Category: Emeka Omeihe

The 2023 elections are enmeshed in dialectics of sorts. If this dialectical situation involving thesis and antithesis gives rise to a positive outcome (synthesis), our democracy may be better for it. But it could result in negative outcomes.

Contradiction is evident from the actions, inactions and decisions of the major political parties; the utterances of key party personages and efforts to defend decisions by their various party organs.

The basis for this disagreement was evident before the primaries of political parties but was given added impetus by events of the presidential primaries. It is all rooted in the clamour by the southern part of the country for power rotation.

The demand got fillip when 17 southern governors cutting across party lines issued a communiqué after their meeting in Lagos, reiterating their “commitment to the politics of equity, fairness and unanimously agreed that the presidency of Nigeria be rotated between the southern and northern Nigeria”.

The import of that given extant power matrix is for the major political parties to choose their presidential candidates from the south for the electorate to shop from just as it happened in 2019.

Ironically, the parties were not forthcoming on this as their primaries inched closer. The Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, after much reluctance, threw open its ticket to all contenders citing the exigencies of time. But the party reaffirmed commitment to the rotation principle enshrined in its constitution, whatever that was meant to achieve.

Though the party pleaded time constraints, it was clear political expedience weighed very heavily in influencing that decision. The emergence of former vice president, Atiku Abubakar as the presidential candidate of the party is now history. But the ripples of that and its distortions on power rotation have continued to present the greatest contradiction for the party.

Though Rivers State governor, Nyesom Wike leads the revolt on account of his misfortunes in the party, it will be naive to interpret the disagreement solely along the confines of Wike’s failed interest. PDP is entangled in the contradiction of its inability to stick to its constitutional power rotation principle.

Demands for the resignation of its party’s national chairman, Iyorchia Ayu stemming from the incongruity of having both the presidential candidate and the national chairman come from the same northern geo-political divide, highlights this contradiction. Those in the vanguard of the agitation for balance are not enthused by what the party constitution says on the mode of removal of the national chairman.

Having shoved aside the same constitution in the presidential primaries, the party does not stand on sound moral ground to resist the agitation to take the position of the national chairman to the south by the same considerations.

Read Also: Tinubu will win 2023 presidency, fix Nigeria – South West Arewa community

The PDP is a victim of its own contradiction. It is a victim of permutations on the expediency of capturing political power. All the argument about time constraints are nothing but a subterfuge to hide the underlying belief that a northern presidential candidate is the best bet to capture northern votes touted as the deciding factor for electoral success.

They are entitled to their calculations. But they have to contend with the contradiction thrown up by that decision. That is the force and momentum of dialectics.

The same dialectics is playing out for the All Progressives Congress APC but slightly in a different direction. Though the party was slow in coming clear on its position on power rotation resulting to the emergence of northern presidential aspirants, tension was diffused when northern governors threw their weight behind former Lagos State governor, Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

Tinubu won overwhelmingly at the primaries to emerge the presidential candidate of the party. His emergence satisfied the demand for the party to pick its presidential candidate from the south. So the party had everything going for it as far as satisfying the yearnings for power rotation to the south. The fact of the APC being the ruling party was a further boost to its electoral chances.

But the party did not escape the force of its own contradictions. Dialectics was to set in at the level of the choice of the vice presidential candidate. The adoption of the same faith ticket did not go down well with a section of its members who felt left out in the political calculations.

Key party leaders, amongst them governors have sought to reassure the aggrieved that the decision is not to slight them but a strategy to win elections.  But that calculation brought its own contradiction. The aggrieved are piqued by the underlying insinuation that they are of limited electoral value in that part of the country and are determined to prove wrong that profiling. That is the force of contradiction.

The other contradiction comes from the entrance into the race by the Labour Party, LP presidential candidate, Peter Obi and Rabiu KwanKwaso of the New Nigeria Peoples Party NNPP. Obi and Kwankwaso opted for their new parties apparently sensing the likely outcome of the primaries of their previous parties.

