagonistic groups. This
may not augur well for the progress of the country.

78
(5) The system may not be suitable in heterogeneous societies with different religion and
diverse culture.
Multi-Party System
Multi-party system exists in a country where there are more than two political parties
and in which there is a fierce competition among the parties:
Advantages and Disadvantages of Multi-Party System
The following are the advantages of multi-party system:

(1) It provides for a wide range of choice of programme and candidates among various political
parties.

(2) It is very difficult for a single party to become dictatorship

(3) The interests of various groups are protected.

(4) It is more suitable in a country with diverse culture (heterogeneous society)

(5) It is more democratic because of its high level of competition

(6) In a presidential system of government, multi-party system gives room for an

institutionalized opposition.
The following are the disadvantages of multi-party system:

(1) It has the tendency of leading to the formation of a coalition government which breeds
instability and deadlocks in government.

(2) It may lead to a weak and ineffective government.

(3) It may jeopardize the unity of the country because of its possibility of sectional loyalty

(4) It may lead to instability in government because of its tendency toward frequent change of
government.
Political Party and Pressure Group Compared
The following are the differences between political parties and pressure groups.

(1) Political parties have as their ultimate aim to win election and exercise governmental power
while pressure groups do not seek to win election but to influence governmental policies
that affect their members.
(2) In political parties, membership is open to everybody while membership is restricted to few
people in pressure groups.

(3) Political parties in order to capture the machinery of government nominate candidates for
elections, while pressure groups do not present candidates for elections, but can influence
the election of a candidate.

79
(4) Political parties are well organized and well-structured to cover all levels of communication
in a country while pressure groups are not structurally well organized as political parties.

(5) Political parties have a broad base programmes and policies which often affect the whole
country while the programmes of pressure groups often affect their members alone.

(6) Political parties have manifestoes in which their proposed programmes are stated while
pressure groups do not have
Election Defined
Election is the process through which people or the electorate selects their
representatives into the parliament and other public offices periodically.
Functions of Election
The following are the importance or functions of elections in a country:

1. Elections provide the opportunity for periodic choice of leaders.

2. They serve as avenue through which the citizens exercise their political right of
participation in public affairs.

3. They are means of controlling leaders as well as making them accountable for whatever
they do while in office.

4. Legitimacy (i.e. legal recognition) is conferred on the government through elections.

5. Elections afford the avenue through which the government measure the public opinion
6. The electorate express their public opinion through elections by electing their
representatives
7. Elections afford the opportunity for peaceful change of government.
Types of Elections

(a) The types of election include:

1. Direct Electoral System: It operates where the electorate are directly involved in the
election of their representatives and leaders by themselves.

2. Indirect Electoral System: The electorate here, elect a group of people, otherwise known
as the electoral college, who in turn act on behalf of the electorate to elect their
representatives and leaders.
3. Primary Election: Primary elections are conducted within political parties. The purpose is
to select the party’s flag bearers (representatives) for general elections. Only party members
are qualified to vote in a primary election.
4. General Election: General elections are conducted to select the people’s representatives
and leaders. It covers the entire parts of the country. Every qualified adult, irrespective of
whether member of a political party or not is qualified to vote.

80
5. Bye Election: An election conducted to fill a vacant seat in the parliament due to the death,
resignation or removal of the incumbent officer.

6. Simple Majority Electoral System: Under this system, the candidate who secures the
greatest number of votes is declared elected. The simple-majority system is sometimes
referred to as the “first-past-the-post – or “simple plurality”.
7. Absolute Majority Electoral System: Under this system, for a candidate to emerge the
winner, the candidate must secure at least a 50% plus 1 of the total votes cast. If no clear
winner emerges, another election is conducted (second ballot), while candidates with the
least votes are eliminated until a clear winner emerges.
8. Second Ballot: A second Ballot election is conducted when no clear winner emerges in an
election based on absolute majority principle. In this system, if no candidate secures an
overall majority of votes in his constituency, a second election takes place one week later.
At this second ballot, only the two candidates who got the highest in the first election are
allowed to context.
9. Alternative vote system: The system allows voters to vote once but at least three
candidates in their order of preference. Counting of votes involves gradual elimination of
candidates with least high preference with their votes being re-distributed to others with
higher votes until only two candidates are left and one with the higher ballots is declared
elected. It is mostly used in single-member constituency.
10. Single nontransferable vote system: The system operates under multi-member
constituencies. Under the system voters are allowed to vote for a candidate. Candidates who
secure votes equal to or above the “Droop Quata” are declared elected.
11. Cumulative Vote System: The system allows voters to cast votes equal to the number of
seats to be filled. Thus, a voter can share his votes the way it pleases him. He may decide
to give all to a candidate or share them equally among the candidates. The system favours
the minority group in a society.
12. Proportional Representation: The system accords electoral seats to parties on a basis
commensurate to their popularity with the electorate. Magstadt (2011:334) refers to
proportional representation as “any political structure under which seats in the legislature
are allocated to each party based on the percentage of the popular vote each receives.

81