The Nation Newspaper

Category: Emeka Omeihe

  • Worrying verdicts

    In the last couple of weeks, sundry institutions, groups and individuals have come up with verdicts on the state of Nigeria’s economy and politics. The frequency and direction of these opinions have raised genuine fears on the future of the country.

    Some of the economic and political development indices highlighted have been so scarring and damning that one begins to wonder whether our leaders can possibly muster what it takes to wriggle out of the quagmire. Though some of these issues have been in public domain, the way they have been presented, left no one in doubt that we are really in turbulent times.

    The National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) seemed to have fired the first salvo when it reeled out scarring indices of an ailing economy in urgent need of redemption. It said the nation’s GDP contracted by 0.36 per cent in the first quarter of this year representing the first negative growth in many years. The economy also suffered contraction in the second quarter and a slide into recession as the Naira depreciated, businesses declined and unemployment grew in leaps.

    A report by the United Nation’s on Nigeria’s Common Country Analysis also revealed “a deeply divided society on the basis of the plurality of ethnic, religious and regional identities that had tended to define the country’s political existence” It painted a gloomy picture of the country with most of the development and social indices registering at levels unacceptable.

    The report further observed that for decades, different segments of the Nigerian population had at different times, expressed feelings of marginalization, of being short-changed, dominated and oppressed, threatened or even targeted for elimination.

     A US Congressman, Tom Marino seemed to have upped the ante on these negative assessments when in a letter to the US Secretary of State, John Kerry, he urged his home government to withhold security assistance to Nigeria until Buhari demonstrates “commitment to inclusive government and the most basic tenets of democracy; freedom of assemble and freedom of speech” He faulted the anti-corruption campaign of the government for focusing almost exclusively on members of the opposition while overlooking corruption among some close advisors of Buhari. Marino also spoke on extra-judicial killings of 347 people in Kaduna and 36 pro-Biafra movement members and attempts to silence opposition.

    There are two strands of negative indicators that have been highlighted by these opinions-economic and political. As regards the former, we have been presented with an economy in deep recession characterized by Naira depreciation, overall contraction in economic activities culminating in huge job losses. There are also issues of galloping inflation and debilitating poverty as 64 per cent of Nigerians are rated to be living below the poverty line.

    The government has admitted the country is in recession and by that, it is unlikely to quarrel with these indicators which ipso facto are features of an economy in recession. It has promised through its minister of finance, Kemi Adeosun that the economy will be turned round in no distant time through investment in capital and diversification.

    The same sentiments had been shared by President Buhari who appealed for patience with an assurance that “we are going to get out of our economic problems”  They have also talked of a number of interventions to revive the ailing economy even as such measures have at best remained mere conjectures. A kite was recently flown about emergency powers which the president intends to seek from the national assembly to deal with extant challenges.

    Though no such presentation has come before the national assembly, there is everything to suggest that the idea is not going to be an easy sail. We would rather have Buhari kick off with the enormous powers he enjoys under the constitution before any resort to such extraordinary powers that could easily lend themselves to abuse given that absolute power corrupts absolutely. However, getting through such a request would seem a tall order.

    But the National Council of States, after a meeting last week said it had endorsed a number of measures for the government to deal with the situation. Curiously, such measures were kept under wraps. Ironically, such intervention measures are direly needed now to steer the ship of the nation away from the brink to which it is inevitably headed.

    There is massive poverty and suffering in the land occasioned by the economic policies of the government and something urgent must be done before majority of our people are consigned to their early graves. Before now, it has been a fad by the government and its apologists to blame the previous regime for the current pass.

    We have since moved beyond such buck passing and stereotypes. We have gone beyond the worn-out issue of how past leaders failed to plan for the future; failed to diversify the economy and similar rationalizations. We are confronted by extant situations that should task the creative energies and ingenuity of leaders to make the difference. History is surfeit with records of leaders who came at very trying moments of their country but were able to turn them around very positively. That is the kind of rare expertise, high credentials and uncommon patriotic courage the situation now requires.

    But, does the government as presently constituted have what it takes to turn around the fortunes of this country for the better. What of our economic managers: are they the best the nation can boast of in the present circumstance? Do they exude sufficient confidence in terms of experience and capacity to grapple with the complex situation brought to the fore by the recession?

    Perhaps, the UN recommendation that “transforming and diversifying Nigeria’s development paths needed a radical and new approach, especially by investing in people and in a strong more dynamic and inclusive productive informal sector” should be instructive. The question is whether we have seen the prospects of such radical and novel approaches?

    However, the success of new and radial approaches to our mounting economic challenges is intricately linked to the application of similar measures at the political front. For, the line between the economy and politics is a very thin one.

    The UN report spoke of a deeply divided society on the basis of the plurality of ethnic, religious and regional lines. Marino highlighted the absence of an all inclusive government and commitment to freedom of assembly and speech. He wants the US to urge Buhari to form a “government that represents the diversity of its citizens and allows dissenting voices to be heard”

    These systemic dysfunctions cannot be dismissed off handedly as the Minister of Information Lai Mohammed had tended to. So also are the issues of alienation, marginalization; of being short-changed, and threatened as aptly captured in the UN report. Though some of the issues raised by Marino may have been slightly exaggerated, it was wrong to have concluded as Mohammed did that his views were out of tune with reality; imaginary and ill-informed.

     If anything, they serve as a sad reminder to issues that are already in the court of public opinion. What is required now is for the government to take up these negative indicators and evolve urgent ways of resolving them so that our divided and fatally fragmented peoples can once again unite and pool their creative energies together for the better. And unless the political dimensions of these verdicts are addressed through genuine, honest and equitable approaches, they will continue to negate efforts at economic development as the Niger Delta case has shown.

  • Ekiti’s grazing law

    Governor Ayo Fayose of Ekiti State has just signed a law to regulate grazing activities in the state. Titled “Prohibition of cattle and Other Ruminants Grazing in Ekiti 2016”, the law provides for grazing activities between 7am to 6pm on a daily basis while any herdsman caught with firearms or any weapon whatsoever during grazing will be charged with terrorism.

    An offender is liable on conviction, to six months imprisonment without option of fine.Under the law, farm crops destroyed by the cattle of any caught herdsman, shall be estimated by an agricultural officer and the expense borne by the culprit.

    Emerging reactions to the law vary depending on which side of the divide they are coming from. But most reservations have tended to centreround the provisions of the law rather than the propriety of that piece of legislation. But, implicit in those reactions is a seeming consensus that some form of regulation on the activities of herdsmen is imperative.

    The first issue copiously canvassed is the seeming incongruity of aspect of that law as it relates to terrorism with the constitution of the country. Those who canvass this view, contend it is wrong to classify herdsmen carrying weapons including such light ones as arrows, knives, cutlasses and catapults as terrorists because such categorization runs against the spirits of the anti-terrorism law. For this school, the law on anti-terrorism is very clear and nowhere did it classify carrying such light weapons as an offence under it.

    The other strand of the argument is that exceptions should have been made by the law against these light weapons because herdsmen need some of them to ward off criminals and also contend with the vagaries and harshness of the environment in which they conduct their business.