Before now, politics had largely coalesced along a two party platform, following efforts by the military to institute a two-party system. The 1993 elections were fought along that line. In the last eight years, national elections have predominantly been fought along two party platforms.

That balance has been substantially altered by emerging political developments. We are now contending with the contradiction of having the three major ethnic groups fielding candidates for the elections. Given the fault lines of this country, the language of political discourse has begun to assume parochial coloration. The evidence is palpable.

Nobody would want to admit this profiling. But all the actors stand to take advantage of it one way or the other. How the countervailing forces of these contradictions will play out?

Agitation for the establishment of state police reverberated last week, albeit from an unusual quarters.

But for the angle it emanated, one would have been led to dismiss the call given the way previous ones were disdainfully treated by the current regime. Even then, the reality that the country is about to enter the thick of electioneering campaigns also suggests some difficulty in seeing through the type of constitutional re-engineering that will usher in such changes.

That was the initial difficulty when the news filtered of a communiqué by the Northern Governors Forum (NGF) and the Northern Traditional Rulers Council (NTRC) calling for the amendment of the 1999 constitution to give legal backing for the establishment of state police.

But these reservations did not in any way diminish the weight and symbolism of the advocacy. It was the first time since state police came to the front burner that both northern governors and traditional rulers sat together to lend their voices to it. They were united that state police was the best way out of the myriads of security challenges holding the region and the rest of the country to the ground.

It is good a thing the northern leadership has found its voice on this crucial matter even belatedly.  Since the complex wave of unceasing insecurity swept across the country, there have been strident calls for state police to fill the yawning gap created by the glaring inability of the central police to adequately respond to their statutory functions. It has been canvassed with varying degrees of persuasion that Nigeria’s citizen-police ratio which is far below the minimum world standards cannot make for effective police performance given the centrality of the federal police command.

Curiously, despite the weight of evidence in support of state police, the idea did not quire resonate with President Buhari.  He had severally opposed that idea. In an interview, he had said: “state police is not an option… find out the relationship between local governments and governors. Is the third arm of the government getting what they are supposed to get constitutionally?”

Buhari did not only utterly dismiss the idea of state police but drew comparison with the management of local government funds by state governors to underscore the likely fate of state police if it comes on board. Yet, the existing structure of the police that leaves state governors as glorified chief security officers without powers of control over the police has remained largely unhelpful.

Since nature abhors vacuum, states have had to respond to this yawning gap variously. There are vigilante group across the country set up by state governors with powers for limited security functions. And in the face of the escalating and existential security infractions that had pushed the country on edge, there emerged regional security outfits such as Amotekun in the southwest and Ebubeagu in the southeast.

There is a multiplicity of other groups across the country with cloudy roles that sometimes throw up complications into the security architecture. Yet, all these cannot take the place of state police in a federal setting.

Decentralization of policing is a cardinal feature of all federations. The United States of America which model of democracy we copied maintains federal, state, municipal and local police. Canada has federal, provincial and municipal police even as it has a unique arrangement in which some provinces, municipalities and aboriginal communities voluntarily contract policing to the federal police.

So it is not the issue of state police being abused by state governors. Neither does it suffice to cite whatever lapses that exist in the management of local government funds to fault the compelling imperative of state police. If such morbid fear was to have a serious place, this country has no reason continuing with the presidential system of government given the serial abuses and assault it had been subjected to by leaders, including the current one.

The system of government in place since the return of democracy in I999 is nothing but democracy in its most aberrant form. The same goes for the unitary system of government that disguises as a federal order, no thanks to the defective and anti-people constitution bequeathed to us by the military.

The same mind-set that accounts for opposition against state police has been the greatest undoing of all efforts by real patriots to have the imperfections of our federal order addressed through a national conference. So it is good a thing the northern leadership is rising to the reality of state police as an essential ingredient of a functional federal system of government.

Before now, much of the agitation had come from the south as if that region has any peculiar gain from it. But it does appear not much can be achieved now as we enter serious electioneering campaigns shortly.

