International Journal of Humanities Social Sciences and Education (IJHSSE) Volume 2, Issue 9, September 2015, PP 52-64 ISSN 2349-0373 (Print) & ISSN 2349-0381 (Online) www.arcjournals.org ©ARC Page | 52 Fostering Democratic Governance in Nigeria through John Rawl’s Political Theory Anthony Anikpe Mbah Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka Abstract: This research aims at critically articulating, examining the Nigerian democracy vis-sa-vis global democracy in the light of John Rawls theory of justice. The work navigated through the landscape of the Nigerian democratic journey from 1 st October 1960 when Nigeria became politically independent up to 2015, when the bell rang “Transition” It evinced that Nigeria is not fully a democratic nation; since the dividend of democracy not adequately attained; especially in the areas of political stability, free and fair election, the majority rule, minority principles and equitable distribution of social and economic goods. The paper further argued that the solution to these social and political problems can be realized if the Nigerian leader and the led entrust the administration of governance in the hands of well-educated individuals who have acquired philosophic acumen and adopt the practice of John Rawls political thought “Principles of Justice as fairness”. 1. PREAMBLE It is a common belief by many nations, individuals that Nigeria has had a long excruciated account of dancing around democracy, but never quite getting it right. For it seems that among the leaders who govern, ignorance and selfishness are in control, Chuba Okadigbo pinpointed that: “Most leaders of National governments of Nigeria do not have the benefit of university education or formal intellectual training they also lack political experience and are on-the-job leaners”. 1 The conception of selfless service and pursuit of good of every citizen’s is not present. Even with the existence of multiple party systems in practice. Based on this, it becomes paramount to critically examine the Nigerian political system “Democracy”. In spite of the numerous efforts being made by some philosophers, scholars, and politicians’ e.t.c to improve the standard of political structure of the modern Nigeria, the concept of democracy still pose a big problem to the citizens. Odimegwu: in an introduction to a work titled Nigerian Democracy & Global Democracy noted that “In its concepts, it runs counter to excellence. In its practice it bespeaks anarchy, so, why the clamour for democracy? Is it the most we can afford”. 2 With these and many more unstated challenges, the goal of this work is to address the proceeding puzzles. Is Nigeria Democratic in nature? How can the dividends of democracy be felt or distributed? Does Nigeria democracy preserve the basics of social justice? And to what extent can John Rawls theory of social justice assist in scrubbing out injustices in Nigerian democracy if there is any? 2. DEMOCRACY BY WAY OF SCHOLARS DESCRIPTIONS The concept “DEMOCRACY” is said to have originated from the ancient Greece “ATHENS” as early as 600 BC. It is a derivative of Greek word “DEMOCRAKIA” meaning “The rule of the people” or “The rule by the people. 3 Ifechukwu in his article: Fostering Democracy in Nigeria: Perspectives from Popper’s Critical Philosophy observes that great Athenian states man “Pericles” speaking in 431 BC defined it in the following clear terms ; Our constitution is named a democracy because; it is in the hands not of the few, but of the many. But our laws secure equal justice for all in their private disputes and our public opinion welcomes and honors talent in every branch of achievement… on grounds of excellence alone… our citizens attend both to public and private duties and do not allow absorption in their various affairs to interfere with their knowledge of the city‟s … we decide or debates, carefully, and in person all matters of police, holding … that acts are foredoomed to failure when undertaken undiscussed. 4 According to Aristotle, Democracy is the rule of many for the good of poor” 5 as opposed to oligarchy which is the rule of the few for the good of wealthy. This distinction was made by him “Aristotle” in