    In this wise, it is reasoned that apart from attacks from robbers, herdsmen confront all manner of animals in the bushes and will be helpless in the face of attacks from those elements in the absence of such light weapons. There is a point here. There ought to be exceptions to the category of weapons the herdsmen could carry since in our daily lives, such light weapons are not against our laws. Herdsmen need some protection against some of the hazards they face while doing their business in the inclement bush environment.

    There is also merit in the argument that by handing down terrorism charge on any herdsman carrying guns and other light weapons, the Ekiti law is bound to come into conflict with the anti-terrorism prevention law. And to the extent that law is inconsistent with the constitution, it stands to be voided by the courts. When this happens, the state government would be handicapped in approximating the goals for which that piece of legislation was made.

    No doubt,Ekiti State government was goaded to classify carrying arms by herdsmen as terrorism given the pattern and magnitude of destruction that occur each time they attack communities. Such attacks usually leave in their trail sorrow and awe on account of the decimation of populations and properties comparable in terms, to terrorism onslaughts. The law would therefore strike as a desperate therapy to a malignant tumour- the objective being to ensure that Ekiti State is insulated from those ugly scenes that have been the tale of communities each time herdsmen strike.

    But this objective could still be approximated without having to enact laws that will at once, come into conflict with the constitution. The same aim can still be realized by making the carrying of dangerous weapons such as the AK-47 rifle and 24 rounds of ammunitionrecovered from a herdsman in Affa, Udi local government area of Enugu state and in other places, a criminal offence.

    The other issue being canvassed against the anti-grazing law is that it should have allowed herdsmen who want to relocate to do so at night. The argument is that it will minimize the disruption of social activities were the herdsmen to do so at night. With the pattern of the attacks by the herdsmen, which usually take place in the night with near invincibility, it will be difficult to persuade anyone with the above argument. Moreover, that will negate the whole essence of limiting herding between certain hours of the day.

    Ekiti State government must have taken into account the reality of the operational strategy of the herdsmen in arriving at the provision requiring all activities relating to herding to commence and end between 7am and 6pm. It would seem that aspect of the law was well designed. There is the need to regulate the movement of herdsmen so as not to give room for any subterfuge by the unscrupulous ones to attack communities while they are asleep.

    The law also struck the right chord by stipulating that herdsmen caught destroying the crops of farmers will have the value of such farm produce assessed by an agricultural officer for the culprit to bear the cost. This is apt given that at the heart of the conflicts between farmers and the herdsmen has been the wanton destruction of the crops of the former.

    This provision is even more germane and as has been argued in several quarters, the herdsmen are also in business and it will be wrong to despoil the crops of farmers or feed their animals with them the way they had hitherto carried on. The realization that crops destroyed by their cattle will have to be paid for, will make them more circumspect in the way they conduct their business.

    That way, a major source of friction between the farmers and the herdsmen would have been considerably reduced. By the same token, the constant friction that usually aggravates attacks by the herdsmen would have been substantially stymied. It is true that Ekiti State is not among the states where the herdsmen have severally wreaked havoc. But it has taken the bull by the horn by coming out with legislation to curtail the menace of the herdsmen.

    It is a step in the right direction. It is a bold statement that the government will not sit-by while its citizens are mowed down by a band that has scant regard for human lives. It is therefore pertinentthat the law should be despite some reservations especially as it relates to trying those carrying weapons and other light arms for terrorism. At any rate, our courts are there to trash out issues relating to the envisaged conflict between the law and the nation’s anti-terrorism law.

    Perhaps,Ekiti may not have gone this farwere the federal government forthcoming in dealing with the menace of the herdsmen. For, despite the serious danger which incessant attacks by the herdsmen portends for national peace and stability, the attitude of the federal government to it has at best, remained largely tepid.

    Even with the directive from President Buhari to the military and police to stop the recurring killings of hapless Nigerians by Fulani herdsmen, no concrete action seems to have been taken in this regard. That is why rather than abate, the attacks have festered. Matters are not helped by the inability of our law enforcement agencies to bring to book the suspects arrested for the dastardly massacre at Nimbo in Enugu State and elsewhere where such attacks had occurred.

    If things continue the way they are, more of the states that have been at the mercy of the insurgents will have no option than to go theEkiti way to protect the lives of their people. That is the unmistakable signal which the law has sent across. The Buhari regime should take vicarious responsibility for any eventual outcome of such conflicting legislations including the increasing lure of self-help to stem the scourge.

  • Of EFCC’s arrests and detention

    Given the pervasiveness of corruption in this clime, the task of getting rid of it cannot be considered a mean feat. This is apparent from the constant recourse to the catchphrase ‘corruption is fighting back’ each time anti-graft agencies are faced with institutional hiccups or strident criticisms on their methodology for prosecuting that war.

    But this disposition could also turn out a great liability. It could turn out a subterfuge on the part of officials of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and related agencies to trample on the rights of the accused and seek to justify that travesty hiding under such nebulous suppositions. No doubt, the fight against corruption is at the heart of the survival of this country.

    Yet, in this crucial battle, the rules must be very clear. The standards must be straight. Else unscrupulous officials begin to conduct themselves in ways capable of whittling down public confidence and support for the campaign. There are recent incidents that have raised the momentum for the re-examination of the roles officials of the EFCC play in the arrest; handling of suspects and disposition of issues before them.

    First is the raging controversy over the death of a former Chief Protocol Officer at the Ministry of Defence, Desmond Nunugwo while being detained by the EFCC for allegedly defrauding a businessman. Accounts from his cell mates indicated that Nunugwo took ill and died shortly after his detention, as he could neither assess his high blood pressure and diabetes drugs due to inability to reach his wife because the investigating officer went away with his phone. This has resulted in claims and counter-claims between the family, the EFCC and the police. And until the riddle is resolved, it will remain as a sore point in the handling of detainees in the custody of the anti-graft body.

    If this incident does not sufficiently illustrate the indiscretion in handling suspects by some officials, the purported arrest and detention of former governor of Imo State, Chief Achike Udenwa by the agency last week, should drive this point home more poignantly. In a widely publicized statement, the commission had said it arrested and detained the former governor and would have him arraigned in court soon.

    It claimed this was precipitated by the inability of Udenwa to keep to the terms of the administrative bail granted him in the case of the N350 million campaign funds allegedly collected from the former Director of Finance of the PDP Presidential Campaign Organization, Nenadi Usman. According to the commission, Udenwa reneged on the bail conditions which required him to report to the agency when he is needed to do so, thus necessitating the revocation of the bail.

    But Udenwa issued a statement shortly after in which he strongly refuted the claims by the anti-graft agency. He gave a brief but lucid account of his dealings with the EFCC. He said, by a letter dated May, 13, he had applied for and obtained permission from the commission to travel abroad for medical check-up. Following this, he said the commission released his international passport which it had been holding to enable him make the travel. A new date of August 13 was agreed upon by both parties. But it later turned out the date fell on a Saturday, a non-working day for the agency and had to be further rescheduled by both parties for August 18.

