The Nation Newspaper

Category: Friday

  • Sorry Mr. President, our nation is NOT making progress

    It is not quite decorous that one should answer back to ones President but with all due respect sir, there doesn’t seem to be any other way to react to your Independence Day address to the nation than to point it out to you in a direct, plain, simple and straight forward way, the inherent lapses that seem quite grave, to say the least. What I am saying has to be said devoid of any ambiguity or literary guile because it is very important that it is clearly understood.

    With due respect to you sir, your speech of October 1st was not only way under par, it is a long litany half-truths, contrivances and outright fallacies. After listening and then reading the published texts (just to make sure I heard you correctly,) my conclusion is that we are probably living in two different countries. While the rest of us live in Nigeria, you live in Asokoro Land from where you hop into your luxury jet and fly off to other beautiful places across the world. Obviously you only see the real Nigeria through the eyes of your fawning aides and the screen of the Nigeria Television Authority. That’s acute myopia.

    You said sir that “our nation is making progress” and I say sir that the country is fast receding to the status of a failed state. I will provide substantiation to this later.

    You seem to anchor your speech and thoughts on your so-called Transformation Agenda (TA) which you mentioned liberally in the speech. But sorry sir, what is this TA? As I write this, I honestly proclaim that I do not know the head or tail; the beginning or the end of this Agenda being profusely touted by you and your aides as if it were a magical command to solve all of Nigeria’s problems. Nearly one and half years since your inauguration yet nobody has carefully defined and sold (told) this agenda to the people before we can begin to debate its implementation. Where is this document, what is its essence, what are the deliverables and timelines, what are the signature projects, what are the people to expect at the end of four years? The people deserve to know these things and more as a basis of assessing you after four years. Heaven is my witness I do not know. I offer this space to any reader who knows.

    Mr. President, to transform is to change radically, quickly, dramatically, completely, from good… to best. Transformation is akin to a paradigm shift – you create a model, an exemplar of all that is good. Most obviously Mr. President, the problems of your administration may well lie in your understanding of the word ‘transformation’. Perhaps if you had anchored around a less virile and less organic word may be we would just look the other way and allow you waddle through four years.

    Mr. President if you go to bed with ‘transformation’ you are bound to give birth to extreme children (that word again!). One quick example sir: a transformational leader in your shoes today would handle the corruption monster in Nigeria this way. From day one in office, he would declare all his assets to the last pin publicly to Nigerians; he would insist everyone under his purview, does the same pronto. He would draw a line right there and dare anyone to take a pin he has not earned. At the end of each year through the four-year tenure, he and his appointees would repeat the same process.

    This, Mr. President, is transformation. With this approach, you may never have much need of anti-corruption agencies because you have deployed a stronger force called personal example. You have not done any of this, in fact corruption and not insecurity, is the greatest problem of your administration. Yet you looked Nigerians in the face and told them that: “We are fighting corruption in all facets of our economy and we are succeeding.”

    How could you say that Mr. President? That is a mind-bending untruth; one almost became deranged listening to your anti-corruption treatise. Let it be stated clearly that yours so far, is the most corrupt government in our history. You and members of all arms of this government seem to be sworn to a blood oath to run a deeply corrupt system. You are all in a steamy, carnal relationship with corruption. Under your administration, corruption piggybacks on corruption; corruption violently sodomises corruption. Here is a scenario: a governor loots his state blind and when his tenure ends, instead of the thief being brought to book, the Office of the Attorney –General of the Federation (AGF) in cahoots with the anti-graft agencies, would squeeze the bandit of the loot in the name of plea-bargain and then set him free. This shady, non-transparent, non-accountable transaction is never made public; the monies are never repatriated to the stated. The total amount is never made known by the plea bargain incorporated Office of the AGF. The thief-catcher is himself a mindless thief and it explains why we never had a single ex-governor convicted or jailed. We are in a looters’ paradise.

    Mr. President, just a few days before October 1st, a 24-year-old young Nigerian was arrested at the Lagos Airport trying to ferry $7m (about N1.1b) to Dubai. He said he was working for powerful Nigerians. It never got this bad. Why are we at the nadir now? I will tell you. You, Mr. President, you and your friends hardly fund the budget up to 20%. Mr. President the local governments across the country are all worsted. Nothing is happening there except desolation and death. We never heard a word from you concerning this; what is transformation?

    Now back to your comment that our nation is making progress and you premised that on a 7.1% gross domestic product growth (GDP). With due respect Mr. President, it is not true that there is such a growth and if perchance there were, official corruption eats it all up. You said power supply has improved but most of us could not watch your broadcast due to power outage. Our energy sector is sinking deeper into crisis with fuel scarcity crippling the nation. After 52 years, we cannot exploit our oil, we cannot refine it and we cannot even manage to ship in refined products from other countries. We do not care how you do it but it will be a big shame if you don’t deliver a refinery as you promised, in four years.

    Lastly, you said, “we have improved on our investment environment; more corporate bodies are investing in the Nigerian economy… Nigeria has become the preferred investment destination for investment in Africa.” Common Mr. President you sure didn’t say that. You surely do not suggest that all the small, small chop money that desperate Nigerian Diasporans send to their old ladies back home is actually investment? Is it really? If only you could take another look at your favourite word, TRANSFORMATION, ironically, you are actually sitting on the solution to most of our problems.