Not with the rubberstamp National Assembly, it’s skewed and lazy leadership that seems more concerned with regime protection over and above the collective interests of their constituents. Nothing of such can come from that legislature in the remaining months notwithstanding recent tepid threat to impeach the president over lingering insecurity.

Perhaps, issues relating to state police and other contentious features of our federal order are best left to the incoming administration that will presumably emerge from free, fair and credible elections next year. Until then, we expect to see the presidential candidates of the political parties addressing the country on how they intend to respond such national questions as fiscal federalism, state police and restructuring both of the polity and the economy.

We expect the presidential candidates to show clear roadmap on how they intend to unite the disparate and variegated interests that have been torn apart by segregated and nepotistic policies that left Nigerians more divided and fragmented than ever in our history. These are issues of immediate concern than the distractive diatribe polluting the political space.

Today, we are here to tell you that while we may not be there yet, our military and other security agencies have succeeded and are succeeding in substantially restoring security across the nation. As far as the daunting security we face are concerned, we can tell you that the worst is over.”

These were the confidence building words from four of the country’s ministers when they briefed the media on the security situation in the country. With these, Minister of Information, Lai Mohammed and his counterparts in Defence, Interior and Police Affairs sought to reassure citizens of the successes by security agencies to secure the nation.

The presence of the Chief of Defence Staff, Lucky Irabor was also to add weight to the message. That should be something to cheer.

This is especially so for a country that has in the last few years been assailed by all manner of security infractions to the extent of questioning the capacity of the government to live up to its basic function of maintaining law and order. If a secure environment has been restored or is being restored, that gives hope that the law of the jungle is about to be consigned to the dustbin of history.

Can we then sleep with our eyes closed given the assurances that the worst of insecurity is over? Are Nigerians now free to travel to various parts of the country without fear of the sundry criminalities that had dominated the social space? These are the searing questions thrown up by the claims of these top government functionaries. The way they are answered will serve as a veritable guide to public perception of the assurances.

It would seem the ministers anticipated an air of public skepticism on their claims. Their caveat that there may still be instances of isolated security challenges but not on the scale that have been witnessed was meant to take care of that doubt. And there lies the difficulty in getting the public to buy into the message.

There is a challenge of statistics here. Because it is difficult to quantify the level of success the security agencies have made in taming insecurity, the public often rely on available unofficial reports on criminal activities across the country for their information. Many of these stories and reports are not even available either to the security agencies or the government.

Incidentally, they form the basis for assessing how effective the efforts of the government have been in combating the insecurity monster. If that is what they are referring to as isolated security challenges, then the government has a herculean task convincing the public that the worst of insecurity is over.

Read Also: Insecurity scaring away foreign, local investors, says Lawan

Events in parts of the country as the ministers spoke do not bear out the claim that we have seen the worst of insecurity. They spoke at a period Nigeria had just been rated by the global Terrorism/Analysis group, Jihad Analytics as the second most attacked and terrorised country in the world with Iraq coming first and Syria placing third. The report covers January to June 2022.

Even if the government based its optimism on its touted successes in the last two months of July and August, the ministers still spoke against the background of festering kidnappings, banditry and sundry criminalities across the country.

They spoke at a time most Nigerians are still afraid to travel to parts of the country for fear of being killed, kidnapped or dehumanised by ragtag criminals. Their fear is even heightened by the fact that they will be left on their own to negotiate their freedom with huge sums of money when kidnapped, with the government seemingly helpless.

These are the people being told that the worst of insecurity is over. These realities coupled with the government’s indifference in rescuing kidnapped victims will obviously work against the assurances by its officials. It is definitely a hard sell.

This is not the first time seemingly rosy scenarios of improved security have been presented with much fanfare but they turned out their direct opposite.

Five months in office, we were told by the same government that Boko Haram insurgency had been technically defeated and their capacity to mount organised attacks against the military had been neutralised. But all that turned out to be a ruse as we have since been victims of their insurgency with its splinter group, Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP) mounting attacks beyond the confines of their areas of operation.

