Legitimacy involves the capacity of a political system to engender and maintain the belief that existing political institutions are the most appropriate or proper ones for the society.

No nation, when selecting its leader, can foresee what characteristics in him will eventually gain the upper hand; and the lesson to be learnt from that is that any constitution must be so framed that it is able to prevent the misuse of power by the individual, and that it must be based on the principle of freedom and justice for the community as a whole. It is, then, an irrefutable fact that the democratic form of government, with its guarantees for the inviolability of individual liberty and of judicial security for all, is the right form for any highly developed nation; and to ensure that these guarantees are valid for all its citizens is the paramount duty of democratic policy and legislation.

At the 2020 Daily Trust Dialogue she proved why she is called beauty and brain when she aired her view on the brand of Democracy Nigeria is practicing Hear her What we have in Nigeria now is democratic GOVERNMENT and I don’t think we have democratic system to support it. For instance, if you look at our last two decade of democratic rule, you will notice the high rate of fluctuating numbers of women in both elective and appointive positions. But in truth, democracy ought to be all about equitable representation for all interest groups in the society and sadly in Nigeria we have continuously struggled to achieve this perhaps largely due to the absence of political party ideology which remains a key weakness in the Nigeria setup.

And we believe in democracy -- that the only real source of legitimacy is the consent of the people; that every individual is born equal with fundamental rights, inalienable rights, and that it is the responsibility of governments to uphold these rights.

Of these not right forms of government*… monarchy, when bound by good written rules, which we call laws, is the best of all the six; but without law it is hard and most oppressive to live with. The government of the few must be considered intermediate, both in good and in evil. The government of the multitude is weak in all respects and able to do nothing great, either good or bad, when compared with the other forms of government…; therefore of all these governments when they are lawful, this is the worst, and when they are all lawless it is the best.

Many forms of Government have been tried and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time; but there is the broad feeling in our country that the people should rule, continuously rule, and that public opinion, expressed by all constitutional means, should shape, guide, and control the actions of Ministers who are their servants and not their masters.

There is no doubt in my mind that, from the third-person point of view, monarchy is the most reasonable form of government. By embodying the state in a fragile human person, it captures the arbitrariness and the givenness of political allegiance, and so transforms allegiance into affection.

Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.

The democratic political system owes its legitimacy to the capacity to guarantee and respect human rights in the best of fashions. That was the lesson of Chile. We have reappraised democracy because of what we have lived through as regards human rights. When we speak about human rights, the ethical basis of democracy is at stake.

That is why a thinker like Thoreau said that ‘that government is the best which governs the least.’ This means that when people come into possession of political power, the interference with the freedom of people is reduced to a minimum. In other words, a nation that runs its affairs smoothly and effectively without much State interference is truly democratic. Where such a condition is absent, the form of government is democratic in name.

You can not have free government if you can not bind the people who participate in the government to accept the results of the election. It is the exercise of our inalienable right to life that enables us, and justifies us, in forming legitimate governments. When those governments are formed, we cannot reject them because we don’t like the results.

The Netanyahu government was chosen lawfully, in alliance with the rules of democracy. Those who cry out: "They've deprived us of our country," are, well, no more than crybabies. The rules of democracy haven't been broken. No one has altered the rules, not even the bastards. Yes, but the fact that a government is chosen lawfully, abiding by the rules of democracy, doesn't necessarily mean that the country will be run as a law-abiding state and that democracy will be protected from those who try to undermine and destroy it, including the government itself and the prime minister himself, with his own bare hands.

In my reports to the United Nations General Assembly and Human Rights Council, I said that democracy means the correlation of the will of the people and the governmental policies that affect them. Democratic governance is much more than ritual periodic elections, but entails genuine policy choices, people's power to propose legislation, challenge laws and regulations by referendum, demand transparency and accountability from government.

A regime that has a Constitution which denies the sovereignty of the people and where candidates are selected by the regime and the Parliament can not vote into laws its own proposed bills, is not a system representative of the people. This regime interprets divine laws as it pleases and elections are like those held under the Soviet or Saddam's regime. All this is to make the world believe that they enjoy a certain degree of legitimacy. Elections must be boycotted. To vote for this regime is to prolong its survival. Not to turn out will be the demonstration that the people rejects this theocracy. What the people is asking for is a secular Constitution based on the Universal Charter of Human Rights. Reformists couldn't do anything. We have lost ten years. Time has come for change.