    LAST MUG: Governor Rochas’ reality check: Governor Rochas okorocha of Imo State must be a thoroughly disillusioned man now. He may have completely dissipated the wave of the people’s goodwill upon which he rode to office a short while ago. Last Saturday when Deputy Speaker, Emeka Ihedioha was celebrating his mother, Rochas was actually booed by the same people who thought he was a messiah just a few months ago. That was not the first time; he was recently disgraced in a paliamentary poll in Oguta when his party lost woefully. More worrisome, the dim on the streets of Owerri (by hapless Imolites) is that Ikiri (the queer owl, as the ousted governor Ikedi Ohakim was derisively called), is far better than a born criminal. It’s a pity, if only they knew then, what they know now. Meanwhile Imo State is like a wasteland under the spell of a hurricane.

  • National consciousness as camouflage

    National consciousness as camouflage

    It is time once again to mark (celebrate?) the flag independence of our dear country and to lament what turns out to be its unfulfilled promises. Yet while this lamentation comes natural to many who invested a sizeable amount of capital in the prospect of a strong, united, and democratic nation-state, many others are not surprised at the ugly turn of events. There are good reasons for both reactions, though as I would argue, the second group has the benefit of the facts.

    To the first group, it is the case that the struggle for freedom forged a united front against the colonial powers universally condemned as a rampaging force of racist exploiters responsible for the dismemberment of motherland Africa, first through the enslavement and physical separation of its sons and daughters, and second through the balkanisation of its land without the courtesy of involving any of its rulers.

    The resentment of the European master brought Africans to the realisation of their kinship as the dispossessed and, in the words of Frantz Fanon, the wretched of the earth. Pan-African ideas bolstered the resolve of Africans in the Diaspora and on the continent, and decolonisation became a rallying cry for the mobilisation of the people against imperialists and exploiters.

    Interestingly, for the masses of African colonies, it was the colonial factor that brought them together and developed in them the consciousness of a common bond. A semblance of national consciousness was thus generated as the direct outcome of the people’s encounter with the colonial system.

    To those who invested a lot of capital in the development of this consciousness as a result of their leadership of the anti-colonial struggle, and later in the newly independent country, Nigeria in our case, it was this semblance of national consciousness that enticed and entrapped. It enticed them to the possibilities of a truly new and bold experiment which, they thought had a great potential for becoming a reality. While the enthusiasm could be explained by appeal to the investment of time and resources, there were indications even right from the beginning of serious impediments.

    To the second group referenced above, the whole idea of a common nationality or national consciousness has been a ruse all along. The coming together of different groups and forces was motivated by different and in many cases, conflicting interests, with traces of these emerging during the “nationalist” struggles. Indeed, as some analysts have observed, it could be surmised that there was a conscious decision, independently or collectively arrived at, by the differing and conflicting forces, to first gloss over their divisions for the sake of working together to eliminate the common enemy.

    Frantz Fanon’s analysis of “The Pitfalls of National Consciousness” in The Wretched of the Earth captured vividly the imagery of a disjointed and inept national middle class at the dawn of independence. Of course, while Fanon saw something worth commending in the initial act of solidarity against the imperialists, he also worried that it could lead to an anomalous outcome of dog eating dog if and when national consciousness slides into ethnic consciousness: “National consciousness, instead of being the all-embracing crystallisation of the innermost hopes of the whole people, instead of being the immediate and most obvious result of the mobilisation of the people, will be in any case only an empty shell, a crude and fragile travesty of what it might have been.” Fanon laments the “facility with which, when dealing with young and independent nations, the nation is passed over for the race, and the tribe is preferred to the state.”

    The fear and the agony passionately expressed by Fanon are shared by many Africans in and outside of the continent who decry the post-independence rot. But while they blamed the slide into ethnic consciousness as culprit, I would suggest that we take another look at the issues. For this, we must acknowledge the groups that were involved in the original struggle: the masses, the elite, and the coloniser.

    For the most part, the masses were never unmindful of the reality of their primordial attachments. Indeed, for them the ethnic community—the original nation—was their only reality. They were never properly attuned to the reality of the new nation, which was more of an imposition than a voluntarily assumed consciousness. The masses were right at home with their ethnic nationalities.

    The elite, on the other hand, had a love-hate relationship with the new “national” reality. It promised a new lease on life with the prospect of taking over the perquisites of office at the departure of the colonial lords. On the other hand, there was the fear of the Other—the rivals from pre-existing primordial groups competing for the same perks. And so, while national consciousness meant little or nothing to the masses, it proved to have a dual meaning for the elite who must therefore present a bifurcated relationship to it: take full advantage of its promise for self-advancement, and at the same time undermine its potential for genuine national consciousness which supersede primordial attachments. Since national consciousness is an essential prerequisite for national unity, it is not a surprise that the latter has been so elusive.

    In the special case of Nigeria, recent history is no different from the now apparently ancient times of anti-colonial struggles. Consider the so-called North-South divide. It seems clear that the self-interest of the political elite has been the motivating factor of the crisis of mistrust. Northern governors want to re-open the litigated and adjudicated offshore-onshore controversy. They are against the creation of more states in the South and they reject the idea of embedding zonal arrangements in the constitution. The South is against the position of the North in every instance of these issues.

    I like to believe that northern governors believe sincerely that these issues have a direct bearing on the welfare of the northern masses and not just the interest of the elite. To that extent, they must also believe that it is their sacred responsibility to fight for their people. In the same way, the southern governors have similar belief about their position vis-à-vis the welfare of their people. Is there another group that is looking after that other entity that is named NIGERIA? Indeed, does any one of the antagonists in the current debate acknowledge the existence of that entity? National consciousness will be mouthed ad nauseam in this season of remembrance. But it is hard to not see it as a ruse.

    There is one more thing. Both northern and southern political elites get motivated by self-interest. It is human as psychological egoists would argue. But there is a difference. In the case of the Southwest in particular, precedence was created at the dawn of Western Nigeria’s self-government in 1957 when the foremost welfarist of our space, Chief Obafemi Awolowo, consciously aligned his self-interest with the interest of the masses. Awolowo was not a saint. But he knew the game of politics well and he made a calculated effort to ensure that the welfare of the masses was the measure by which his success would be judged. It paid huge dividends politically and morally.