Ironically, the government is again claiming that the worst terrorism is over. Let us hope this is not another attempt to live in denial of the realities on the ground. Unfortunately, that attitude had characterised the government’s responses to the multifarious security challenges across the country, challenges that had almost pushed the country to the precipice.

The ministers captured the gravity of the unceasing insecurity when they said it is, “Undoubtedly, the greatest challenge to the peace and security of our great nation since the civil war from 1967 to 1970…and the kind of challenges that would have overwhelmed many nations.” They sought to give credit to President Buhari for his purposeful leadership that has put the worst of the insecurity behind us all.

They are entitled to their opinion. Two issues brought to the fore by this comparison: the first is the admission for the first time that Nigeria has never in its history been so assailed by the kind of insecurity seen in the last few years. The other raises the question as to how we got into that avoidable mess. Are there lapses in the actions or inaction of the government that culminated in the escalated violence being compared to the civil war situation? Why the spectre of insecurity?

Answers to these questions can be found in the dispositions of the government; its responses to budding security infractions. Government’s lethargy in frontally confronting such cases as the insurgency of the herdsmen and banditry led to escalated and degenerated outcomes. It is either responses are weak and tinted with biases or others are obviously escalated and mismanaged to achieve predetermined ends.

As I was writing, reports filtered in of the arrest in Cairo, Egypt of the chief negotiator for the kidnapped Abuja-Kaduna train attack victims, Tukur Mamu and his deportation to answer some charges. Yet, the man has been in the country and left through our airport only to be arrested in faraway Egypt. What do we make of such tepid responses?

Notable Nigerian investor, politician and philanthropist, Chief Emmanuel Chukwuemeka Iwuanyanwu, turned 80 yesterday, September 4, 2022.

The weeklong activities to celebrate his entry into the league of octogenarians featured prayers in churches and mosques for the peace, unity and prosperity of Nigeria, a novelty football match and a public lecture.

A jubilee church service and grand reception, during which his biography titled “Amazing Grace of God” was unveiled, rounded off the celebrations. The biography was put together by some University of Nigeria students to show appreciation for his numerous contributions in the field of education.

Perhaps, the lecture theme, “Igbo Quest for Nigeria’s Unity,” delivered by President-General emeritus of Ohaneze Ndigbo, John Nnia Nwodo, and other activities for the birthday celebration were selected to reflect Iwuanyanwu’s place and role in Nigeria’s political trajectory.

Born in Atta, Ikeduru Local Government Area of Imo state, he had his education at St Patrick’s School, Rukpoku, in Port Harcourt, Rivers State, before proceeding to New Bethel College, Onitsha, for his secondary education. He was admitted to the University of Nigeria, Nsukka, graduating in Civil Engineering.

He worked for Hardel and Enic Construction Company before acquiring it from its foreign operators. Through his uncommon business acumen, the establishment made very quick and phenomenal growth into a conglomerate of many companies, venturing into Banking, Real Estate, Insurance and Sports development.

Iwuanyanwu Nationale Football Club of Owerri, which dominated national sports and won national and international laurels, was part of his contributions to sports development. The club became a hunting ground for many of the players that represented the national team in international competitions.

He also invested in Aviation and Publishing. This crystallised in the establishment of the Champion group of newspapers and Oriental Airlines. The emergence of Champion Newspapers had a very defining impact on the newspaper industry. It was an instant business success because of the innovations it brought to the industry. That was the first attempt by any Nigerian newspaper establishment to print in colour.

The establishment was home to journalists of all diversities and persuasions, offering remunerations that elevated the worth of the journalism profession. As the pioneer political editor of the newspaper, who had only previously worked in regional newspapers, it was a pleasant experience sharing ideas with colleagues, some of whom had been editors of other national newspapers before joining the group at inception.

His impact in the aviation industry is as remarkable as it is interesting. It is worthy of note that what is today known as the Sam Mbakwe International Cargo Airport, Owerri, was a fruit of communal efforts by the people of the old Imo State comprising the current Imo State, Abia and parts of Ebonyi State.

