The Nation Newspaper

Category: Emeka Omeihe

  • Bail-out and sundry issues

    The measures unfolded last week by the Buhari administration to offset backlog of salaries and allowances owed workers in the country call for serious introspection. Those showering encomiums or indulging in chest-beating for the credit to the new administration which the package represents may miss the salient lessons the development has placed in the vortex of public opinion. Good as the measures are especially given the dire economic situation in many of the states, the message may be lost if the raging euphoria blurs our vision to the monumental dangers in states depending on federal handouts for survival. That should be the real issue.

    Under the measures, $2.1billion dividend paid into the Federation Account by the Nigerian Liquefied Natural Gas company Limited (LNLG) is to be shared among the three tiers of government. Between N250 and N300 billion special intervention funds from the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) are also available as soft loans to the states while a N600 billion relief package from the Debt Management Office (DMO) to help states restructure their debts with the commercial banks is also on offer.

    Much of the reactions from the larger public have come as commendation for the federal government for saving the states from the deleterious economic situation they have found themselves. At the last count, many of the states owe workers between four and 10 month’s salaries. Even with the cheering prospects which the incentives offer, there is a wide gamut of feeling that the new package may be misused by some states, unless firm measures are put in place to monitor strict application.

    The lesson in this seeming vote of no confidence on some of the governors can only be lost on us at a great cost. And that is the key issue that has been brought to the fore by the foregoing. In it also is the indubitable fact that despite the challenges arising from the fall in oil prices in the international market, the governors are largely to blame for running the economies of their states virtually aground. So the issue goes beyond non- availability of funds. It has little to do with the drop in revenue accruals from the federation account. That is why even oil bearing states that receive more from the federal till are in many months’ salary arrears while some others that do not enjoy that advantage are faring better. The secret of this can only be located in how effective and efficient they have been in the management of the funds that accrued to them overtime. That is the real issue here. And the way it is handled will chart the direction for the financial prudence, self sufficiency and ultimate survival of the states.

    It also brings to question the efforts of state governors to save for the rainy day; efforts to rely more on internally generated revenue given our dependence on a mono cultural economy. It largely hinges on priority-setting and cost-cutting. The governors needed to be measured against these indices for us to determine whether the new intervention funds will not go the way of previous accruals that were misused. So when we avail state governors with more funds without them appreciating what the new direction entails, we stand the risk of coming back to the same situation.

    As of now, there is nothing to indicate from the life styles of the governors that it will not be business as usual. The number of their former colleagues currently facing trials for sundry financial misdemeanour do not give comfort of mind that we are about to exit from the mess so soon after. It is also curious why the current debilitating finances of the states were kept under seal in the days following the last electioneering campaigns. Or what role the last elections played in bringing these states to their knees shortly after.

    The public may need to know whether the inability of states to pay salaries and allowances has a direct bearing with the huge spending of the political parties during the last elections. If the issue bears positive correlation with the cost of running elections, a more effective and more pragmatic approach would entail fundamental constitutional review to cut down the cost of running elections in this clime. There is also the challenge of the defective federal system of government we currently run. We ought to be certain whether we really need a federation in the strict sense of it or the aberrant form in which it currently operates. There is the need to resolve once and for all whether the component units will exercise a large measure of financial autonomy or continue as an appendage of the central authority. These are the kind of lasting interventions we should be concerned with at this point and not the unnecessary altercations between rival political parties as to who should take credit for the funding of the bail-out package. The PDP had sought to take some credit for the funds the government intends to disburse contending that savings from the Jonathan regime formed a major chunk of that money. It further reasoned that the availability of such huge funds puts a lie to the impression which President Buhari gave to the world that the treasury was virtually empty.  The party would therefore want the president to correct his earlier statement given the huge amount that is now readily available for sharing.

    But the presidency in an apparent move to extricate itself from the accusation, swiftly explained that the money meant for sharing, represented dividends from the NLNG which had just been remitted into the federation account while others came in the form of loans and rescheduling of previous exposure of some states to the commercial banks. It was also very unequivocal in denying that any money was drawn from the Excess Crude Account (ECA) that is now a subject of disputation.