    On Tuesday August 16, he said while he was in Port Harcourt for the PDP convention billed for the next day, he got a call from his guarantor that he was required by the EFCC in Lagos the next day being Wednesday by 10am, which he obliged. But when he got there, he met another officer who immediately confronted him with the claim that he has deliberately and consistently refused to honor invitations and could no longer be reached.

    Udenwa said the allegations were shocking to him as all his dealings with the agency should be in their file. Moreover, that was the fifth time he was honouring invitations by the EFCC in Lagos without any instance of failure on his side. Following this sequence of events and the curious haste with which the matter was released to the media even when he still departed their office the same day, Udenwa sees the action as a premeditated one. He said he was compelled to put matters straight because the claims could portray him as an unreliable person who may have other motives for allegedly not honouring the invitations in addition to putting his guarantor in jeopardy.

    The issues raised by the former governor are as weighty as they are damn serious. They hinge on the credibility of the EFCC. The sum total of his case is that the claims bandied by the EFCC on which basis it issued a statement alleging he reneged on the terms of his bail by refusing to honour invitations and could no longer be reached are false. He went further to support that claim by chronicling all his interactions with the commission, the number of times he had kept scheduled appointments with no incident of failure.

    Since Udenwa brought these issues to the court of public opinion, the EFCC has not disproved them. One is therefore, left with the inevitable conclusion that his account of his dealings with the EFCC represents the true position. He has been able to sustain his claim that the EFCC may be propelled by motives other than serious commitment to the war against corruption for its action especially given the sequence of events that followed that Tuesday.

    And if one may ask, how did the officer he met that day arrive at the conclusion that he reneged on the terms of his bail and could no longer be reached? How come the commission granted him permission to travel abroad by releasing his international passport only for an official to turn round and bandy false allegations under which guise she claimed to have detained and would him arraigned in court? What of the indecent haste with which the story of his purported arrest and detention was leaked to the media even when the whole episode ended that same day? Was the media trial intended to embarrass and smear his image before the public or what? These are the issues to ponder.

    We raise these posers because of the conflicting signals they throw up on the credibility of some of the actions of those charged with the execution of the war against corruption. Incidents like this reinforce suspicions that unscrupulous officials can go to lengths to subject the war to ends that are less than ennobling.

    That is where the recent observation by President of the Nigerian Bar Association NBA, Augustine Alegeh that the “war against corruption must be fought within the ambit of the law and any attempt to fight corruption through other means is corruption”, cues in very appropriately. Before now, the Joint Action, Coalition of Civil Societies in Nigeria had feared that the war could be bastardized by the actions of corrupt officials within the EFCC. That is the real issue to watch.

    The other strand of the argument Udenwa highlighted was that the case is about money for the presidential campaign election as it concerns all states of the federation and not Imo State alone. He said that as the PDP presidential campaign coordinator for Imo State, he and others involved have explained the details of the expenditure as it relates to the state and he has nothing to hide.

    It is either the EFCC is satisfied with details of the deployment of the funds for the campaigns or it is not. Where it happens the money has been properly accounted for in the execution of the plethora of activities preceding that election, it is incumbent on the agency to let the matter go. But if on the contrary, it has evidence that the fund was not used for the purpose it was released, it is at liberty to take the appropriate line of action. That is the way out of the current game that miserably conveys the impression that there is more to the matter than the fight against corruption. But the EFCC owes a duty to explain how the presidential campaign fund for Imo State is remarkably different from those spent in other states that nothing is being heard of.

  • Rape victim’s ordeal and police

    Reports of the abduction of Dr.Ime Stephen, uncle to the 15-year old school girl, Mary Udo, allegedly raped at gunpoint by a police Inspector in Akwa Ibom State, represent the apogee of the travails of the family since the rape incident took place.

    It is at once a dangerous development that calls for the immediate intervention of the Inspector-General of Police as insinuations are very high that the incident has an uncanny link with the rape saga.

    Before his abduction, Citizen Stephen had reportedly escaped assassination attempt at his village house at Nyaodiong, in the MkpatEnin Local Government Area of the state. He had also petitioned the state Commissioner of Police, Murtala Mani, alleging threat to his life, that of his family members, attempted arson on his new house and malicious damage of property.

    He also had cause to visit the CP penultimate Friday to complain of frequent attacks on him and how to get justice for Udo. Before his latest fate, the victim was pressing hard for the matter not to be swept under the carpet after refusing to accede to entreaties from some clergymen and police officers sent to him by the Divisional Police Officer DPO to let the matter go.

    Those sent to him by the DPO of the MpatEnin local government were said to have persuaded him to pipe down on the grounds that the incident was not only a big shame to the offending Inspector but the police establishment he represents. But as things stood, Citizen Stephen would not allow the matter go apparently in deference to the rape victim who had said “it was a harrowing experience. There is nothing on earth that would make me forgive the inspector”.

    The little girl’s feelings are understandable given that the inspector not only allegedly raped her at gunpoint while returning from church but detained her for three harrowing days and made the family to cough out N10, 000 before setting her free. That is the height of criminality unexpected of those paid with taxpayers’ money to protect the society. It is a big scandal that by now ought to have attracted deserved attention from the police authorities.

    It is bad a thing that a police officer of that rank could degenerate to such a bestial and criminal level of raping a school girl returning from church at gunpoint. Worse still, he also had the temerity to detain her for three days and forced the family to pay N10, 000 for her safety. These are enough to ruffle public sensibility in saner societies.

    In an issue as serious as this, the minimum expectation is for the accused to be made to face the full weight of the law without delay. But all indications have not pointed to this direction. For, it is about a month now the incident happened without the public being availed the benefit of any serious action taken against him. Rather, what we find is an attempt by the police to paper the matter as vividly indicated by the emissaries they sent to the victims’ uncle.

    Unfortunately, Udo’s family would not have such things covered up because it could encourage policemen to take laws into their hands in anticipation that the system would have a way of protecting them. This column identifies with the Udo family in condemning this singular rape incident and the lawlessness that followed. It cannot and should not be swept under the table. It is a very heinous offence with prospects of further denting the image and credibility of the police force.

    It is trite that the course of the police force will be better served when it distances itself from the criminal activities of its men and officers by taking decisive steps to discourage the resort to criminality. Even if the police had need to apologize to the victim’s family for the bestial treatment meted to their daughter, that should not in any way detract from the fact that the accused must still be made to pay for his sins.

    The accused inspector whose name up till now, is being shielded by the police should immediately be made to face the music for the unmitigated disgrace he is to the institution. That way, we will be sending the right signals that those who abuse their positions of trust for self-serving reasons will not go scot free. That is the lesson that must be underscored most poignantly in the instant case.

    Curiously, the abduction of Stephen has added another dangerous dimension to the matter. This is especially so given that before his latest ordeal, he had escaped an assassination attempt to his life. He had also alleged threats to his life, that of his family, attempted arson on his new house and malicious damage of his property. All these were documented in a petition he sent to the state Commissioner of Police CP.