In the course of the fund-raising for the construction of the airport, Iwuanyanwu made the most singular individual financial donation for its successful completion. That was not all. The airport on completion got entangled in the vortex of Nigerian politics as issues of viability were freely traded.

Citing alleged non-viability, domestic airlines showed little interest in scheduling regular flights to that airport. But Iwuanyanwu deployed his fleet of Oriental Airlines aircraft to maintain regular scheduled flights to the airport such that within a short period of time, it became a hub of commercial flight activities. Much of the credit for the success of that airport should go to the pioneering role of Oriental Airlines and one or two others that then placed a higher premium on patriotism over and above profitability.

He also left indelible footprints in the sands of Nigerian politics. Together with other patriotic Nigerians, Iwuanyanwu championed the campaign for the restoration of democracy in this country. He was a major contender for the presidency of the country when the military indicated their intention to hand over power to civilians.

Deploying his huge resources to advantage, his presidential bid did a lot to arouse the consciousness of the people on the imperative of having all sections of the country take a shot at that highest elective political post. That quest has remained a burning desire. His brand of politics may not have gone down well in some quarters. That is in the very nature of politics itself. There are also those who seek to fault him based on the fate of the great business empire he had set up.

God created him great and he attained greatness. Iwuanyanwu gave a hint of his covenant with God while announcing the death of his wife, Eudora in 2011.

He had said: “During the more than 40 years of our marriage, we were able to utilise God’s gift to assist humanity in so many ways. Thousands of poor children were, through Eudora and I, given an opportunity to acquire education up to university level. We invested a lot in health and educational infrastructure, supported many communities in search of basic needs of life, such as water, food, shelter and electricity. We played a major role in the building of the Imo Airport and in sports development” That is a modest statement on his contributions to humanity.

His uncommon patriotism, selflessness and philanthropy fetched him many awards, honours and chieftaincy titles. A recipient of three national merit awards, CFR, OFR and MFR, he has many honorary doctorate awards from renowned universities in the country and abroad. Traditional rulers of Igbo land including Delta and Rivers states, conferred on him the chieftaincy title of “Ahaejiagamba Ndigbo.”  He is also the Balogun Babaguwa of Ibadan land, an honour bestowed on him by Olubadan of Ibadan.

To this great statesman of large heart and uncommon courage, a man who positively touched and transformed millions of lives, I share in the joy of his 80th birthday anniversary and wish him many more healthy years in the service of God and humanity.

Before this article is published, the National Executive Council (NEC) of Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) may have ratified the outcome of the congresses of its chapters to press on with indefinite and total strike.

This is a sequel to stalemated negotiations between the union and the federal government. ASUU went on strike in February to press home its demand for funds to revitalise the universities; payment of Earned Academic Allowances and renegotiation of a 2009 agreement.

The union is also demanding the Adoption of University Transparency and Accountability Solution (UTAS) as a payment platform for universities, payment of salary shortfalls and non-remitted check-off dues. The federal government had in March set up the Nimi Briggs committee to negotiate with ASUU.

But the strike lingered in spite of the negotiations such that President Buhari, last June, warned ASUU, “enough is enough” of the strike as it would have generational consequences on families, the educational system and future development of the country.

ASUU did not take kindly to the warning as it blamed the government for its inability to attend to the agreements it reached with the negotiation team. “It will be a month on July16, 2022 since they met with us. Nigerians should ask them when they will ask us to come and sign the report/agreement of the renegotiation meeting,” the union responded.

Another meeting was held mid-August with ASUU hopeful of the government’s final decisions on the agreement. But the meeting ended in a stalemate. ASUU bitterly complained that the government did not bring any new thing to the table but was rather begging them to call off the strike.

The union had expected the government’s positions on the agreement reached with the committee but got nothing save empty promises that they would be incorporated into next year’s budget. What to incorporate in next year’s budget is not to the knowledge of the union. They accused the government of carrying around a bag of deceit.