    Since that successful experiment in political engineering, the political elite in the Southwest are hard-pressed to ensure the congruity of their elite motivation with the interests and welfare of the masses. Awolowo ensured that the struggle against colonialism culminated in massive investments in welfare institutions—education, health, employment, rural development—that cater to the basic needs of the people. This was how a fractious people, united only by a common language (with some dialects mutually unintelligible), came to see themselves as one. This was how a Yoruba nation was born out of a myriad of tribal enclaves. And it is a lesson for how a Nigerian nation can emerge out of a multitude of tribes and tongues. That is, if the train has not already left the station.

     

  • New Southeast State: Thanks Gov. Kwankwaso

    New Southeast State: Thanks Gov. Kwankwaso

    Such comforting irony it is that sometimes, adversary brings out the best in you and if you are lucky, some good fortune. This is what may happen to the age-long, half-hearted agitation by Ndigbo for equity and fairness in the distribution of Nigeria’s commonwealth among the federating units. The Igbo nation which was one of the three regions (Eastern Region) of Nigeria at Independence in 1960 has today been viciously carved and sculpted into a tiny appendage entity of southern Nigeria through the instrumentality of the Hausa-Fulani hegemony which held sway for over 35 years since 1960.

    Recently, the governor of Kano State, Alhaji Rabiu Kwankwaso kicked the doughty backsides of the Igbo elite when he let it be known in clear terms that Ndigbo agitating for an additional state is misguided and unreasonable. And one must say it here upfront that Ndigbo have this man to be grateful to who has let it out that the pre-civil war conditions, perceptions and even afflictions are still alive and well. Did our fathers not teach us that when evil persists for one year, it tends to become the norm? One noticed some Igbo leaders hee and haw about Kwankwaso’s statement but if it takes the Kano governor to stir us to life then we should show him nothing but gratitude.

    It was before our eyes that so many voodoo censuses have been held for the sole purpose of keeping the Igbo nation static at her post- independence population while other region’s population had been growing in leaps and bounds. Before our eyes, Southern Cameroun was excised from Southern Nigeria; before our eyes, the oil-rich Bakassi Peninsula was handed to Cameroun just to spite the Eastern Region. We watched as the hegemonistas in military uniform brazenly re-parceled the country into states, federal constituencies, local governments and even electoral wards to suit their design to continue to dominate in perpetuity.

    Never be a bedfellow to an unjust man, says an old adage for you will always wake up on the floor. Governor Kwankwaso is only acting true to type. Traditionally, he is not capable of fair play, equity and justice otherwise, he would have been restrained in his comments knowing that Nigeria’s population censuses, the premise on which his argument is built is deliberately skewed and therefore, unreliable. Kwankwaso would have been circumspect if he realized the deep hurt the entire Igbo nation bears for being subordinated to the size of old Kano State (today’s Kano and Jigawa States). These two states now have more local government councils, more federal constituencies and more INEC wards than the entire five Southeast states. What this means is that in the last 20 years or so, these two states have been getting more federal allocation than the whole of the Southeast put together.

    How could Governor Kwankwaso make such a callous, if not wayward statement knowing that Ndigbo make up about one-third of the phantom nine million population figure he claims that Kano has? It is the same way Ndigbo are littered across all Nigerian towns and cities; refugees in their land, partly because there is an unspoken national agenda to mark them out even when they do not have the ball. This is the punishment and pain Ndigbo have endured and lived with, albeit, gallantly since after the civil war.

    But there is no wallowing in self pity here. Ndigbo actually have themselves to blame for their current situation as this column had posited several times in the past. Fact: if Ndigbo by a certain consensus this instant, are asked to present a new Igbo State for adoption, one doubts if they are capable of presenting one in the next 10 years. Reason: every Amadi and Okoro who has a say wants the new state carved out of his backyard and the new capital sited in his front yard. In short, there is no critical Igbo elite therefore, there is no critical consensus on issues that matter to us. What a pity. Perhaps Kwankwaso has roused us?

    LAST MUG: PHCN sale: why would IBB, OBJ buy power plants they run down: there is something uncanny about former presidents buying up state facilities they allowed to be run down and decay under the guise that government cannot run anything. During the reign of President Ibrahim Babangida, over $12 billion oil revenue was unaccounted for. In the time of President Olusegun Obasanjo, again, over $12 billion was repaid as loan to some rich countries. Today, the country suffer untold infrastructure and power deficit and the nation’s meager power assets are unbundled and privatised to make them more efficient and guess who is buying them? To allow firms (North-South Power Coy and Transcorp) in which Babangida and Obasanjo have interests to buy Nigeria’s power plants is the limit of corruption in Nigeria.

    Right of Reply

    Re: Of Deathways, Highways and Onolememen’s N652 billion

    Ordinarily, one would not have bothered replying Steve Osuji over his article published in last Friday’s (14th September, 2012) edition of the Nation Newspaper titled “Of Deathways, highways and Onolememen’s N652 billion’ but for the malicious falsehood contained therein.

    Osuji apparently trying to create an unsupported parallelism between a recent accident along the Benin-Ore-Sagamu expressway in which four lecturers of the Igbinedion University plunged into Ovia River and the awarded contract for its rehabilitation, claimed that the Federal Executive Council has just approved the award of the repairs of the road to the tune of N652 billion. This is not only false, but a deliberate misrepresentation of facts.