    Though the presidency did not clearly say so, implicit in that clarification was a veiled attempt to reaffirm its earlier position on the state of finances of the federal government. That was the purport of the argument that the dividends from the NLNG had just been paid in and that the president’s attention to it was drawn during a courtesy visit by the company. Whatever the case, the money still belonged to the federal government. It is immaterial at what point the attention of the authorities were drawn to its existence. And as has been rightly argued in some quarters, government is a continuum.

    Perhaps, the president could be excused since he had promised to give the nation full details of the financial standing of the country in due course. Thus, we may not have to be in a hurry to take him to task on how empty the treasury was when he assumed office. By the time he has had a comprehensive picture of the situation; perhaps there will be the need for the kind of demands the opposition is making of him regarding how empty the treasury really was.

    The lesson in all this is in the need for caution and moderation in our criticisms and utterances. It is important that we are constructive and factual in all our presentations otherwise we will be inadvertently creating monsters that will turn round to haunt us. In the wake of the last elections, foul and intemperate language was freely deployed. Facts were also twisted to gain advantage. If these could be excused given the exigencies of winning elections, there should be very little room for them now.

    Part of the disenchantment with Buhari’s pace is on account of the type of campaign promises the opposition mounted to gain power. The end may have justified the means. But the general impatience with his speed and subsequent pleas for more time would have been absolutely unnecessary if the enormity of the problems facing the nation were really factored in while making campaign promises. Our nationalists faced the same situation immediately after sending the white man packing. So, we need to reappraise our language of political discourse.

  • Boko Haram protests

    When residents in major cities of Anambra State protested against alleged plans to relocate some Boko Haram detainees to prisons there, many were tempted to dismiss the protests with a wave of the hand. This was more so when prison authorities rose to vehemently deny such a plan was in the offing.

    They hinged their denial on the grounds that most of the Boko Haram detainees were still awaiting trial and it would be inconceivable to relocate them to areas far flung from their trial venues. Since Anambra State is hundreds of kilometres away from the North-east, the epicentre of the insurgency, many were led to believe the rationalization of the prison authorities. The shrouding of the trials, conviction and issues relating to the insurgency in utmost secrecy, left one with little choice than to buy the argument of the prison authorities.

    This was followed in quick succession by a statement from the Anambra State chapter of the All Progressives Congress (APC) accusing the state government of masterminding the demonstrations for political reasons. The party was so emphatic that it described the rumours as baseless even as it had no basis dabbling into the controversy.

    But things took a different turn a few days later when another round of demonstrations erupted in the sleepy city of Ekwulobia in the Aguata Local Government Area. This time, the demonstrators were very certain that about 49 Boko Haram convicts had been relocated to the Ekwulobia prisons. They had as evidence, the arrival of truck loads of soldiers with mattresses and mats. As if these were not enough, the sight of soldiers who cordoned off the prison fenced with wire gauze, stopping and searching people including villagers left no one in doubt that Boko Haram prisoners were indeed at the facility. Even then, the leadership of the traders’ association which has been anchoring the demonstrations, quoting prison sources, said Boko Haram prisoners numbering 49 were actually brought to the facility on Sunday, June 28 under very tight security. It would seem from the above that the protests were after all not a fluke as we were made to believe. The protesters appeared to have gotten their facts right before kicking against the relocation. And what is their grouse? Their fears can be gleaned from some of the placards which among others read “please save our state from Boko Haram insurgents” “Why Ekwulobia of all the towns. Why Anambra State”. Their worry is that housing the insurgents in the area would attract all manner of visitors especially sympathizers of the convicts with the frightening prospects for unleashing attacks on the people. There is also the possibility of jail break with serious security implications for the people.

    Ordinarily, the prison authorities should be within their call of duty to deploy prison inmates to any facility of their choice in any state they consider safe enough for that purpose. So they may not have contravened any law of the land in the instant case. By relocating those 49 insurgents to the Ekwulobia prisons, it should be expected that the facilities there are well protected, well equipped and adequately safeguarded against the volatility and dangerous machinations of such high risk inmates. If that was the rationale, there may be no serious ground for the seeming paranoia against the housing of the insurgents in such facilities.