    Ironically, not much is known of the response of the CP to these allegations before the man was finally abducted from his house by masked gunmen who broke through the wall from the backyard. Neither is there any evidence of the provision of police protection to the man in the face of the serial threats to his life and that of his family.

    And until the CP speaks on the latest development, the impression we get is that the command did not take seriously the copious complaints of the human rights activist. But if the police did not take seriously the issues raised in the petition, the abduction has shown very vividly that either it underestimated the weight of the matter or turned a blind eye to it for inexplicable reasons.

    For whatever reason, it is sad that the fears of Stephen have come true. If the police had taken the matter seriously, they would have responded positively by building some form of security around the Udo family. Had that been done, we would have saved the police institution the embarrassment of having to contend with the reality of this abduction despite repeated complaints and allegations of threats to life and property.

    That is the burden the police has to shoulder given the latest development. It also suffers vicarious responsibility of having to demonstrate beyond reasonable doubt that this abduction is not in any way connected with the family’s insistence that justice must be done in the case of the inspector that raped, abused and extorted money from the innocent school girl.

    There is no better way to demonstrated this than a quick apprehension of the marauding gang that abducted Stephen. With the smashing of the gang and freeing of the rights activist, we will be demonstrating to the world very unambiguously that the cries of the witch at night had nothing to do with the death of the child in the morning. That is the uncanny reality that has been elevated to the fore by the unfolding events surrounding that rape case.

    It is important that the police authorities get to the root of the matter to demonstrate very clearly that the current twist is not in any manner linked to the family’s insistence that the offending inspector must face the wrath of the law. A quick apprehension of those criminals will not only disabuse insinuations of complicity but further shore up the waning public confidence in the ability of the police to protect and treat information given to them with utmost confidentiality.

    We now run the risk of allowing the impression fester that those charged with the security of the citizens can trample on and serially abuse such privileges and get away with them. That is the point where the predicament of Stephen now leaves us. We must work to reverse this ruinous tendency by promptly apprehending the abductors and secure Stephen’s freedom. The IG must act now to extricate the police from it actions or inaction that led to the current pass. But nothing untoward should happen to Citizen Stephen.

  • Enough of that!

    Those who have had to contend with the debilitating effects of last May’s increase in fuel price from N86 per litre to N145 have obvious reasons to worry with emerging reports that the price of the commodity may go up again.

    This time around, the actual price at which the commodity is primed to sell at the filling stations is put at N151.87k per litre. The new price regime is said to be predicated on the continued fall in Naira value which sold at N400 per dollar at the parallel market.

    On account of this, marketers are said to be pushing to sell their products at this market value so as to remain in business. They contend that if they have to sourceforeign exchange at the prevailing market rate, they have no alternative than to sellat the new price. Alternatively, they have called for government intervention by way of subsidizing their foreign exchange purchases.

    Apparently worried by the development, the Group Managing Director of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation NNPC, MrMaikantiBaru said he has not received any directive to increase fuel price. He however admitted that several factors necessitated the current agitation “especially the issue of exchange rate that has moved and we don’t expect any serious changes”.Baru further said that the review could be done by the right body which is the PPPRA.

    It is obvious speculations on an impending increase in the price of fuel are not without foundation. That much was admitted by Baru even as he has not been directed to effect any price increase. He admitted that at issue is the continued slide in Naira value which by extrapolation meant that marketers now have to pay more to import the commodity and will suffer serious business reverses if the situation persists.

    And when we pair his statement that they don’t expect serious changes with the other that the review could be done by the right body, it becomes obvious that there is the possibility of a price change barring some intervening variables. What the man has done is an admission that there are issues with the current pump price of petrol even as it is not within the purview of his corporation to determine when or not to increase fuel price. That is my reading of the situation.

    That has not in any way foreclosed possible increase by the PPPRA which is statutorily charged with that responsibility. By the same token, if directed to increase the price of the commodity, the corporation will have no alternative than to comply. That much can be gleaned from Baru’sstatements.

    Where that leads us now is the real issue. And if you ask the average citizen, he is likely to tell you that another fuel price increase is in the offing as there is no smoke without fire. This line of thought is further given credence by the logic of deregulating the downstream sector of the oil industry. By that logic, since the Naira has fallen and marketers have to spend more to import the commodity, the difference ought to be passed over to the consumer.

    That is why the marketers are leading the agitation for a further price increase. And if the government has its way, it may go ahead to further adjust the pump price of fuel after all, hell did not let loose when it hiked it to the current regime a few months back. It could as well accede to the pressure from the marketers.

    But that will be very insensitive to the current debilitating economic realities wrought on the ordinary citizens by the last increase. If the truth must be told, the reality on the ground cannot permit any further increase without sentencing the ordinary man to his early grave. Today, many families cannot afford to put food on the table on account of the economic recession which our leaders have openly admitted.

    Spiralling inflation, job losses and unavailability of employment opportunities especially for the youths have combined to inflict untold hardship on majority of our citizens. That is the reality on the ground now. The situation is not remedied by the inability of the government to realistically and effectively come up with social intervention measures to cushion the excruciating effects of the last exercise.

    Before now, governments have tended to justify proposals for fuel price increase with a promise that it will put in place a number of palliatives to cushion their effects. We are yet to see any of this come on stream. Yet, speculations are again on that another price increase is being pushed forward by the declining value of the Naira.

    The marketers have asked to be allowed to sell their products at their market value to remain in business. You cannot possibly fault them. After all, they are in business to make some profit.But can the Nigerian society as it currently stands survive another price hike? My answer is no. What to do?

    It is obvious that the current pass has everything to do with the declining value of the Naira due to recent exchange rate policy of the government that has been largely criticized for its inconsistency. It is obvious also that if the marketers continue to source foreign exchange at the current rate, something may have to give way.

    What the situation requires is some form of intervention on the part of the government. Some have argued that intervention by the government is needed in order to avert the foreboding possibility of another price increase. This school believes the government should somehow grant some exchange subsidy to marketers so as to avert an imminent price increase. To this school, if the government could grant some foreign exchange concession to pilgrims, it has more reasons to do so in view of the sensitivity and wider repercussions of the matter.

    There are some others who contend that the demand of the marketers does not seem to add up given that some of them are even selling slightly below the approved market price. If so, how come they are talking about price increase and non-profitability of the business, they query? To this, the reaction is that some of the marketers took to this unwholesome practice to remain in business and those who indulge in it may soon come to a head.

    In all therefore, it is inevitable that some form of intervention by the government is the only way out of the situation. Governments have social responsibility to their citizens. That is the raison d’etrefor their existence in the first instance. Whatever policies a government intends to implement must wear a human face as no society can possibly grow beyond its people.

    Yes, we can talk of appropriate pricing and all that. We can talk of generating more money through appropriate pricing to tackle nagging development challenges. We have also heard of the losses to the nation on account of smuggling of the product. All these may count as justification for deregulating the downstream sector of the oil industry.

    Bu there is a limit beyond which this reasoning cannot proceed without serious repercussions for the wellbeing of our citizens. That is the point where we are now. It will be highly irresponsible on the part of the government to nurse the idea of another fuel price increase. Enough of that!

