Governance Practices That Undermine Deliberative Democracy’s Potential to Address Nigeria’s Democratic Governance Problems

Sustainable development goals (SDGs), however, conceptualized would remain a fleeting notion in the absence of good governance and said good governance does not need to have liberal or democratic undertones. Irrespective of how good governance might be conceived, it ought to be structured in a way that aids those marginalized to actualize their socio-economic and political aspirations. It is the continued successes of illiberal constitutional orders like Kuwait, UAE, Macau, Qatar, Singapore, and China to realize this aspiration for their marginalized citizens that distinguish them from the liberal constitutional orders of the United States and other western democracies, who continue to fail their marginalized citizens. This realization is one of the factors that energize the rise of populism in western liberal democracies. Against this backdrop, there has been an increasing focus on what sought of good governance is necessary to actualize SDGs. One solution that has emerged is the incorporation of deliberative democracy ideals into the governance framework of countries. This article's focus is not to further elaborate on their findings. Instead, and relying on Nigeria as a case study, this article identifies governance practices that could constrain the potential of deliberative democracy, and by extension, the actualization of Nigeria's SDGs aspirations. This inquiry is essential because inserting deliberative democracy's precepts into Nigeria's existing governance framework would enable the Nigerian constitutional order to inter alia be more attuned to producing fair and just outcomes for all Nigerians, rather than Nigerian elites as presently obtainable