Need Urgent help with this project?
1.1 Background of the Study
Over the past decades, man countries have gained experienced with referendums, citizens forums, citizens’ hurries, collaborative governance, participatory budgeting and other models in which citizen have a more direct say (Nwayawun 1999). Most people would view this as a positive development. Citizen’s participation is usually considered a valuable clement of democratic citizenship and democratic decision making. Also, theorists in democratic theory have argued that a stronger role for citizens and to minorities, it encourages civic skills and civic virtues, it leads to rational decisions based on public reasoning, and it increases the support for the outcome and the process (Koyle. et al 2008). Fundamental question is whether there is empirical evidence to uphold this argument.
While many academic have written about involving citizens in policy making, empirical research about the actual effects of participation is scarce, empirical studies on, for example, empowered participatory governance (e.g Sung 2006), on deliberate democracy (e.g Fishkin 2009, Hendrinks et al, 2000), or an citizen governance (e,g Van Stakkan, 2003), are mostly case studies on a limited number of cases and focusing on one or two elements of democracy (Adekunle 2004). Hence it becomes parliament to assess the contribution of democracy innovation (Barth 2008). In order to evaluate the impact of citizen participation on democracy, there is need to develop a frame for studying the relation between citizen participation and democracy.
This frame work contains element from different theories on citizen participation. Furthermore, this study includes empirical evidence about from 120 cases in different western countries (Ajayi 2002). The focuses is on these forms of citizens participation, which are related to policy problem and which unusually are prompted or facilitate by government (Koyle et al 2008).
It should be noted that many political theories have also defended representative democracy as most realistic option for modern democracies. According to Schuman Feature in the competition for leadership. The role people merely to produce a government (Schumpeter 1976: 269). And a through the dramatic ideal of populist democracy is clearly present in Dahl’s A preface to democratic theory (1956) Dahl also argues that we need to be realistic. In other words, the best we can do is to try to realize a set of condition that would be necessary and sufficient for measuring democracy in the real world (Dahl 1956). In his view, election are essential to maximizing democracies in the real world conditions in the terms of institution and produce to maximize populist democracy, others are particularly social choice theorist, have shown that it is impossible to define the will of the majority (R: K 1982; Race and David, 1976; Ostrogarsk; 1964). As voters for party programmes containing opinions on all types of issues, elections rarely the pretences of the votes on specific issues.
Some theorist who favour a narrow conception of political participation, emphasize the negative aspects of participation and regard massive participation even as being dangerous (Koyle et al 2008).
Moreover, it shows that citizen involvement produces a number innovation. However, since these positive effects are perceptible only to those taking part, and the number of participants is often small, the benefits to individual democratic citizenship are for more conclusive then the benefit to democracy as whole (Ajayi 2002). Citizen participation is usually considered a valuable element of democratic citizenship decision making. Theorists claim that it has positive effects on the quality of democracy and, over recent decades, many countries have gained experience with referdums (Fadeiye, 2005).
This democratic innovations can be grouped into four main types: deliberative forums, surveys, referendum and participatory policy making projects. Participation in these can have an influence on various elements of democracy, such as an decision making, inclusion, skill and virtues, deliberation and legitimacy. Deliberative forums and surveys are better at promoting the exchange of arguments and a willingness to stiff preference (Fishkin 2009).
Citizen participation contribute to democratic development of knowledge, skills and virtues, no matter which form of citizen participation is examined about the process and the outcome, whereas those who do not participate are less supportive. In order to understand the contribution of different forms of citizen participation to democracy it is important to distinguished between a foams or outcome and decision making versus process and opinion formation. Citizens participating in referendums and participatory policy making have more of on impact on policy than do participate in deliberative surveys and deliberative forums. In addition; there is a tension. Deliberative forums and surveys are better at promoting the exchange of arguments, while referendums and participatory policy making projects are better at involving people. The number of people becoming involved represents a relatively small portion of the population, and particular groups are often under represented.
However, it is not clear whether citizen participation enhances democracy as a whole or whether citizen participation projects also lead to more support, deliberation or skills among those who do not take part (Michels 2013).
Lastly, the analysis points to a number of positive effects on democracy, but the findings also show that the contribution of participation to democracy differs according to the types democratic innovations. It offers a systematic analysis of the contribution of participating to elements of democracy , such as influence on decision-making inclusion, skills and virtues deliberation and legitimacy. (International institute of Administrative sciences, 2014).
1.2 Statement of Problem
Since the advent of democratic rule in Nigeria during the tenure of (Sir Abubakar Tafawa Balewa’s first republic and Alhaji Shehu Shagari in the year 1979-1983), there have been so many people perception of the abuse of democracy in the socio-political development, that is the issue of democracy have been unfavour to the citizen in times of electing leaders. Hence, the researcher need to carry out a research on people perception of the abuse on democracy in the socio-political development, and also what leads to the abuse of the democracy in the Socio-political development. With a view to make a notion of correction about the issue on democracy and also to make the democracy era for the citizen.
1.3 Purpose of the Study
This research will examine on people perception of the abuse of democracy in the socio-political development of Abeokuta South Local government Ogun state Specifically the objections of this study is follows,
i. To examine the various benefits attached to democracy.
ii. To analyse various abuse to democracy in Nigeria socio-political governance.
iii. To examine the problem associated with democracy.
iv. To explore the function of democracy in the socio – political development.
v. To analyse the problems associated with democracy in the socio – political development.
vi. To create problems and challenges confronting democracy.
1.4 Research Questions
The following questions were asked to guide this study;
i. What is the perception of people on the role of democracy on socio – development of Abeokuta south local government area of Ogun state?
ii. Is there any significant effect between the abuse of democracy and socio –political development of Abeokuta south Local Government?
iii. What are the perception of the peoples abuse of democracy in the socio – political development of a country?
iv. How can people’s living standard and welfarism be improved through better democratic practises in Abeokuta South Local government?.
v. What control measures should be put in place to strengthen democratic institutions for socio – political development in Abeokuta South Local Government?
1.5 Scope or Delimitation of the Study
This research project will be carried out in Abeokuta South local Government, Abeokuta, Ogun State in five (5) township namely; Adatan township, Ake township, Itoko township, Kugba township and Sapon township. In terms of content, this study shall be limited to people perception of the abuse of democracy in socio-political development.
1.6 Significance of the Study
This research will enable the government to know people perception towards effect of democracy in the socio – political development of a country.
i. The research will help to express the challenges of democracy on socio – political development of the citizens.
ii. It will also help the citizen and the masses to realise that democracy if used properly can enhance the socio – political development of a country.
iii. The research will help the policy# makers to have a Fall perception of the type of political frame work or political ethnics to formulates on the democratic principles of socio – political ethnics to formulate on the democratic principles of socio – political development to the citizens.
iv. The research will enable the politicians to embrace a democratic process of a free and fair election as well as enhancing the socio – political development of the country.
v. Researchers will benefit from this research work in order for them to know the perception of the abuse of democracy in the socio – political development of a country.
1.7 Definition of Terms
The keywords as used in this study are explained as follows;
Abuse: The use of something in a way that is wrong or hurtful; alcohol/drug /solvent abuse.
Democracy: According to Abraham Lincoln defined democracy as the government of the people by the people and for the people.
Development: An event constituting a new stage in a changing situation.
Perception: The ability to see, hear or become aware of something through the senses.
Political: Connected with the state, government or public affairs.
Social: Connected with society and the way it is organised.