    But this optimism pales into insignificance in the face of the decrepit state of our prisons. Not only are our prisons not well kept and maintained, their security has left much to be desired. Overcrowding has left in its wake, recurring incidents of jail break. When this is juxtaposed against the recurring attempts by Boko Haram detainees and their accomplices to free their detained members through very violent means, the fears of the Anambra people can be better understood. Those who may be inclined to dismiss these fears have the cases of Kogi and Ekiti states where gunmen believed to be linked to the insurgents bombed two prisons and aided the escape of inmates. If these instances are still not enough, the jail break at the SSS Headquarters in Abuja during which the insurgents disarmed the SSS agents guarding them resulting in heavy shooting that sent the seat of the federal government shaking, drives home the mortal danger in hosting the insurgents. There were similar instances of Boko Haram attempts to free their colleagues in military facilities even in Maiduguri. So when traders and residents in Anambra State especially Ekwulobia fear that mortal harm may come their way through the presence of the insurgent religious extremists in the decrepit and poorly protected prisons, they are standing on very solid grounds. And as has been noted, the prisons where the insurgents are now being housed have only wire gauze as fence. That is why those passing there come into contact with soldiers guarding the facility. It is for the same reason that the arrival of high profile inmates cannot be hidden from the prying eyes of the public. Thus, the prison cannot be considered safe for the keeping of very dangerous and potentially explosive criminals for whom life means nothing. One had thought that the standard practice is to keep such dangerous criminals in maximum security prisons.

    Those who know Ekwulobia well would be amazed at the logic for the transfer of the insurgents there. Despite its status as a local government headquarters, Ekwulobia is still largely a rural community located at the very heart of Igbo land. A Boko Haram attack there is very unlikely to go down well with the people of that geo-political zone. It is likely to be viewed as a deliberate act of exporting Boko Haram to a zone that is battling with a surfeit of its own challenges. Perhaps, the inability to come to terms with what the situation would portend should Boko Haram insurgency be added to their litany of challenges is at the root of these protests.

    More fundamentally, a lot of people from that region suffered serious casualties in lives and property in the hands of the insurgents. Many of them have had to flee the northern parts of the country in the wake of incessant attacks and threats from the murderous group ordering them to leave or face annihilation. Before Boko Haram changed strategy, much of their targets were Christian places of worship even as their hatred for other religions has never been in doubt. So if the people of the zone grow paranoid on the mention of Boko Haram on their soil, they have genuine cause to complain. They are within their rights to draw copious attention to the unmitigated danger which the arrival of the dreaded criminals on their soil portends. That right can neither be abridged nor circumscribed especially in the democratic dispensation we now find ourselves.

    It is one thing for the government to reserve the rights to deploy prisoners anywhere and a different ball game for such rights to invade the sensibilities of the people without whom governments have no meaning. The protests may not be enough to compel the government to reverse its decision to relocate the detainees there. But they have drawn serious attention to the fragile peace in the area as a result of the presence of those detainees. They have sensitized the authorities to the dangers in keeping such violent groups in rural prisons lacking in serious security architecture. They have called attention to the new challenges in that community consequent upon of the arrival of the insurgents. These are the points that have most poignantly been driven home.

    The federal government has the option to shut its eyes to the genuine concerns of the people of the community. It is also at liberty to ignore the issues raised about the inappropriateness in hosting sophisticated criminals in ill-maintained and ill-equipped prisons. But it stands to take liability for acts of omission or commission should the simulated scenarios eventually play themselves out.

  • Legislators’ pay and other matters

    Renewed public interest in the salaries and allowances of lawmakers and political office holders should not be surprising. With the grim state of the nation’s economy; mounting arrears of salaries by governments and high cost of governance, it is difficult for the seemingly huge pay of legislators and other political office holders to continue to evade the prying eyes of the public.

    This interest is not entirely new. It was a subject of heated debate around 2013. Then, there arose public outcry against the wide gulf between what was seen as the jumbo pay of federal legislators, vis-à-vis extant wage regime in the country.  The actual pay of the lawmakers generated so much speculation that the Revenue Mobilization, Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) had to come out with the schedule of salaries and allowances of members. Even with that, their actual salaries and allowances have since remained a highly misunderstood issue, often leading to opaque interpretations.

    According to that schedule, the annual salaries and allowances of a senator amounted to N12.9 million. This is in addition to N24 million paid once in their tenure of four years. In this category fall such items as car loan, housing loan, terminal benefits etc.

    For a member of the House of Representatives, his annual salaries and allowances amounted to N9.5 million in addition to N23.8 million paid once in four years for other loans and benefits.