  • Not just about oil

    For some reason, recent media interview by former President, Goodluck Jonathan after a visit to Aso Rock, is bound to elicit considerable public interest. For one, it has taken long since he spoke to the press especially given the travails of his party in the campaign against corruption.

    And for another, the resumed militancy in the Niger Delta culminating in the destruction of oil facilities and threats of secession are issues the public is keen in knowing his take on them. At the last count, two militant groups from that region have threatened to declare a republic of their own.

    It was therefore little surprising that journalists’ questions centred round these key national issues. But while he refused to entertain questions on the war against corruption contending that the matter was before the courts, he was very forthcoming on the militancy in that region.

    He said he has been liaising with traditional rulers and other key leaders of the Ijaw ethnic nationality to ensure that peace reigns in the country. He must have also gladdened the hearts of those who believe in the indivisibility and non-negotiability of the Nigerian sovereignty when he told reporters that there is no alternative to a united Nigeria. But then, he is not expected to say anything to contrary to a country he presided over its affairs for six good years.

    That the question arose in the first instance is suggestive of one or two things. The first is that as a former president from that region, he can neither feign ignorance nor appear nonchalant about such a serious national challenge with dire repercussions to the national economy. That is not all, there are speculations stemming from events of the last elections, that the resurging militancy may be remotely linked to his fate in that election.

    For any of these possibilities, his views would be much sought after in the current impasse in that region. And he did not disappoint those who reason along this line.

    Hear him, “those of you who have followed my talks when I was here, my emphasis is that we need a united Nigeria, and I always emphasized that Nigeria is great not just about the oil, so many countries produce more oil than Nigeria and nobody notices them. We are great because of our size, the human resources we have, the diversity we have, if we fragmentize the country into small components, we will be forgotten by the world.”

    The above statements are not only loaded but equally weighty. They are bound to mean different things to different people depending on the prism from which they are viewed. He said we need a united Nigeria and Nigeria is great not just because of oil but other potentials it is endowed with. And that there are many countries that produce more oil than Nigeria but do not command the political weight and significance Nigeria commands. These are statements of fact.

    In a way, he has not only assuaged the feelings of those who believe in the continued unity and indivisibility of the country but underscored the point more succinctly that Nigerian unity is not just all about oil. By highlighting such critical variables as size, human resources and diversity, he also seeks to give accommodation, sense of belonging and relevance to all groups in the enterprise despite the primacy of oil as the main source of our revenue earnings.

    By way of extrapolation, he was saying that every group has something to contribute to this unity in diversity. As such, those who take to militancy and sabotage of oil installations to press home their grievances should have a rethink as Nigeria is not just all about oil. That would gladden the hearts of sections that have been at the receiving end of scathing criticisms for not contributing or contributing little to the common wealth.

    If the above satisfies the expectations of the pro-establishment, it may come as a huge disappointment to the oil bearing communities because of its reductionist undertone. For, Jonathan runs the risk of being accused of attempting to narrow down the grievances of the Niger Delta people to the fact that they produce oil. That is why he reminds them that there are many countries that produce more oil than Nigeria that are of little consequence in world politics. If that is correct, it is only logical that the weight assigned to this country cannot be solely predicated on its status as an oil producing country. That conclusion cannot be faulted.

    But it is one thing to contend that oil is not the only source of strength for this country and entirely different kettle of fish to convey the impression that the crisis in the Niger Delta is all about oil. That would be a very simplistic perspective of the matter. It is not just about oil or claims for its control. It has to do with glaring injustice and systemic inequities in the country which easily finds expression in the despoliation of the environment of the oil producing communities to which our leaders turn blind eyes to.

    Those communities have not said other parts of the country have no stake in that resource which mother-nature bountifully endowed at their backyard. Their complaints arose in the first instance due to the devastation and degradation of their environment by the oil producing companies without giving a hoot to their well-being. So if we are serious in locating the main source of grouse of the Niger Delta people, it has its roots in the type of leadership we have had in this country- a leadership that has been anything but nationalistic.

    There are off course issues relating to the distribution of oil blocks and the wealth accruing from oil revenue. In these, the Niger Delta people feel largely shortchanged. So it is not just about the ownership of oil but the injustice and hardship arising from its exploitation and distribution. And it will be wrong to think that the oil bearing communities are not entitled to express their views on these even as ordinary citizens.

    Before now also, they have been very vocal in agitating for some form of restructuring to place the country in a better stead to withstand the challenges arising from discontent of the disparate groups. So, the failure to restructure is fundamental to the resurging militancy rather than any obsession with their reality as oil producing communities. Those who are vehemently opposed to restructure are vicariously liable for the continuing systemic dysfunctions that have not allowed this country witness peace. Good a thing, former military Head of State,Yakubu Gowon has said there is nothing wrong with restructuring if it is done within the contest of one Nigeria. All the proposals on restructuring including the recommendations of the 2014 National Conference which Buhari has put in a cooler are within the context of one Nigeria. Why the opposition to this visionary document?

    There is also the weird suggestion that restructuring cannot go hand in hand with the campaign against corruption. The two can in all honesty, proceed simultaneously. As a matter of fact, restructuring is more fundamental to the overall success of the war against corruption as it targets its roots than the current perspective that target symptoms.

    Agitations for self-determination by the Pro-Biafra movements, the resort to military warfare by the Boko Haram terrorists that have vowed to institute an Islamic state in this country and the scourge of the herdsmen are manifestations of deep seethed grievances and inadequacies which can be redressed through restructuring.  They have little to do with what the sections involved contribute to the national purse.  So it is not just all about oil or the right to it.

  • Ambode’s loans

    All things being equal, the Lagos State government will from September, commence disbursement of N6.25 billion as loans to interested unemployed youths in the state.

    The fund according to the commissioner for Wealth Creation, BabatundeDurosinmi-Etti is to assist unemployed Lagosians to create wealthby setting up businesses of their own. And it is meant for everybody including artisans and traders.

    He said the creation of his ministry was on account of the huge number of unemployed youths in Lagos state and that Governor Akinwunmi Ambode had directed the fund to be made available to ‘everybody’. Consequently, interested individuals and groups have been advised to organize themselves for easy accessibility to the fund.

    Given the dire economic situation in the country and the high unemployment rate especially among the youths, the proposal by the Lagos State government to make some funds available to unemployed youths to set up their own businesses is very visionary and therefore worthy of commendation. It recognizes the problems in the continued harbouring of a large army of youths with no visible means of livelihood and the potent danger it poses for the peace and orderly conduct of the society.

    By making available the loans to the youths to set up their businesses, the government would have kept them busy as gainful partners in wealth creation, while at the same time obviating those ills associated with joblessness. It is therefore a worthy intervention to add value to human capital by making them worthy citizens. The larger benefits to society are enormous.

    Though details of the modus operandi of the fund are yet to be made public, there is no doubt that if properly managed, it will go a long way to create jobs for the army of the unemployed youths who daily roam the streets for lack of gainful unemployment. This will not only rob off very positively on the reduction of the sundry crimes that have come to buffet our urban centres but diffuse the potent threat to national stability which the subsisting situation portends.