That was the last known official engagement/communication between the government and the union. Curiously, the Minister of Education, Adamu Adamu, was to address the press claiming they had reached an agreement on almost all the issues except on two fronts – the payment of withheld salaries and conditions of service.

But the union challenged the minister to make public details of all the issues he claimed agreements were reached on.

I have set the background to the current stalemate and consequential flexing of muscles between ASUU and the government to put matters in proper perspective.

Various chapters of ASUU have, sequel to the stalemate, held their congresses to take a position on the matter. And reports from across the country post an overwhelming resolution to press on with indefinite and total strike. The way things stand, the prolongation of the strike is almost a fait accompli. Our children’s hope of going back to classes may for long remain uncertain. That is how bad the situation is unless the government finds common grounds on all issues, especially as it concerns the policy of no-work-no-pay.

But the situation may even get worse, given feelers that the government is considering proscribing the union for alleged intransigence in the festering strike that is about to enter its seventh month. In its place, the government is said to be encouraging the emergence and eventual recognition of a splinter group to divide the ranks of the union.

If this speculation is true, and the government goes ahead with it, that would sound a death knell for ASUU. A malleable group that will do the bidding of the government will emerge to take its place. But that would be a very big statement on the kind of governance framework we operate in this country. This is a supposed democratic contraption.

The last time we heard of the proscription of such unions was during the years of the locust denoted by military rule. Are we now sliding to those inglorious pasts in a putative democratic enterprise surfeit with mechanisms for collective bargaining and peaceful resolution of conflicts?

If such intemperate and draconian measures could be tolerated during military rule, it should not find justification in a democratic setting, especially given the issues in the disagreement. The leadership of the country that lays claims to popular will as the basis of its legitimacy cannot be seen showing strong affinity with armed tactics on issues that can be easily resolved through democratic channels.

Issues in the dispute are resolvable and can be peacefully resolved without dislocating and disrupting teaching and learning in the university system. Any attempt to proscribe ASUU, or sponsor division within its ranks, will end up complicating matters with the prospects of throwing the university system into an avoidable chaos. Neither proscription nor the sponsorship of a splinter union is a solution to the issues in dispute.

What is expected of the government is for it to come clear on aspects of the agreements reached with the Briggs Committee acceptable to it for implementation. That will be evidence of its sincerity to fund the universities such that they can favourably compete with their peers in other parts of the world. That our universities have fared woefully in international ranking should be of serious concern to the government.

There is no information on what the government has agreed to offer and the timeline for implementation. The impression is that of a government not keen on coming clear on the outcome of the negotiated agreement but only interested in wielding the big stick. That would be rather unfortunate.

The government is inadvertently swaying public sympathy to the side of ASUU by the cloudy manner it is handling the negotiations. If the payment of withheld salaries and allowances will bring the strike to an end, why not? After all, the lecturers will still make up for lost hours.

When a few years ago, the federal government approved $1.959 billion for the construction of a rail line from Kano State to Maradi in Niger Republic, there was public apprehension on the propriety of the project.

Questions were raised regarding the justification for the project when rail transport facilities are virtually inexistent in most parts of the country. Why build a rail line largely for another country when rail transport facilities are virtually not available in most parts of Nigeria?

But then Minister of Transport, Chibuike Amaechi rose in stout defence of the 248-kilometre rail project. According to him, poor road network, security challenges and harassment from various government security agencies which discourage individuals and businessmen from other African countries from exporting through Nigeria were some of the justifications.

He said the project will grow exports as it would encourage Niger which largely exports through Benin Republic to use the direct rail services to Nigeria ferry her goods without encumbrances. Not many were convinced about the appropriateness of the project given debilitating economic challenges the Nigerian economy was mired.

Insinuations were rife that primordial considerations of clannish hue must have weighed heavily in influencing the project. But that did not stop anything.

There is little information on the progress of the project since then. But the same government that committed itself to building a rail line for Niger was at another level negotiating a $5.851 billion EXIM Bank loan from the Chinese government for what it called nationwide rail modernization project.

