NEXUS BETWEEN POVERTY AND ELECTORAL VIOLENCE IN NIGERIA’S PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS OF 2011-2019

1.1 Background to the Study Poverty is a multidimensional concept that can be examined from various perspectives. As outlined by the Development Assistance Committee (DAC, 2021), poverty entails numerous forms of deprivation that affect human capabilities. These include insufficient access to food, poor health, limited education, lack of security, inadequate employment opportunities, denial of rights and dignity, restricted voice in governance, and overall food insecurity. Rocha (2019) emphasizes that due to the diversity of poverty experiences across different global regions, there exists an extensive body of literature attempting to define, measure, and develop policies to address poverty. Despite its rich natural, geographical, and socioeconomic endowments, Nigeria remains a paradox—endowed with immense wealth but plagued by severe poverty. Ideally, the nation should rank among the wealthiest countries globally. However, Okpe and Abu (2019) observe a steady and alarming rise in poverty levels, which is widespread and affects a vast portion of the population. As Abiola and Olaopa (2018) note, Nigeria’s poverty situation is a harsh reality that has led to low life expectancy, malnutrition, illiteracy, disease, unemployment, lack of access to credit, and a general sense of hopelessness. Successive governments have implemented various poverty alleviation strategies, yet their outcomes have been largely disappointing (Ovwasa, 2020; Adesopo, 2018; Omotola, 2018). Most analysts agree that these efforts have failed to meet their objectives. According to empirical evidence, Nigeria’s entrenched poverty is, in many ways, a result of deliberate actions by the political elite. It has become a structural barrier to national development and a genuine democratic process. This entrenched poverty has deepened class divisions and political marginalization. The poor, as a result, often resort to various forms of protest—sometimes through criminal activity. Notably, a large proportion of election-related violence in Nigeria is carried out by impoverished individuals seeking financial gain or reacting to systemic exclusion. Between 1954 and 2019, Nigeria conducted eleven presidential elections along with several regional, state, and local elections. Many of these elections were tainted by pre- and post-election violence. The country gained independence in 1960, following its first general elections in 1959. Historians refer to the first period of civilian rule (1960–1966) as the "First Republic." After the 1959 elections, the Northern People’s Congress (NPC) formed a coalition government with the National Council of Nigerian Citizens (NCNC), and the Action Group (AG) acted as the main opposition party. Notable leaders included Ahmadu Bello in the North, Michael Okpara in the East, and Obafemi Awolowo in the West. The Second Republic (1979–1983) adopted a U.S.-style presidential system, led by President Shehu Shagari and Vice President Alex Ekwueme. However, the hopes of Nigerians were dashed by widespread corruption and misuse of public funds, as Ogundiya (2019) describes this era as one in which corruption became institutionalized. The Third Republic was an attempt at transition that never fully materialized. Although a new constitution was prepared in 1989 and plans were made for civilian rule by 1990, military ruler General Ibrahim Babangida postponed the transition to 1993. Businessman M.K.O. Abiola won the 1993 elections in a landslide, but Babangida annulled the results, citing legal concerns. This led to nationwide unrest, with over 100 lives lost, effectively ending the republic before it began. Following the death of General Sani Abacha in 1998, General Abdulsalami Abubakar initiated a transition program. Based on Abacha’s draft constitution, this process culminated in democratic elections and the handover of power to a civilian president on May 29, 1999. The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) registered three parties: the Alliance for Democracy (AD), Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), and All Peoples Party (APP). The AD and APP joined forces to field Chief Olu Falae and Alhaji Umaru Shinkafi, while the PDP presented former military head General Olusegun Obasanjo with Alhaji Atiku Abubakar as his running mate. Despite irregularities and isolated violence, the elections were largely seen as credible, leading to the end of 16 years of military rule. President Obasanjo inherited a nation facing infrastructural decay, a compromised civil service, and a politicized military. He swiftly retired politically active military officers, formed a human rights commission, freed political prisoners, and cancelled fraudulent contracts and licenses. The 2003 elections saw Obasanjo re-elected, defeating Muhammadu Buhari (ANPP) and Emeka Ojukwu (APGA). However, observers—including the EU and civil society organizations—criticized the election as heavily rigged in favor of the ruling PDP (Roberts & Obioha, 2015). INEC and security agencies were accused of complicity in electoral manipulation (Ajayi, 2017). The 2007 presidential election, won by Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, was widely regarded as the worst in Nigeria’s history by local and international observers, including Human Rights Watch and the EU. Allegations of fraud plagued the polls, and questions about Yar’Adua’s health persisted until his death in 2010. Vice President Goodluck Jonathan assumed office and was elected president in 2011. Though considered one of Nigeria’s fairest elections, the 2011 vote was marred by unprecedented post-election violence that left over 1,000 people dead and caused widespread destruction. Electoral irregularities, inflated voter turnout in certain regions, and logistical flaws persisted. For example, the South-South and South-East zones recorded voter turnout rates 50% above the national average, raising suspicions of ballot manipulation. Across Africa, political transitions remain contentious due to the high stakes of office, with leaders using any means—including violence—to retain power. Electoral systems in many African states have not yet fostered the collaboration and negotiation needed in fragile democracies. Elections in Nigeria continue to be marred by violence because elites see them as a gateway to state resources. The 2015 presidential election, won by Muhammadu Buhari (APC), was a watershed moment. Despite fears of national disintegration, the polls concluded relatively peacefully. Nevertheless, 275 cases of electoral misconduct were recorded, with 236 suspects identified, though only 120 were confirmed. Gilbert and Ubani (2015) lament how fraudulent practices and corrupt officials continue to undermine democracy in Nigeria. Nigeria’s elections are often characterized by ballot theft, candidate imposition, voter inducement, rigging, and even assassinations. Party dominance, youth unrest, and militancy intensify the cycle of violence and bad governance. Although past elections have witnessed violence, the 2019 presidential election appeared particularly volatile. The intertwining of poverty, unemployment, and political manipulation by elites has left many youths vulnerable. Often used as tools by powerful politicians, impoverished citizens—especially the youth—resort to violence as a means of asserting influence. This study, therefore, seeks to explore the connection between poverty and electoral violence in Nigeria’s presidential elections of 2011, 2015, and 2019. 