    The Lagos State government is therefore on the right track for coming to terms with the reality that given its cosmopolitan nature with a burgeoning population, some form of direct intervention to have the youths engaged is a sine qua non for peace and stability of the state.

    Yet, as commendable as the project is, adequate care must be taken to ensure that the overall objective is neither defeated nor circumscribed by actions or inactions either on the side of prospective beneficiaries or those to be charged with its implementation. We say this because of the tendency for the fund to be sabotaged by the observed penchant of the average Nigerian to see such loans as free funds to service conspicuous consumption.

    Since the fund is said to be for all those who apply, it is only to be expected that the number of applicants will far outstrip whatever is available for disbursement.Yet, it is still a good beginning. What needs to be done is for the state government to come up with fool-proof criteria for authenticating the identity and other information to be supplied by prospective beneficiaries.

    In a clime where data on individuals is hard to come by, there is the need to work very closely with traditional institutions, market associations and the like to stand as guarantee for applicants. Also very relevant is the need to verify and monitor the kind of businesses the loans are to be deployed.

    It was in an apparent move to check these sources of abuse that the government warned that those who will supply false names and wrong addresses or divert the loans to frivolous activities such as weddings would be made to face the law. That is the way to go otherwise the good idea may be defeated by some of our ruinous dispositions and attitudes to anything that is of the civic realm.

    No doubt, there is the urgency to get the youths engaged through such intervention loans if we are serious in reducing the debilitating unemployment rate in the country. With the daily laying off of workers on account of the technical recession which our economic managers have admitted, governments both federal and state must seek out other alternatives of aiding the unemployed to engage in some form of self-employment. That will also involve conscious and concerted efforts to provide such supportive infrastructures as power, water, durable roads among others. At present, the current state of these social infrastructures is a serious disincentive to investment.

    Ours is a county where many are qualified to work and are prepared to work. Yet they cannot find any work to do. That is the irony of our situation. And we can continue with such a foreboding scenario with dire repercussions. The Lagos State government should work with great zeal and focus in determining artisans and traders genuinely intent in improving their fortunes and avail them of the loans.

    The initial disbursement of N6.25 billion should serve as a pilot scheme and experiences gathered from its implementation brought to bear in enhancing the overall success of subsequent disbursements. Closely linked to this is the ban on street trading which the state government has moved to enforce. A recent interview by some reporters on why street trading flourishes, highlighted such factors as the poor state of the nation’s economy, spiralling inflation, lack of sufficient capital to start off business, inability to pay for shops that are usually out of the reach of many, among others.

    The loans when properly managed and harnessed, will also partly address street trading which was outlawed since 2003 but has not been fully implemented because of the abject poverty in the land and the repercussions of having toexacerbate the situation. It was in an apparent realization of the yawning gap between the ban and the material conditions of the people that reservations have been made on its full implementation now.

    The government appears not unmindful of these reservationsas it has gone ahead to engage the public on the evils of patronizing street hawkers. The state Commissioner of Police, FataiOwoseni took up the challenge to sensitize the public on the dangers inherent in patronizing these street hawkers when he recently addressed the media.

    After enumerating the dangers associated with street trading such as robberies, sale of harmful and substandard goods and exposure to accidents, he admitted “We know the mood of the society and we want to balance our enforcement and that is why we are doing a lot of public enlightenment”. He has said it all.

    Owoseni raised another valid issue when he urged street traders and hawkers to form a formidable front and meet the government to create corner shops for them. That initiative should rather be taken up by the government as it will enhance the overall success of any eventual and full implementation of the ban on street trading.

    With the creation of the corner shops that are within the reach of the poor, youths who are lucky to benefit from the loans will have little problem adapting to the competitive business environment. By the same token, traders driven out of the street will find alternative and affordable places to do their business. So the corner shops are two sides of the same coin as they will not only enhance overall success of the utilization of loans but the crusade against street trading. Should we wait any longer to have them on stream?

  • Idris and Arase’s 24 cars

    Those highly enthused by the anti-corruption crusade of the Buhari regime would have been taken aback by the allegation that immediate past Inspector-General of Police IG, Solomon Arase went away with 24 vehicles of the force contrary to extant regulations.

    This is more so, given that the former police boss was one of the arrow heads of the anti-graft campaign. If after a few weeks of his retirement, such weighty and damaging allegations are being levied against him, not a few would be at great loss as to what has become of that key crusade.

    His successor, Ibrahim Idris had while addressing the media alerted that his predecessor took away 24 cars while departing from his position. He did not stop there. He further alleged that some of the departing Deputy Inspectors’ General of police,DIG’s went away with seven and others eight vehicles contrary to their entitlements.

    Hear him: “A week before I was announced IG when you look through my office window you could see so many cars. But the cars all disappeared when I came in. I discovered that the last IG went away with 24 vehicles including two BMWs. The DIGs some took seven, others eight. And they left me with an old vehicle”.

    Idris said he wrote Arase reminding him of police rule regarding the number of cars he is entitled to and asked that he return the excess wondering what need he had for such high number of cars. He also gave indication of his intention to probe vehicle purchases and promotions within the police force on account of observed irregularities.

    But Arase has countered the allegations saying he neither made away with such number of vehicles nor received a letter from Idris on the matter. He said all matters relating to the deployment of the vehicles in question are contained in his handover notes to Idris wondering why he was not contacted for clarifications if the need arose.

    For these procedural flaws, Arase views the allegations by Idris’ as a figment of malice; a hasty voyage into media propaganda. As things stand, it is the words of Idris against those of Arase.

    On their face value, it is difficult to establish which of the personages to believe.Idris claimed the vehicles he saw through his window a week before his appointment, especially the two BMWs that are assigned to the IG disappeared immediately he was appointed. He fingered his predecessor for collecting 24 including the two BMWs while the DIGs collected between seven and eight only to leave him with an old vehicle which President Buhari even noticed and askedwhat he was doing with such an old car.

    But Arase has said nothing of such happened querying what need he has for 24 cars when he is not operating a car mart. The same feelings were shared by Idris when he asked during his brief to reporters what need an individual has for 24 cars. It would therefore appear both of them are on the same page in the thinking that an individual has no need for such number of cars.

    If there is any shred of truth in this conclusion, it then means that something must have gone awry somewhere. It is either the facts of the matter have not been properly presented or somebody somewhere failed to do his job properly. This is especially so given that Arase has said very unambiguously that all details pertaining to the deployment of those vehicles are well documented in the handover notes he gave Idris while leaving office.

    He went further to contend that nobody reached him for clarifications assuming some ambiguity arose from the handover notes. And to drive this point closer home, he wondered why Idris who is privy to his phone number and other details did not call him for clarification before placing the matter within the public domain.

    Viewed along this line, Arase has a valid point. Idris should have taken the pains to get in touch with him to shed more light on some of his findings on the alleged disappearance of the cars. Had he done that, we would have been saved the embarrassment of the current recrimination between the two key persons.  Arase should have been given the benefit of doubt until he is unable to respond to inquisition or mails sent to him on the issue.