    For the purposes of records, the rehabilitation of the third phase of the Benin-Ore-Sagamu expressway was only approved by the Federal Executive Council on the 5th of September, 2012 for award to RCC Limited at the cost of N65.223 billion and not N652 billion as claimed by Osuji. Our friend Osuji would have made a balanced and beautiful article if he attempted to delve into the recent past condition of the Benin-Ore-Shagamu expressway before the intervention of the present administration. If he did, he would have also told the reading public that barely six months after taking over as Minister of Works, Arc. Mike Onolememen substantively changed the condition of the road and commuters no longer have to spend over 9 hours to shuttle between Lagos and Benin City. Not only that, the on-going works in the first two sections of the road have reached 89% and 91% respectively, making it possible for travellers from Benin to Lagos to make the journey in about four hours. Expectedly, no road has attracted commendations from the public like the Benin-Ore-Sagamu expressway since Arc. Onolememen restored the perennial failed section at Ore.

    It is our joy that all contractors working at various locations of the nation’s roads including the Onitsha-Enugu dual carriageway which he also mentioned, have just been paid by the Federal Ministry of Works and massive works will soon resume in a matter of days as the rainy season ends.

    •Tony Ikpasaja

    S.A (MEDIA) to Hon Minister of Works

    Note: the wrong figure, N652 billion was picked from a national newspaper which reported the FEC meeting. It is simply an error which this column regrets. No malice or deliberate misrepresentation was intended. But the piece is about the rate of fatal accidents on our roads which has become a carnage. Who might the next victim be? Our Federal roads are still largely death traps. That is the story.

  • Ideas that live

    Ideas that live

    Steve Biko was one of the iconic figures of the South African struggle against the racist, oppressive and immoral system of apartheid. Throughout his involvement in the struggle, and especially in his last days, he epitomised the best in the tradition of resistance movement, defying the arrogance of the operators of a system that denied its victims one of the most precious gifts of the creator—freedom and justice. In the end, he was brutally murdered in prison. But he left a lasting legacy with words to guide and advance the cause for which he died. He reminded us that “it is better to die for an idea that lives than to live for an idea that dies.” These words, crafted on the commemorative stone that marked Biko’s final resting place are worthy of the attention of intelligent human beings.

    It is better to die for an idea that lives because in the life of the idea, the immortality of the dead is assured. On the other hand, living for an idea that dies makes one a living dead. We still remember the like of Steve Biko and Martin Luther King Jr. Indeed Dr. King has his memorial monument alongside those of former presidents in the prime real estate of the United States capital while those who tormented him and organised his premature death lived in ignominy, and, in death no one remembers any of them.

    Freedom has long been recognised as the inalienable gift of the creator to human beings. Jean-Jacques Rousseau, the French philosopher of the enlightenment era agonised over the plight of humans in political societies when he observed that “man is born free but is everywhere in chains.” Whether in the bondage of enslavement, colonial domination, racial oppression, or pseudo democratic arrangements that deny the humanity of citizens, the struggle for freedom and justice have always loomed large. These are the ideas that live. It is the struggle for the realisation of these ideals that move nations and societies to the centre stage of history.

    Our societies have not lagged behind in such endeavours even though it is disheartening, as I would argue, that the burden of the struggles has been disproportionately endured by a few while the freeloaders almost always end up the beneficiaries of the successful outcome. For, while the struggle may be long and brutal, it almost always ended up with victory for the ideas that live. It cannot be otherwise. The human being is not made for bondage or injustice. The spirit would always reject oppression and tyranny. And even those that for selfish reasons side with oppression while it lasts will always take full advantage of its demise to advance the same self interest.

    There are copious resources from our history. The struggle against colonial imposition pitted natives against natives, with some siding with the colonisers. And the battle for independence tarried for a while because of indecision on the part of some about its benefits. In the end, those that hesitated and slowed down the process turned out to be the greatest beneficiaries of the struggle.

    Independence was earned on the proverbial platter of gold because there was no formal war of independence. But those who lost individual rights and privileges because they stuck out their necks knew what they endured.

    Then democratic governance descended into the hell of military dictatorship and the struggle for freedom assumed a different dimension as an internal one among citizens with different ideas of governance. While the military might claim that circumstances forced them to take over and defend national integrity, there was no denying the fact that the hard-earned freedom was in jeopardy. Th e same individuals and groups rallied to its cause, fought the military and won the battle, not without a significant loss of lifes and property.

    In the struggle against military tyranny, there was the usual corps of egotists for whom it is better to live for an idea that dies. They were the praise singers, the fifth columnists, and the plain traitors to the cause of freedom. They were the ones who, while not clearly preferring servitude to freedom, sought to advance their interests at the expense of the larger whole and the integrity of the nation. They enjoyed the patronage of their military friends while it lasted but the idea for which they live has since suffered a fatal assault. Now, they cannot proudly reference their once passionately held convictions. Isn’t this sufficient lesson for everyone to steer clear of ideas that die?

    At present there is another battle going on between ideas that live and ideas that die. This is actually not a different battle; it’s just another front of the same old battle. It is still the battle for the fullness of freedom. The nature of our independence from colonisation meant that we are to be one entity without regard to ethnic or national identities. We concurred because it was a condition for freedom. But then we accepted our differences and agreed that the best means of enlarging our freedom is to preserve our various cultures and languages through a federal system of governance universally acknowledged as the most effective method of governance in a multi-national society.

    The abrupt end to the independence and republican constitutions which gave teeth to that understanding dealt a fatal blow to the practice of federalism replacing it with military unitarism. The idea of militarism has since died but the concomitant idea of unitarism has not been discarded. Why?