    With the change of government and dwindling national revenue resulting in backlog of salaries; it did not take time before the matter resurfaced. It has resurged with such momentum and frenzy that the impression now gaining ground is that the cut is a major step towards plugging the drain in our national revenue chain.

    Not unexpectedly, governments, persons and institutions have bought into the idea as given fillip by emerging reactions to it. Central to all these, is the impression that by slashing these salaries and allowances, more money would be freed for national development. Kano State Governor Abdullahi Gunduje took the lead by slashing the salaries and allowances of political appointees by 50 per cent ostensibly to enable the state get enough funds for development. Governor Okezie Ikpeazu of Abia State placed himself on half salary and cut his travelling allowances by 50 per cent until salaries and allowance owed workers are paid.

    This is as the RMAFC has set up a committee to begin a downward review of salaries and allowances for political, public and judicial office holders. The bug seems to have caught up with everybody with the outlawed Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta MEND threatening to resume hostilities should members of the National Assembly refuse to reduce the huge salaries and allowances that accrue to them. As if responding to this threat, the Senate has also floated a committee to arrive at the same purpose.

    All these concerns can be understood given their convergence on the common ground that we need to make some sacrifice for the country to come out of the woods. If these stem from genuine concerns for attitudinal change in the way our citizens hitherto conceived affairs of the public realm, this would amount to significant progress.

    Before now, the tendency was to fleece and impoverish the government for the benefit of the individual and his primordial unit. That has been the basis for the unmitigated corruption that virtually brought this nation to its knees. Political offices are seen as avenues for self-enrichment rather than service to the humanity.

    If emerging concerns for behavioural shift represent real commitment to prudence, selfless services and patriotism, then we have every reason to hope there will be light at the end of the tunnel. There is a glimmer of hope that we are beginning to enthrone a common bound of selfless services.

    That should be something to cheer.

    No doubt, a reduction in salaries and allowances in the proportion that has been proposed, will free some fund for the development of the states and the nation as the case may be. But it remains to be imagined the positive difference it will make in our overall national development matrix given the figures above.

    It is not certain what constitutes the salaries and allowances of political office holders in the states. But if my little stint in that capacity some years back is any thing to go by, not much savings would be made out of such salary cuts. It will even result in the negative by impoverishing the appointees thereby laying them vulnerable to thievery in the most daring manner. The effect will turn out counterproductive. It would appear the entire idea is propelled more by political expediency rather than sound economic calculations. They promise very little in their overall contributions to the economic health of governments both state and federal.

    But like ever Nigerian thing, every body has bought into the frenzy and wants to make political capital of it. The key thing is that all manner of groups want these salaries and allowances reduced. Once that has been achieved, its teleological purpose has been served. And nothing more!

    More fundamentally, all the noise about pay cut is premised on the flawed thinking they constitute the real avenues for fleecing the nation. One is afraid this view is a highly misplaced one. It cannot stand the weight of evidence in the face of the stupendous wealth lawmakers and political office-holders are known be flaunting around town. They cannot account for the scandalous display of opulence by legislators and political office holders in and out of office.

    They count for little in terms of the funds to run elections in many parts of the country. Worries have been expressed on why people still seek legislative offices in the face of the prohibitive cost of running elections. In some states, it runs into billions to run for a senatorial seat. What is the fraction of the salaries and allowances of a senator to N1billion for instance, to expect it is the main source of recouping his electoral investments?

    It amounts to chasing shadows to nurse the feeling that these salaries and allowances are the real avenues for fleecing the government. They only constitute legitimate and known sources. Nothing has been said of the illegitimate and unknown sources. These are the areas the prying eyes of a government of change should focus. There is so much corruption in the exercise of legislators’ oversight functions. President Buhari captured it succinctly when he spoke of financial recklessness and lack of accountability due to the official abandonment of all financial and administrative instructions in parastatals and agencies. All these avenues must be plugged for real progress to be made.

    But then, the larger public must queue into this change mantra for it to be meaningful. Much of those making noise about jumbo pay, are the same people that at every level of the electoral process, ask for money before discharging their civic duties. You cannot take money in lieu of your votes or support and expect sanity from the system. The sacrifice expected of lawmakers can only endure if there is positive and permanent change of attitude on electoral matters from the larger society.