    Even then, it is still doubtful whether the resort to media hype was the most appropriate handle on the issue. I am afraid, it is not.The inability of Idris to seek such clarification only to rush to the media with such weighty and damaging allegations is at the root of the stench of a rat which Arase smelt in the matter. And it is difficult to fault him on that.

    For now, allegations and counter allegations have been traded. The integrity of the two persons has been put on the line as the public have been sensitized to the dispute. Arase has been accused of some misconduct bordering on appropriating government vehicles illegally. It is a very serious offence especially given the anti-corruption campaign of the current regime.

    But he has spurned the allegation claiming that everything pertaining to the allocation of the vehicles is available to Idris courtesy of the handover notes. Given the dimension that matter has taken, the onus of proof now lies on the shoulders of Idris. He must come public with details of the vehicles and those they were allocated to in the handover notes.

    He should furnish the discerning public with credible evidence as to the source of the claims he bandied on the illegal appropriation of the vehicles by Arase and other senior police officers entitled to vehicles on retirement. Was his ‘discovery’ of the illegal acquisition of the cars based on hearsay, mereconjecture, or a whiff of mental estimate based on the vehicles he saw from his window before appointment? Or was it a product of careful appraisal of extant documents relating to their allocation?

    These posers have been raised in view of emerging media speculations that the two BMWs were actually undergoing maintenance at the premises of the command’s private technicians and that one of them had indeed been returned to the force after repairs. If this is true, why was this fact not available to theleadership of the force before it went public with allegations capable of damaging the image and reputation of the former IG?

    It does appear the police boss acted in a hurry by going public with the matter when all issues relating to the allocations were yet to be properly verified.And since the issue has gone public, every detail of that allocation to departing senior police officers and other formations as contained in the handover notes must be made public.

    On balance however, there is everything to suggest that the allegations by Idris were done hastily. We say so because of the short interval between when he took over and the time he addressed the press. This point is given further credence by hisdecision to investigate vehicle purchases within the establishment in the last three years. If he had such intention, the proper thing would have been to wait for its outcome before deciding on the next line of action. That is where he missed it.

    Perhaps, the new police boss reacted the way he did out of the frustration of being left with one rickety car that embarrassed the president. Even at that, he should still have exercised some caution in going public on the issue. This way, he would have saved himself the burden of having to prove Arase guilty of the alleged offence publicly or tender serious apology to him in the event of the allegations lacking in merit.

  • INEC and Abia stalemate

    Even if the smoldering crisis generated by Justice OkonAbang’s ruling, which sacked Governor OkezieIkpeazu of Abia State is under considerable control, the role of the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC in facilitating that pass, will unlikely go down well with many.

    For, much of the confusion that trailed that ruling would have been stymied had the commission trod very cautiously in a manner expected of that supposedly impartial body. At issue was the indecent haste with which it issued the Certificate of Return to the beneficiary of the judgment, UcheOgah. Not just that, it went further to lie on the pendency of the notice of appeal and stay of execution of that court judgment.

    Initial comments from the commission had vehemently denied that Okezie filed a notice of appeal and a stay of execution, which legal experts said were the conditions that could bar that electoral body from executing that judgment.

    But the Attorney-general and Commissioner for Justice of Abia State came out swiftly with evidence that both the appeal and motion for stay of execution were duly filed and served; furnishing the name of INEC clerk that received them, the time and date they were received. Apparently, embarrassed by this disclosure, the commission was later to reverse itself, accepting that there was actually a notice of appeal but surprisingly feigned ignorance of the subsistence of a motion for stay of execution.

    But for the court judgment from the Abia High Court in Osisioma restraining the Chief Judge of the state or any other judge from inaugurating Ogah, he would have been sworn-in when he stormed the seat of government in Umuahia to claim the mandate given him by the court and aptly facilitated by INEC.

    Issues have been raised regarding the propriety of the order from theAbia high court. Governor Okezie has also been accused of judicial ambush and sundry tactics to stall the swearing-in of Ogah. We shall return to this later.

    On their part, the AbiaState government has also accused INEC of duplicity and compromise especially given its initial denials of the existence of the notice of appeal and stay of execution until the claims were roundly proven to be false. These denials and the hasty handing over of the Certificate of Return to Ogah have largely been interpreted by that government as evidence of INEC’s hidden motive in the matter.

    They found it curious that though the appeal and motion for the stay of execution were duly filed and served the electoral body on June 28, it still went ahead two clear days after, to issue the certificate of return to Ogah. This was further confirmed by counsel to INEC when he told Justice Abang’s court at the resumed hearing that “by issuance I meant that it was signed on June 28, but the actual presentation of the certificate was on June 30”.

    The government has also accused Ogah of attempting to assume the mantle of governance in an election he did not contest; vaulting ambition and seeking ascendancy into that office through the back door.

    It is difficult to exculpate INEC of allegations of complicity in the matter. It had no sufficient grounds rushing the issuance of the certificate of return when the matter was pending in court. So the Abia State government is on a solid footing to accuse it of bias in the instant case. It ought to have waited for the legal processes to have run their full course before action.

    And given what we know of these election cases, it does not take a genius to come to terms with the realty that the incumbent would definitely challenge the ruling. So INEC had no business embarking on that precipitous and pre-emptive voyage in utter disregard of its prospects for chaos.

    INEC’s position on the matter was further trivialized by its national commissioner in charge of the South-east, Lawrence Nwuruku when he said he was simply obeying court order by hastily presenting the certificate of return to Ogah and that if another court issues another order he would also obey it.It is not just a matter of obeying court order as the propriety of executing that judgment when it has already been challenged in court to the knowledge of that electoral body. That is the issue to contend with.

    It is wrong for Nwuruku to have presented the commission as a robot just obeying court orders without recourse to other developments that may impede their execution as this case has proven. Nwuruku also displayed crass ignorance of the inherent danger in the action when he said that if Ogah is sworn in and another court rules that another person should be sworn in, they will again swear that person in. It is not just as simple as it has been presented given its prospects for anarchy.

    And if one may wish to ask, was the opinion of the legal department of INEC sought in this matter? We raise this poser because, in matters of this nature in the past, INEC is known to have exercised considerable discretion on the appropriate recourse. Why that caution was thrown to the winds in the instant case, is at the root of the allegation that the electoral body had more than a passing interest in the matter.

    Ikeazu succinctly captured the contradiction in the whole process when he asked: so if it were in a matter of capital punishment, I would have been executed before my appeal is heard? That is the crux of the matter and the point where INEC got it all wrong. It should have allowed the legal process to run its full course.

    Moreover, the course of democracy, law and order in Abia State would be at great jeopardy if we accept Nwuruku’s position that Ogah should be sworn in and if the appeal court rules to the contrary, we should have Ikpeazu re-sworn in. That obviously, is nothing than an invitation to disaster. The proper thing to do is for the status quo to be maintained pending the determination of the appeals up to the Supreme Court.

    With that singular action by the electoral body, we have inevitably been entrapped to a situation where a governor is sitting in office while another person with a court judgment and a certificate of return is unable to assume office, a standoff of sorts with wider repercussions for peace and orderly conduct. INEC is largely culpable for this sordid state of affairs.

