SIR: Reading Gabriel Amalu’s piece with the title, Beware Governor Ugwuanyi, published in The Nation, September 13, I couldn’t help recalling that intense glare on the face of my Logic 101 lecturer each time a student committed the fallacy of drawing a conclusion on the basis of an absurdly false premise. That grave look was often a prelude to his sharp reprimand which typically left the guilty student utterly mortified.
I wonder just how Amalu would have fared under my logic lecturer’s scrutiny particularly when it does in fact, seem that he drew his conclusions long before his rather spurious premises.
For instance, he alleged the existence of a sectional agenda conceived “to tactfully send away those from other zones occupying sensitive positions… and have them replaced with persons from Nsukka zone,” without citing any ministry, department or government agency where the nepotism spoken of had occurred. Of course, he couldn’t have cited any because there is none.
One of the earliest actions Governor Ugwuanyi took after his inauguration was to conduct a human development survey of each local government area in Enugu State. The survey revealed that Nkanu East was the least developed local government area. The subsequent projects sited in that council area such as the four mini bridges along the Amechi-Idodo-Amagunze Road and a few others were a consequence of that survey. If the governor had any sectional agenda as claimed, he could conceivably have influenced the result in a way to suggest the most expedient situation existed in Udenu, his local government area. In fact, Nkanu East council is not even in his Enugu North senatorial zone.
It’s ironic that Amalu whose Agbaja kinsman had held sway for eight years as governor, and under whose administration the most brazen nepotism was perpetrated, could accuse a governor whose broad-mindedness is unparalleled of having a provincial outlook. Surely, Amalu does not require the prodding of any “taxi driver” to realize that Udi Local Government Area alone had 11 permanent secretaries whereas the entire Enugu North (the governor’s zone) with six largely-populated councils had nine permanent secretaries as at the time the governor assumed duties in May last year. The situation has remained largely the same baring the 10 permanent secretaries appointed by Governor Ugwuanyi since his inauguration. Despite such disproportionate spread, Enugu West zone where Amalu comes from still got three.
The writer’s claim of bias in appointment of heads of departments/agencies is just as unfounded. Enugu State has five tertiary institutions comprising Enugu State Polytechnic, Iwollo; Enugu State University of Science and Technology (ESUT); ESUT Teaching Hospital; Institute of Management Technology (IMT) and College of Education, Technical. Among these, only the rector of IMT is from the governor’s senatorial zone.
Additional statistics reveal the falsehood in the writer’s claim of nepotism against the governor. For instance, the helmsman of the State Civil Service Commission is Martin Ugada, another Amalu’s kinsman. Also, the Secretary to the State Government (appointed by the governor) is from Enugu East zone, just as Chukwuemeka Isaac Nwatu, chair of the State Local Government Service Commission, just to mention a few.
With regard to criticism of Ugwuanyi’s handling of attacks by herdsmen, Amalu might just be educated by these facts: Governors neither have powers over the police nor any arms-bearing law enforcement agency. The result is governors’ seemingly lack of capacity to deploy the police in a manner that serves the purpose of deterrence and prosecution of criminals. It is one of several ills arising from Nigeria’s flawed federalism. Given such scenario, how effective can the Ekiti State anti-grazing law (eulogized by the writer of the piece to which this reply is addressed) be with a police force whose allegiance is to the Inspector-General of Police – and not the governors?
Many observers have been drawing parallels between the step taken in Ekiti and some South-east states, urging governors in the latter to take a similar hard-line stance. But beyond the media buzz, such extreme step creates and the sentimental yearning it feeds, there is hardly any tangible benefit thereof. We should be scandalized by the inability of the police – and the federal government to whom it is answerable – to protect citizens and not be outraged that a governor has refused to succumb to an emotional crowd baying for reprisal.
- Uchenna Nwuzo
Agbani, Enugu State