     

  • Workers’ salary arrears

    Within the last two weeks or so, the nation’s consciousness was awakened to the backlog of salaries owed workers by many state governments. The attention of this writer was first drawn to it by a call from the Osun State chapter of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) urging the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA) to come to the aid of the workers by donating food item and sundry relief materials to save them from starvation.

    At first, one thought it was one of those gimmicks by politicians to gain attention which may eventually add up to nothing. But then, the elections were already over. What purpose would such a seemingly campaign of calumny serve at this point in time, one had reasoned?

    Soon, events began to unfold in quick succession such that it became obvious that the call was not just for nothing. At least, two demonstrations in the state capital that drew attention to the desperate plight of workers were to follow subsequently. One of such was by civil society organizations during the June 12 celebrations.

    As if these were not enough to generate public concern, the state governor, Rauf Aregbesola was to shock everybody when he reportedly said the resolution of the salary arrears imbroglio was beyond him. He told state house reporters “the truth is that I will not fail to say that it is a situation absolutely beyond my control”.

    Aregbesola hinged his position on the sharp drop in federal allocations which subsequently disorganized his budget. But, in an apparent bid to stave off accusations of any form of mismanagement, the governor was quick to add that he had transformed the state than he met it in 2010 and that such transformation was as a result of effective application of resources. The message the governor intended to pass across was that though the salary situation was that bad, it should not be misconstrued as an evidence of reckless spending. We shall return to this later.

    Then enter the case of Benue State that is also in months of arrears such that have compelled Governor Ortom to conclude plans to borrow money to pay just one month across board. He has also been shouting on roof tops that the departed governor, Gabriel Suswam left a debt burden of N90 billion as against the N9.2 billion he had claimed.

    The list is endless. No less than 18 states are reported owing between two and 11 months salary arrears at the end of May. These are Abia, Akwa Ibom, Bauchi, Benue, Cross River and Ekiti. Others are Imo, Katsina, Kogi, Ogun, Ondo, Osun and Oyo. The rest are Rivers, Plateau and Zamfara among others.

    Some of the defaulting governors have put up spirited efforts to clarify their positions on the salary arrears index. But even as they strive to give the impression that the situation is not all that bad, the bold face they feign pales into insignificance in the face of the pressure they now mount on the federal government for some bailout. Some of them have even gone further to demand a restructuring of the revenue allocation formula.

    Others have been striving to exculpate themselves from the chain of events that led to the current predicament. They lay the blame chiefly on the dwindling receipts from the federation account consequent upon the drop in oil price at the international market.

    Attempts have also been made to shift culpability to the regime of Jonathan for mismanaging the economy. Jonathan can as well be blamed for everything under the sun, including obvious excesses and duplicity of some of the governors both immediate past and serving.

    But at what point will the governors take direct responsibility for the management of the funds entrusted in their care? Why is it that some states are not owing despite the fact they are not immune from the factors cited by some of the governors for scandalously attempting to starve workers to death? Why are states like Akwa Ibom, Rivers, Imo, Abia and Ondo that are oil producing and receive higher revenue than others also owing?

    Answers to these posers can be located in how effective the respective governors managed resources at their disposal. And they inexorably point to the incongruity in attempts to evade responsibility by trying to solely hold other factors culpable. It is the responsibility of the governors to determine areas of priority in the disbursement of their revenue. If they decide to inject them to some other projects in utter neglect of workers salaries, it is their decision and they cannot shy away from its consequences.

    Effective planning would require that all competing needs are weighed on the scale ensuring no sector is funded to the detriment of others. If the governors had done that irrespective of the dwindling revenue, the situation might have been somehow different. The governors should take the blame for the backlog of salaries owed workers. After all, they ought to have provided for the rainy day since it is common place that states can solely depend on receipts from the federation account at their own peril.

    It is mismanagement of resources to deploy funds such that workers emoluments are not paid for months no matter how competing other needs were. That brings us to the Osun situation in which the governor had sought to rationalize the salary arrears on the ground that he has transformed the state through judicious application of funds. That could as well be. But a ‘judicious application’ of funds that left a backlog of seven months salaries ought to face another verification test. The first law of nature is self survival. Labor is also rated the most important factor of production. Other factors without the human capital will lead to nothing. It is smacks of inverted logic to canvass the argument of effective application of resources in the face of the scandalous inability of the government to pay months of salaries. You cannot have effective application of resource when one critical sector is yawning for urgent attention through obvious neglect. That is the obvious flaw in pushing that argument any further. He may have done well in other sectors. He may have invested heavily in infrastructure that will benefit humanity in the nearest future.