    The reason that unitarism has not been discarded is because there are still those who live for an idea that dies. There are still those egotists who benefit from the sustenance of decadence and whose sole purpose in life is not the immortality of existence through the promotion of ideas that live. They are attracted to unitarism for as long as they command the levers of power and are in the position to dole out favours. But it is certain that unitarism will go the way of other ideas that die and their present promoters will, again, shamelessly turn out to embrace true federalism and its attendant benefits. In the fullness of time, it will all happen before our very eyes. It always does.

  • A potpourri of Abati, Lady Gaga, Ben Obi and SLS

    A potpourri of Abati, Lady Gaga, Ben Obi and SLS

     

    When a columnist is assailed by a torrent of issues, dire and critical, he often resorts to cooking them all with one pot ( a cauldron if you will). This column has gathered the above in-the-news dramatis personae to x-ray what they have in common or uncommon.

    Hurray, Reuben Abati can bite too!: Ouch, we don’t want to think for a moment that our dear colleague, Dr Reuben Abati has been pressured into posturing like an ‘attack dog’ for the president too. Sorry we have been asked to use ‘attack lion’ at least in the spirit of the corps. While I will not divulge who made this all-important correction, you and I know who has been pressuring our Abati to make his bite as ferocious as his bark lest his office would be relocated near Aso Rock kitchen where Mama can rework his media offerings which she thinks are beginning to lapse into annoying literary essays.

    Well, if he did not want to heed the warnings, the recruiting of a wild, if not hungry ‘lion’ into the mix has snapped our venerable Reuben into quick march. Who would not, what with the ‘initial gra gra’ of the second lion raising dust everywhere and perhaps getting all the freebies. It didn’t matter that Reuben had done quite well in the past 14 months under the extreme and peculiar circumstances he found himself. He had done his very difficult job with unusual aplomb, gradually elevating his office to a quality presidential instrument of public engagement – reflective, authoritative, genuine and germane.

    However, it seems Abati has been pushed to change from the civilized style to the crude Nigerian way. Abati showed us his teeth last Sunday in a widely circulated article: ‘The Jonathan they don’t know’. So much is wrong with the piece apart from the effusion of canker and abuse. Now who are ‘they’? Is it the masses of Nigerians who voted overwhelmingly for Jonathan just last year? Yes Reuben has a ‘new’ job to do now but he is versed enough in the art of public perception; he surely knows that the president lost Nigerians in January when he ambushed them with that vicious New Year gift of ‘subsidy’ removal. Look at the tsunami of incongruities that has trailed that singular, crazy action. Has any problem been solved? Look at the mind-bending corruption unfolding under his principal’s watch. You are right Reuben, we do not know this President any longer.

    Abati  opened his piece snapping at all manner of ‘enemies’ of his principal calling them all manner of names like cynics, ignoramuses, unintelligent, thoughtless, anarchists and alaseju – the extremist. You must remember this word which General Ibrahim Babangida popularized at the peak of his dictatorship prelude to clamping down on the Nigerian free spirit as represented then by lecturers, unionists, activists and of course, newspaper houses. Did Reuben deliberately refrain from using the English word ‘extremist’ in his write-up and settled instead for the Yoruba term, alaseju?

    Need we remind our dear friend that this ignoramus mob of critics has been part of the democratic culture from the beginning of time? One American president once described his horde of critics as “a nattering nabob of negativism.” Let me close with this quote from Abati’s piece: “The clear danger to public affairs commentary is that we have a lot of unintelligent people repeating stupid clichés and too many intelligent persons wasting their talents lending relevance to thoughtless conclusions.” Well Reuben should accept our sympathy but nobody, not even the idiotic columnist will hand him his script to rework before publication. And of course, if he and his principal don’t like the Nigerian smoke, they should quit the Nigerian kitchen.

    A Lady Gaga-ed world: now you may begin to wonder what the enfant terrible of American entertainment world, Lady Gaga has got to do with this column? Nothing really except that she is at number 14 in the Forbes list of 100 world’s most powerful women. The salacious, often ill-clad and flesh-flashing musician is listed as a celebrity.( Hey, my ancient reader, celebrity is now a profession in this new world in case you have not noticed, thank you.) Lady Gaga (pardon me I couldn’t be bothered with her real name) comes ahead of the president of Argentina, the prime minister of Australia, the prime minister of Thailand, the president of Malawi and the president of Liberia. She even comes ahead of Queen Elizabeth II of England. She is rated to be by far more powerful (whatever that means) than numerous women of notable achievement and substance including our own Finance Minister, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala.

    The message Forbes is passing to us is that the world has become so terribly dumbed- down and stupid that it places so much values on a young woman who does little else than dress wildly and showcase her body. Can you see the direction the world is travelling?

    Ben Obi drops Ogbunigwe on Ndigbo:  Chei, our dear elder, Chief Ben Obi, who is adviser to President Goodluck Jonathan on inter-party affairs has lobbed a grenade at his people. In his wisdom, Chief Obi has advised Ndigbo not to contemplate the presidency in 2015 until his boss, the incumbent has decided whether he wants a second term or not. It may sound unbelievable if not ludicrous but that is the way of the Igbo elite, he is the quintessential house negro. Give him a small pot of porridge and he mortgages his homestead. It was the same situation in 2003 when Chief Ojo Maduekwe, then minister in President Olusegun Obasanjo’s administration admonished that it was idiotic for Ndigbo to contemplate the Nigerian presidency ostensibly because his boss wanted a second term desperately.

    What has changed in Igboland since 2003? Nothing, excepting that Elder Maduekwe has remained in one miserable appointment or the other since then. Do these people know what Ndigbo suffer by having fewer states with huge population in Nigeria? How many federal projects has been completed in Igboland since 2003? Do they know why Igboland is today a wasteland for kidnappers, assassins and pimps? Our leaders and elders can’t go home anymore and termites build multiple mole hills in their obi. Our elders now observe traditional rites in the cities. E woo, aru eme na ala Igbo. With men like these, who need leaders and elders.