Curiously, the so-called nationwide rail modernization project had the eastern corridor completely shut out. Fiery senator, Enyinnya Abaribe had in a motion titled “omission of Eastern Corridor Rail line in the request for approval of federal government 2016-2015 External Borrowing (Rolling Plan) faulted the exclusion.

With Abaribe’s intervention, tepid explanations were offered that Aba and Onitsha both in the southeast were included in the plan. There were also further claims that negotiations were on to find a financier for a more inclusive eastern railway project. All said, it was obvious that that part of the country was not really in their calculations.

The rail modernization project was to be embroiled in intense controversy and subsequent withdrawal of funding by the Chinese government. That much was revealed by Amaechi who said the federal government was seeking alternative means of funding the projects.

There is paucity of information on the progress made in the rail modernization project. It is also not clear whether alternative funding sources have been found. But two things stand out distinctly from the initial conception and current state of the project. The first is the air of uncertainty that now surrounds it with high prospects of turning out a pipe dream. The other which is a logical consequence of the first is the contradiction in undertaking to build the rail line to Maradi in Niger Republic when the country is sweating, scouting for funds for its internal rail network project. A country immersed in such financial stress would have first deployed available funds to connect its citizens before playing the big brother.

Since it has come to scouting for loans, are we now also going to borrow to fund Niger? And what will be the commitment of that country to the loan repayment since their citizens stand to gain immensely through increased export of goods and services when the rail line comes into fruition?

These questions resonate given the disclosure last week that President Buhari had also approved N1.1billon worth of Sports Utility Vehicles as gift to the government of Niger Republic. The transaction had been kept under wraps until exposed by an investigative reporter. Expectedly, and like in the Maradi rail project, its rationale has not gone down well with the discerning public.

Not when our universities have been shut down for more than five months now over funding and ancillary issues. Not with the biting economic conditions that have further reduced our citizens to the poorest of the poor. We may not have to solve all of our challenges before helping out a needy country. But the instant case does not fit into such extenuating circumstance where our immediate needs have to wait for us to uplift a needy neighbour.

It seems inconceivable that a country like Niger cannot afford to buy such vehicles for whatever reasons. Finance Minister, Zainab Ahmed said the president has the right to make such assessment and act and that Nigeria has been supporting its neighbours. That is beside the issue. The president acts on behalf of Nigerians and his actions or inactions must come under the prying eyes of the public in terms of how they conform to overall interests of the constituents.

So it goes beyond the matter of right or practice. We are dealing with its justification especially given where this country finds itself now. Perhaps, the explanation that it is to enhance their capacity to protect their country and vicariously Nigeria could pass. This is more so given the humongous security challenges pushing the country on edge.

Incidentally Niger is one of the countries from where foreign herders largely responsible for the insecurity in the country flock into our shores. It remains to be seen how the vehicle gift will be of help in the fight against insecurity in the country.

But the cost of the 10 vehicles appears outrageous. Each would go for more than N100 million. Is that the cost of such vehicles within our shores? Someone needs to respond to this poser.

The interest served by Buhari’s regular goodies for Niger Republic is getting suspicious given the affinity of people of that country with sections of the Nigerian population.

Nothing illustrates this more poignantly than the list of six Nigerians awarded national honours by that country for their roles in promoting better relations between Niger and Nigeria. All of the six recipients come from one of the nation’s geo-political divide. Does that say something?

The aphorism, it takes a thief to catch a thief, found real life expression in the Sabon Birin Yandoto Emirate of Tsafe Local Government Area of Zamfara State penultimate Saturday.

This cliché found relevance when a notorious repentant bandit leader, Adamu Aliero was turbaned Serkin Fulani (leader of Fulani) by the Emir of Yandoto, Aliyu Garba Marafa. Reason: he is expected to combine his knowledge of banditry and associated criminality with his new royal position to stem the tide of banditry in the emirate.

The brief and very colourful ceremony was attended by more than 100 bandits in a show of solidarity. The horde of bandits still in active service, stormed the scene in a convoy of motorcycles though without arms and ammunitions.

