Issues and Strategies in Promoting Democracy and Good Governance: Nigerian and Malaysian Examples
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines both the political structures and institutions of Nigeria and Malaysia with a view of highlighting areas of similarities and differences in their modus operandi. While Malaysia has witnessed a tremendous boost and radicalism after 20 years of Prime Minister Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad's rule, Nigeria since the restoration of democracy in 1999, after a long military rule, did not yield a proper institutionalization of democratic principles. There have been cries against anti- and undemocratic practices of the eleven years old civilian government in Nigeria. The two countries under review operate a Federal Constitution, promote the principles of rule of law, protect the rights and liberties of the citizens but differ in the system of government. Malaysia operates parliamentary system while Nigeria is built on a presidential system. What went wrong and how can democracy be promoted and consolidated? The paper explores answers to the above question. The conclusion of this article is drawn on the premise of providing plausible suggestions that will promote democracy and good governance in the two countries.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".