    Sanusi: the joker in the (Central) Bank: those who gave Malam Sanusi Lamido Sanusi (SLS) some benefit of the doubt would have by last week, given up hope entirely on him. This fellow has proven for sure that he has no clue (this harmful word again) about running the central bank, the pulse of any nation’s economy. First he is too loquacious, too impulsive and he enjoys grandstanding a great deal. This is not the nature and character of supreme money men of the apex bank ilk. They are hardly seen, hardly heard unless in matters of extreme monetary importance.

    Second, who says the banks in the country must be in perpetual reform mode.(it’s the CBN that need a forensic reform). Since 1999, there has been this morbid instinct to continuously tinker with our banks. The result is that the banking system has been thoroughly ravaged by these ill-informed, and one must say, ill-motivated reforms. Now, Sanusi, the current banker of bankers seems to have worked himself into a mire and as we say in my place, a man who has been beaten to the ground can only spray dust and nothing more. Sanusi’s  current irrational action of introducing five thousand naira currency notes only signals that he has unraveled completely and the best thing that can happen to him now is to help him out of that seat in the best interest of all. He has become the joker in the bank.

  • Letter to CBN Governor

    Letter to CBN Governor

    Whoever amongst you sees something abhorrent let him change it physically; but if he is incapable, then, let him change it verbally; and if he is still incapable to do so then let him change it wishfully; however the last option is an evidence of a very weak faith”. Hadith of Prophet Muhammad (SAW).

    Dear Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria, Ordinarily, this open letter would not have been necessary if some other avenues were available for public servants like you to rob minds with the ordinary citizens of Nigeria. Similar letters had been written in the recent past through this column to some other prominent public servants in Nigeria including Mr. President. Though you are being surreptitiously labelled unjustifiably by the Press as the most controversial CBN Governor ever in Nigeria, it is a matter of delight for reasonable Nigerians who follow your focused direction that you are calmly weathering the storm despite unwarranted heat being maliciously generated from certain quarters to ensure your failure.

    You would have probably noticed that ‘The Message’ as a column takes a special interest in your office. This is not because you are a Muslim and in charge of money but because your courageous and patriotic performance so far deserves public cooperation and support. And, by winning the World Banker of the year 2011 award, you have put the malicious sceptics to shame. Ever since you became the CBN Governor in 2010, this column has followed your track record very keenly and has randomly commended or admonished you as the situation warranted. Yet, we have never met one on one.

    By and large, as the 10th Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria you have wonderfully proved your mettle by showing that administrative prowess is surely a property of intellect with which only the Almighty Allah endows whoever He wishes. The very quantum of your impeccable achievements in that exalted office in the past two years conspicuously stand you out of the pack. In a sane country the citizenry should be proud of you.

    However, there are moments in the life of a leader when it may become necessary to look over his shoulder and see if the foot soldiers are still there to man the rear effectively. Perhaps for you this is one of such moments.

    Going down the memory lane, you will recall that though the British Colonialists first brought monetary coins and currency notes to Nigeria in 1892 such monies were not in public circulation until 1912 when the West African Currency Board was established to issue currency notes for the sub-region. Nevertheless, the history of Nigeria’s Central Bank did not take root until 1952 when the report of an enquiry into banking practice in Nigeria was submitted. That enquiry led by G. D. Paton a Briton appointed by the Colonial Administration paved the way for the first Banking Ordinance designed to ensure orderly commercial banking and to prevent any establishment of unviable banks that year. Subsequently, a draft legislation for the establishment of Central Bank for Nigeria was presented to the House of Representatives in March 1958 which became fully implemented on July 1, 1959 when the CBN officially came into existence.

    Since then, the Central Bank Act, 1958 (as amended) and the Banking Decree 1969 (as amended) have constituted the legal framework within which the CBN operates and regulates banks. Also, the wide range of economic liberalization and deregulation measures which began in 1986 with the adoption of a Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP) resulted in the emergence of more private banks and other financial intermediaries. The Banks and Other Financial Institutions (BOFI) Decrees 24 and 25 of 1991, which repealed the Banking Decree 1969 and all its amendments were, therefore, enacted to strengthen and extend the powers of CBN to cover the new institutions in order to enhance the effectiveness of monetary policy, regulation and supervision of banks as well as non-banking financial institutions. Unfortunately in 1997, the General Sani Abacha led Federal Government enacted a new CBN (Amendment Decree No. 3 and BOFI (Amended) Decree No. 4 to remove completely the limited autonomy which the Bank had enjoyed since 1991.

    Thus, the 1997 amendments brought the CBN back under the supervision of the Ministry of Finance an opportunity that opened the gate for reckless looting of the national treasury. The Decree made CBN directly responsible to the Minister of Finance with respect to the supervision and control of banks and other financial institutions, while extending the supervisory role of the bank to other specialised Banks and Financial Institutions. That amendment placed enormous powers on the Ministry of Finance while leaving the CBN with a subjugated role in the monitoring of the financial institutions with little room for the Bank to exercise discretionary powers. In 1998, another CBN (Amendment) Decree No. 37 which repealed the CBN (Amended) Decree No. 3 of 1997 was enacted. The Decree provided a measure of operational autonomy for the CBN to carry out certain traditional functions which enhanced its versatility.

    However, the current legal framework within which the CBN operates is the CBN Act of 2007 which repealed the CBN Act of 1991 and all its amendments. The Act provides that the CBN shall be a fully autonomous body in the discharge of its functions under the Act and the Banks and Other Financial Institutions (BOFI) Act with the objective of promoting stability and continuity in economic management. In line with this, the Act has widened the objects of the CBN to include ensuring monetary and price stability as well as rendering economic advice to the Federal Government.