1.2 Statement of the Problem Democracy is universally acclaimed for granting citizens the right to elect their leaders, which was a driving force behind Nigeria’s democratic transition in 1999. However, since the return to civilian rule, nearly every election has been accompanied by violence, raising serious concerns about national unity, law and order, and democratic consolidation (Igbuzor, 2020). Although multiple factors such as ethnic diversity, corruption, and perceived electoral injustice contribute to this violence, the growing poverty and unemployment among Nigerian youth remains a critical concern. These youths are often recruited as agents of electoral violence by political actors seeking power by any means necessary. The country’s unemployment crisis has reached alarming levels and poses a serious threat to democratic sustainability if left unaddressed. Electoral violence in Nigeria has a long history—dating back to 1965—and has escalated in recent decades due to failed poverty alleviation programs and worsening socio-economic conditions (Igwe, 2020). This study aims to explore whether there is a relationship between poverty, poor living standards, and electoral unrest. It questions how poverty has created a vulnerable population that can be manipulated by opportunistic politicians to disrupt elections. The core thesis of this research is that poverty significantly fuels electoral violence by producing a large population of unemployed, disenfranchised, and easily influenced individuals. Therefore, this study seeks to critically examine the role of poverty in triggering electoral violence in Nigeria’s presidential elections of 2011, 2015, and 2019. 1.3 Objectives of the Study The broad objective of this study is to examine the Relationship Between Poverty and Electoral Violence in Nigeria’s Presidential Elections of 2011, 2015, and 2019. Other specific objectives includes: i. To examine whether poverty played a role in instigating electoral violence during the 2011, 2015 and 2019 general elections in Nigeria. ii. To ascertain the relative pattern of electoral violence which occurred during the 2011, 2015 and 2019 general elections in Nigeria. iii. To ascertain the significant relationship between poverty and electoral violence during the 2011, 2015 and 2019 general elections in Nigeria. iv. To ascertain the impact of poverty as a catalyst to electoral violence during the 2011, 2015 and 2019 general elections in Nigeria v. To examine the effect of electoral violence on the democratic process of Nigeria. 1.4 Research Questions The study was guided by the following research questions: i. Did poverty play a role in instigating electoral violence during the 2011, 2015 and 2019 general elections in Nigeria? ii. Is there a relative pattern of electoral violence which occurred during the 2011, 2015 and 2019 general elections in Nigeria? iii. Is there a significant relationship between poverty and electoral violence during the 2011, 2015 and 2019 general elections in Nigeria? iv. Was poverty a catalyst to electoral violence during the 2011, 2015 and 2019 general elections in Nigeria? v. What is the effect of electoral violence on the democratic process of Nigeria? 1.5 Hypotheses Ho: Poverty did not play a role in instigating electoral violence during the 2011, 2015 and 2019 general elections in Nigeria. Ha: Poverty played a role in instigating electoral violence during the 2011, 2015 and 2019 general elections in Nigeria. Ho: There is no significant relationship between poverty and electoral violence during the 2011, 2015 and 2019 general elections in Nigeria. Ha: There is a significant relationship between poverty and electoral violence during the 2011, 2015 and 2019 general elections in Nigeria. 1.6 Significance Of The Study It is believed that at the completion of the study, the findings of this study will be of great benefit in ameliorating the menace of electoral violence in Lagos state by proffering effective recommendation on the need to implement poverty alleviation programs in Nigeria, the study will also be of great importance to the care givers and parents on the need to educate their children on the nemesis of electoral violence. The study will also be of great importance to the department of political science as the findings of this study will contribute to the pool of existing literature in the subject matter. 1.7 Scope Of The Study This study will examine whether poverty played a role in instigating electoral violence during the 2011, 2015 and 2019 general elections in Nigeria. The study will also ascertain the relative pattern of electoral violence which occurred during the 2011, 2015 and 2019 general elections in Nigeria. The study will further ascertain the significant relationship between poverty and electoral violence during the 2011, 2015 and 2019 general elections in Nigeria. In addition, the study will ascertain the impact of poverty as a catalyst to electoral violence during the 2011, 2015 and 2019 general elections in Nigeria. Finally, the study will examine the effect of electoral violence on the democratic process of Nigeria. Hence, the study is delimited to Eti-Osa, lagos state. 1.8 Limitations Of The Study In the cause of the study, there were some factors which limited the scope of the study: Availability of research material: The research material available to the researcher is insufficient thereby limiting the study. Time Constraints: The researcher was involved in other departmental activities like seminars, attendance of lectures et.c which limited her time for the research but the researcher was able to meet up with the time assigned for the completion of the research work. Financial Constraints: The researcher was with limited funds, he cannot visit all the areas to get responses from respondents but she was able to get good information concerning the research topic Attitude of respondents: The attitude of the respondents to the study was not encouraging and this affected the study. 1.9 Definition Of Terms Poverty: This is the state of not having enough material possessions or income for a person's basic needs. Poverty may include social, economic, and political elements. Absolute poverty is the complete lack of the means necessary to meet basic personal needs, such as food, clothing, and shelter. Electoral violence: This is levied by political actors to purposefully influence the process and outcome of elections, and it involves coercive acts against humans, property, and infrastructure.