Aliero, touted for his daring banditry escapades in both Zamfara and Katsina states earned the goodwill of the emir when he agreed at a meeting to stop attacking communities and villages in the emirates and to allow residents access to their farms.

The emir was moved to confer the chieftaincy title on him to ensure that in his new capacity, the repentant bandit leader will allow peace to return to the beleaguered emirate. Good calculations it would seem; especially in the face of the unceasing banditry that has reduced the state to a verity of the state of nature where life has become nasty, short and brutish.

But unknown to the emir, he miscalculated. He appeared to have placed higher premium on the temporary reprieve his emirate will get from the rapprochement without factoring in all the angles to that action. And that turned out his greatest undoing.

Zamfara State government was quick to dissociate itself from the action. It suspended the emir from the throne and appointed the district head to preside over the emirate pending the outcome of investigations into the incident.

Whatever conclusions the panel reaches on the matter will determine the next line of action of the state government. That is the situation the emir is into. Poor him! His case is even made more complex by reactions from neighbouring Katsina State government and its state police command.

Governor Aminu Masari of Katsina State is sad at the development vowing to have Aliero arrested for his criminal activities in the state if sighted. For the state police command, Aliero is still on their wanted list even as the prize of N5million placed on his head for any person with information that will lead to his arrest is still standing.

He is wanted to answer charges bordering on criminal homicide, terrorism, armed robbery and kidnapping. That is how bad the situation is for the repentant bandit crowned Serkin Fulani.

Nobody is sure where he is hiding presently given the heat generated by his turbaning and threats to get him arrested to answer for sundry criminalities. He must have gone back to his former ways; disappearing into the forests to avoid arrest by security agencies.

From his hiding places, he would continue to launch attacks on communities with greater ferocity and dexterity than he hitherto did. Since the security agencies have been helpless in arresting him even with the bounty placed on his head, the frustrations that compelled the emir to seek peace with the bandit warlord should begin to make some sense.

Yes, it is a big embarrassment that a notorious bandit could be conferred with such traditional title. The exercise is bound to raise questions as to whether he is being rewarded for his acts of criminality. Suspicion of complicity in the crime could also arise on the side of the emir.

But as offensive to human sensibilities as the coronation is, the emir may have acted to protect his community from possible annihilation. He should not solely share the blame for his act of indiscretion or bad judgment. Unless it is established he has a hand in the banditry in his emirate, he appears a victim of circumstances beyond his control.

Ironically, the extenuating circumstances that brought about this pass are at the heart of the inability of the federal government to discharge its statutory duty of maintaining law and order. But there is some hypocrisy in the noise on the coronation given the federal government’s policy of reintegration and reabsorption of repentant terrorists into its fold.

The emir may have been influenced by that policy. After all, Masari had in the past entered into peace agreements with bandits, posing with their leaders in pictures clutching their sophisticated riffles. It was a clear celebration of banditry that almost immediately came to naught.

Had security agencies lived up to their responsibility of protecting the lives and property of the emirate, the need to strike a noxious deal with a notorious bandit would not have arisen. The inability of the government to tame banditry and bring perpetrators to book had conferred on their leadership a larger-than-life image exposing the villagers to their mercy.

If the government cannot be of reasonably help in curtailing violent criminalities suffocating Zamfara and other states, why complain about self-help? Or, is self-preservation no longer the first law of nature? Aliero is not the first criminal to get fame through devious escapades. Those who commit all manner of atrocities including killing people during elections to get to public limelight are as guilty as the turbaned bandit.

It is not just enough to suspend the emir or even dethrone him unless he is found to be conniving with bandits. He may have acted naively. But the government should take responsibility for this seeming naivety for failing to protect them against banditry.

The security situation in the emirate may even get worse if the government does nothing to protect the people from Aliero’s possible vengeance. Events in Zamfara are a sad reminder to the increasing slide of the country to a failed state.  This prospect can only be averted through adequate protection of our citizens against rising impunity and criminal annihilation by non-state actors.