    Besides, the regulatory powers of the CBN were strengthened by the Banks and other Financial Institutions (Amendment) Decree No. 38 of 1998 which repealed BOFI (Amendments) Decree No. 4 of 1997. By this Decree, the CBN’s powers on banks, especially those relating to withdrawal of licenses of distressed banks and appointment of liquidators of such banks, including the NDIC was restored. Through those amendments, the CBN may vary or revoke any condition subject to which a license was granted or may impose fresh or additional condition to the granting of a license to transact banking business in the country. This is the Act that gives you as the CBN Governor the enormous powers which you now wield within the banking sector albeit to the great advantage of Nigeria and Nigerians.

    Now that we have a controversy at hand over the desirability or otherwise of introducing a new denomination of Nigerian currency it may become pertinent to also look if briefly at the history of Nigerian currency from colonial times. You will remember that the West African Currency Board was initially responsible for issuing currency notes in Nigeria from 1912 to 1959. Hitherto, the various tribes in Nigeria had used various forms of money including cowries and manilas.

    But on July 1, 1959, the Central Bank of Nigeria issued the first Nigerian currency notes and coins thereby forcing the West African Currency Board to withdraw its notes and coins from circulation in the country. It was, however, not until July 1, 1962 that legal tender status was changed to reflect the country’s new status. The notes were again changed in 1968 as a war strategy following the misuse of the country’s currency notes in certain circumstances.

    And on March 31, 1971, the then Head of State, General Yakubu Gowon announced that Nigeria would change to decimal currency on January 1, 1973 in line with the modern monetary policy in the world. He said the major currency unit to be called Naira would be equivalent to ten shillings of the British currency of Pound Sterling while the minor unit would be called kobo 100 of which would make one Naira. The decision to change to decimal currency followed the recommendations of the Decimal Currency Committee set up in 1962 which submitted its report in 1964. But for the January 1966 military coup that led to a civil war, the Nigerian decimal currency would have been in use since 1966.

    The change that took place in January, 1973 was a major one which involved both currency notes and coins. The major unit of currency which used to be one Pound (£1) ceased to exist and the one Naira which was equivalent to ten Shillings (10/-) became the major unit. Yet on February 11, 1977 a new banknote denomination of 20 Naira value was issued as the highest denomination. This was special in two respects. Its issuance became necessary not only as a result of the growth of incomes in the country but also as a preference for cash transactions and the need for convenience. Thus, N20 note became the first currency note in Nigeria to bear the Portrait of a Nigerian citizen, in this case, the late Head of State, General Murtala  Ramat Muhammed (1938-1976) who was killed in a February 13 1976 military coup attempt.  He was declared a national hero on the 1st of October, 1978. The note was issued on the 1st Anniversary of his assassination as a befitting tribute to a most illustrious son of Nigeria.

    Again, on July 2, 1979, new currency notes of three denominations: N1, N5 and N10 were introduced. These notes were of the same size: 151 x 78 mm as the N20 note issued in 1977. In order to facilitate identification however, distinctive colours similar to those of the current various banknotes were used. The notes bore the portraits of three other eminent Nigerians who had been declared national heroes on October 1, 1978. These were Herbert Macaulay; Sir Abubakar Tafawa Balewa and Chief Alvan Ikoku. The back of each of these notes was engraved in such a way as to reflect the cultural traits of the country. But by 1991, when the Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP), had terribly battered the value of the Naira rendering it almost valueless, both the 50k and N1 Notes were reduced to coins. Later, in response to the expansion in economic activities and to facilitate an efficient payments system, the N100, N200, N500, N1000 were introduced respectively in December 1999, November 2000, April 2001 and October, 2005. And on February 28, 2007, N50, N20, N10, and N5 banknotes as well as N1 and 50K coins were reissued with new designs, while a new N2 coin was introduced.

    Since 1991 when SAP rendered the Naira almost valueless, the coined denominations of Nigerian Naira has become moribund having been rejected by the populace thereby turning Nigeria into a country without coins. Despite this however, Nigerians had never queried any need for introducing new currency denomination as they are now doing in respect of N5000 note.

    Now, many questions are begging for answers:

    1.   At a time when corruption is virtually at its crescendo in the country and you as the CBN Governor are calling for a cashless economy what informs the introduction of the highest currency denomination note of N5000?

    2.   Is there no contradiction in advocating for a cashless economy with one side of the mouth and campaigning for introduction of N5000 with the other side as you are now doing?

    3. What is the logic in introducing N5000 note at a time when Nigerians have not been convinced on the need to return to the use of coins which you are now trying to reintroduce?

    4. Why is such a delicate and highly controversial action being unilaterally taken with neither the involvement of the legislature nor the consent of the populace through a referendum?

    5. In a democracy, who should have the way on a vital national policy as new currency? Is it the majority or the minority? Are you aware that an imposition of such a policy by you the CBN Governor, the Presidency and the pseudo politicians called business group may boomerang especially when the same group is seemingly responsible for the current national economic doldrums?

    6. How economically reasonable is it to spend about N40 billion to mint new currency only to gain N7 billion as being claimed by your spokesmen?

    Perhaps you need to be hinted that the general impression in the country about this new monetary policy and which is probably responsible for the overwhelming opposition to it is the suspicion that you may be inadvertently colluding with some corrupt politicians to ditch Nigeria economically.  This impression is a direct opposite of the high esteem in which you were held before now by most Nigerians because of your marvellous performance in the banking sector. In the past one year, two Nigerian public officials have positively rendered the populace nonplussed by their wonderful actions. These are your esteemed self and the Inspector General of Police Muhammad Dikko Abubakar.