    So the matter is not as such with the ruling byJustice Abang as the indecent haste with which INEC aidedOgah to assume the mantle of leadership. It does not also have much to do with disclosures that the case, instituted in 2014 had suffered frustrations up to the Supreme Court before it was ordered for re-trial and assigned to the present judge. All those were legal processes conducted within the ambit of the law.

    The thrust of this piece is not the propriety of the judgment delivered by Justice Abang. That is the matter for the appellate courts to handle. No attempt is either being made to encumber Ogah from seeking the enforcement of his rights. If that right is propelled by ambition, so be it. But the proper things must be done before he can lay claims to such rights.And in the pursuit of that right,Ikpeazu’s own right to have his appeal determined must be respected.

    If it took the resort to self-help or judicial ambush for that to happen, it would seem the end has justified the means. If there is anything like judicial ambush in legal lexicon, then the judicial system that allows it has itself to blame.

    But more fundamentally, the judiciary must rise to the challenges of the suspicion that it is increasingly lending itself to manipulation by politicians to satisfy theirselfish ambitions. Such accusations have been quite rife before now and are being freely traded by parties in to case. The judiciary must not only remain an impartial arbiter but must be seen to be so.

  • Nigeria’s unity: beyond precepts

    President Buhari seemed to have stirred the hornet’s nest when he told residents of Abuja onSallah visit that Nigeria’s unity is non-negotiable. Apparently worried by rising agitations for self-determination and sabotage, Buhari had said, “When we were junior officers, we were told by our leaders, by the Head of state which was General Gowon, that to keep Nigeria one is a task that must be done. We never thought of oil. What we were after is one Nigeria”.

    By this, he sought to disabuse the minds of people, especially those from oil-bearing states that the foundation of Nigeria was not predicated on oil revenue or what the constituents stood to gain but on the philosophy of the unity and sovereignty of the country.

    But the colonial masters, in amalgamating the country, never lost sight of the potency of the relative economic strengths of the component units for its survival. So, it is incorrect for the president to have conveyed the impression thatthe economic strength and viability of the emergent state was not a serious factor in arriving at that political decision. It was a serious factor.

    That however, is besides the issue. A more contentious matter in the president’s speech is the suggestion that the sovereignty of Nigeria is an end unto itself. That is not correct and cannot possibly be. As a construct, the sovereignty of the Nigerian state remains a means for the pursuit of the common good of the constituents. Its’ appeal and continued justification lie in the capacity of the emergent state to tap and harness the collective energies and resources of the disparate groups for the greatest good of the greatest number.

    That political assemblage is to further the economic benefits and general wellbeing of the various ethnic, linguistic, cultural and religious groups that make up the country. So the idea of keeping Nigeria one was relevant to the extent that it was envisaged as the most plausible paradigm to advance and cater for the general interests and wellbeing of the constituents. It was not just one Nigeria for itself but for the common good of all.

    Sadly, 46 years after that unification civil war, we do not seem to have progressed beyond the challenges the nation faced at its budding stages. That is why today, we still talk of the task of keeping Nigeria one as if that is an end unto itself. For the president to be so agitated that he had to recall that civil war slogan in nostalgia is indicative of one or two things. First, it gives the impression that the Nigerian state has over these years been embroiled in a crisis of relevance due to its inability to serve the collective interests of the component units.

    Secondly, it comes with the awful message that not much progress has been made after that war to drum and internalize the import of that unity into the psyche of Nigerians to secure their loyalty through the capacity of the state to do justice, guarantee equity and fairness to all. Those are the unmistakable signals from the president’s message.It also contains a veiled threat to fight another war to keep Nigeria one if it comes to that.

    One can understand the president’s predicament for which he had to remind us that keeping Nigeria one is a task that must be done. Fine! But,for how long shall we continue to fight to keep Nigeria one? And what future is there for a country that has to depend regularly on force to wield its peoples together? These questions are as instructive as they underscore the inevitability of a rethink on the fundamentals of this unity.

    They also instruct that we part ways with stereotypes and fashion out more eclectic and sustainable ways to avoid disintegration. What should concern us more is not this rabid fixation with forced unity but political engineering processes that will allow the idea to be naturally internalized. That is the path to nation building. It involves the psychological reconstruction of the mind to elicit attitudes and dispositions that are supportive of the government. Force has always proved patently defective in this regard.

    By now, we should have been able to pose question and provide answers to why primordial tendencies have of recent, gained high ascendancy despite several years of platitude on the sanctity of the unity and sovereignty of the Nigerian state. It will be nigh impossible to make real progress as a people if we continue to evade the suffocating dynamics of this challenge. And in answering this question and providing durable solutions to it, we must draw a bold line between precepts and examples.

    It is not enough to preach on the desirability and imperative of the unity and indivisibility of the country. It is also not sufficient to rehearse or remind us of those slogans. We have since gone beyond such catchphrases. What is now direly needed is for that entity to prove its relevance through its ability to attend to the yearnings and aspirations of the constituents. And its capacity to deliver quality public goods and services equitably holds the ace for its continued relevance and survival.

    Ironically, the capacity of the Nigerian state for equity and fairness has come into serious question since Buhari came on stead. In both his appointments and other dispositions of government, his inclination to favor the north over and above other sections of the country has not been in any doubt.

    A situation in which the north now occupies 14 out of 17 key national security appointments with the South-east unapologetically and totally excluded cannot but breed feelings of discontent, alienation and self-help.Neither can it conduce for the sustenance of the non-negotiability and indivisibility of the Nigerian state. And as has been seen from recent events, those notions are facing the greatest challenges of our time.

    When this skewed inclination reared its ugly head at the early stages of Buhari’s appointments, the excuses were that more appointment were coming;  they were his personal staff and he had to work with those he trusted. There were some other trite excuses that will collapse woefully when subjected to empirical evidence including the suggestion that the appointments were based on merit.

    More of such appointments have come and the situation has gone for the worse. The festering impression is that Buhari is a northern president.Yet, in spite ofcomplaints for a redress, we trudge on as if important segments of the country count for nothing within the nation’s political matrix.

    A situation where the president is uncomfortable engaging any personal staff from a population of over 50 million people speaks volumes. It not only reinforces agitations for self-determination but stiff competition for the control of the centre to subject its institutions and resources to primordial advantage.

    Buhari should take very seriously the rising complaints of alienation and shutting out of critical segments of the country from the commanding heights of the military and bureaucracy. If he really means business on the unity of this country, he must be seen to be making concerted efforts to run a more inclusive and all embracing government with an abiding commitment torestructure the country. No group wants to belong to a union where they are consigned to playing a second fiddle and where their views and interests count nothing.

    Wole Soyinka aptly summed up these issues when he said, “I am on the side of those who say we must do everything to avoid disintegration. That language I understand. I don’t understand ex-President Olusegun Obasanjo’s language.I don’t understand President Muhammadu Buhari’s language and all their predecessors, saying the sovereignty of Nigeria is non-negotiable. It’s bloody well negotiable and we had better negotiate it”.