    Mr. CBN Governor, you have done well so far. Please, do not allow these chameleonic politicians to use you for their own purpose because they will eventually dump you characteristically and turn back to laugh at you. A leader is known not by the power he wields but by his application of magnanimity in the use of such power. You are already considered by the populace to be a national economic hero. Do not allow any political charlatan to reduce you into a villain. Politicians are best known for doing that. You are not one yet but you know them. A word is enough for the wise. We shall meet again in a foreseeable future to exchange notes God willing.

    •Historical facts in this article were culled from the internet.

  • Deity defenders and prophet protectors

    Deity defenders and prophet protectors

    After the initial shock occasioned by the horror of senseless killings in the name of God, I often wonder if I am alone in my puzzlement over the rationale. The logic of the position of perpetrators of horror on behalf of the deity and/or his prophets goes like this:

    My God has been abused or demeaned.It is right and proper to defend the defenceless.My God is defenceless.
    Therefore it is right for me to defend my God.Defending my God requires inflicting harm on the abuser.Therefore it is right to inflict harm on the abuser.

    If this does not represent the reasoning of the deity defenders, then that reasoning defies logic. What else could be the driving force or motivating factor? Of course, we could discountenance their rationality and that is how we have always dismissed the once-upon-a-time occasional outbursts of religious violence. They are just fanatics, we surmise, and they are on the fringe of rationality.

    While this might be true, I want to pursue a line of reasoning that grants some rationality to the perpetrators of religious violence. I want to assume that they are as rational as everyone else and try to delve into the logic of their conduct. In any case, in light of the fact that these are no longer rare occurrences, it behoves us to pay attention. More to the point, my assumption of some element of rationality driving the agents of death in the name of God appears to be supported by our efforts to dialogue with them.

    Let me also emphasise the point that deity defenders and prophet protectors are not the monopoly of any one religion—at least not confined to any one of the proselytising or Abramic religions. Christianity had its crusade just as Islam had, and still has its jihad. So the position I advance here is an equal opportunity challenge to the logic of any religion that has its share of deity defenders.

    If the argument above fairly represents the logic of deity defenders and prophet protectors credited with rationality, we have a simple task to challenge its soundness.Let the truth of the first premise be assumed—God has been abused and demeaned. And let us grant the truth of the principle that it is right and proper to defend the defenceless.

    The third premise of the argument which appears to present God as a defenceless being is one of two premises that appear to violate the logic of good judgement. Stating that God is defenceless, for all intents and purposes, appears to be more blasphemous than the original act of blasphemy that the deity defender is determined to protest. For it detracts from the omnipotence of God and presents human pretenders to power and strength as superior to the deity.

    Yet, if the assumption that God is defenceless is untrue, the foundation on which deity defenders rest their action is exposed as spurious. But if it is true, then the whole edifice of religion tumbles down. How can anyone rationally believe in a defenceless God or justify confidence in the ability of a weak deity? Given this dilemma, the position of deity defenders is clearly absurd. The truth of the premise that God is defenceless puts them in an awkward position of worshipping a weak and defenceless God. Its falsity puts them in a position of doing on God’s behalf what he can do for himself.

    I think we can all agree that God can defend himself and His prophets don’t need us to fight their cause. This was Martin Luther’s assurance when he suffered tribulation and persecution after he engaged the Church in his historic reformation efforts. “A mighty fortress is our God”, he proclaimed; “a bulwark never failing; our helper he amid the flood of mortal ills prevailing.

    For still our ancient foe doth seek to work us woe; his craft and power are great, and armed with cruel hate, on earth is not his equal. Did we in our own strength confide, our striving would be losing, were not the right man on our side, the man of God’s own choosing? Dost ask who that may be? Christ Jesus, it is he; Lord Sabaoth is his name, from age to age the same and he must win the battle.”

    Among the 99 names of Allah are the ones that describe his power and strength. Allah is As-Salaam, the source of peace and safety; Al-Muhaymin, the Guardian and Protector; Al-Aziz, the Almighty, the defeater who is not defeated; and Al-Fattah, the Victory Giver. All these appear to deny the truth of the position of those who would take it upon themselves to defend God against blasphemers. What else then could be going on?

    It appears to me that what is going on is that we make the deity and the prophets in our own image, and that is the macho man image. Even when we acknowledge that God can defend himself, and when we understand that vengeance is his, we cannot let go and let God because we feel insulted when our God is insulted. It is akin to the story of the dutiful son who feels insulted by an assault on his papa.

    Even when his old man contends that he can take care of himself or has decided to brush aside the insult, the son makes himself the victim. The personalisation of perceived harm to the deity and the prophets goes to the heart of the turmoil of our contemporary experience. Unfortunately, knowing that it has no basis in spirituality or religiosity and that it is purely self-serving will not make it go away.

    The second offending premise is the one that describes the means and the instrument of defending the deity. “Defending my God requires inflicting harm on the abuser.” If you wonder why this proposition is assumed, the answer is that it is the only way to make sense of the violence that has become an integral part of any protest against what deity defenders and prophet protectors consider an abuse of their God.

    It is difficult to see how defending a God or prophet must warrant harming people, including innocent ones who are not responsible for the insult in the first place. After all, the deities and prophets are acknowledged as peace, loving. It cannot be otherwise.

    If they are creators of human beings and are intent on promoting the good of their creatures, they have to endorse peace and prohibit violence and harm. It follows then that whoever claims to defend a deity by inflicting harm on the creatures of the deity are engaged in a fundamental confusion of the mind. And only the deity can cure such confusion.