    But a situation that compelled a sitting governor to publicly admit helplessness says it all. He may have presented the matter as honestly as he found it. However, in portraying the picture of helplessness, he opened his flanks to diatribe. For, the immediate question the admission conjures is what business he still has there if the situation has defied him? That is why the governor’ altercation with Senator Ben Bruce on his comic gesture to donate part of his wardrobe allowance to Osun workers is patently unnecessary.

    Beyond these however, is the urgent need for a fundamental restructuring of the federal order. As long as we concentrate virtually all powers on the central authority, so long will systemic stress from the component units impair any meaningful progress. Happily, we now have a regime that has promised change. That change must be fundamental and far reaching for real results to be recorded. But, there are vested interests benefiting from the decadent past that will not let go. We must muster the political will to do the right thing through immediate constitutional change. Such change should devolve powers by allowing a greater measure of autonomy to the components units.

  • Saraki, Dogara’s triumph

    The emergence of Bukola Saraki and Yakubu Dogara as the president and speaker of the Senate and House of Representatives respectively is now a settled issue. So also are the treacheries and high-wire politics that followed the contests. This conclusion is however, without prejudice to threats from some quarters to challenge the elections in court. If what we have been told about extant procedure for inaugurating the assembly is anything to go by, it does appear not much will come from such litigation.

    Diverse interpretations have been given to events that brought that pass. And they vary depending on the divide from which it is being viewed. Blames have also been freely traded.

    But the commonly held view is that the APC did not properly handle the crisis arising from disagreements over its mock elections. Not only was the party tepid in its resolution of the rebellion of some of its legislators, it committed a tactical error to have called for a meeting in another venue on the day of the inauguration. With the letter of proclamation, date and time duly signed and delivered by President Buhari, it is curious a meeting with APC senators-elect was hurriedly summoned for another venue around the same time. This says volumes about the handling of the schism arising from the mock elections. The argument that Buhari had just arrived that morning from a foreign assignment may not sway anybody given that the issue was there before he travelled.

    Obviously, the PDP put the situation to its advantage and could have taken up the senate presidency but perhaps, for the firm agreement they reached with Saraki. The PDP is now touted to have come into reckoning again such that its capacity to play the role of an effective opposition is being further strengthened. The election of Ike Ekweremadu as deputy senate president again, illustrates this viewpoint. There is also the argument in some quarters that even if all the APC senators-elect were at the chambers that morning, the outcome would not have changed. The numerical strength of the PDP and that of the dissenting senators-elect is cited to buttress this. This angle cannot be discounted. If anything, the election of Dogara with the full complement of legislators from all divide gives fillip to this perspective.

    However, there are those who scorn the success of the PDP as pyrrhic victory given that both Saraki and Dogara are all of the APC stock. This standpoint is no less appealing depending on how the game unfolds in the days ahead.

    It would appear all the contradictions that shaped those elections are not very obvious now. They are more likely to take clearer shape as the Buhari administration settles for the business of statecraft. All that can be reasonably conjectured, is that the way the coalition of forces at play during those elections manifest, will have wider repercussions for the party especially given that it has before now, been criticized as an amalgam of strange bedfellows with no soul of its own. Possibly, it is the above scenario that is bubbling.

    Various possibilities have been visualized. And much of these raise fresh challenges for the ruling party in terms of its cohesiveness, party supremacy, the discipline and commitment of members to party goals and objectives. There are also issues relating to principles and lack of party ideology.

    Expectedly, the APC has shown serious discomfort with the development. The party has rejected the emergence of Saraki and Dogara lamenting that it amounts to the highest level of “indiscipline and treachery to subject the party to ridicule and create obstacles for the new administration”. The party is highly piqued that the duo entered into an unholy alliance with the same people they worked hard to replace and promised to wield the big stick against them.

    But President Buhari had a different perspective and has gone ahead to recognise the new leadership promising to work with them to deliver his campaign promises to the people. Though he would have preferred the party choices to have prevailed, nonetheless he recognized that a constitutional process had been concluded through the rights of the legislators to elect their leaders.

    There are issues of interest for our democracy in the position taken by Buhari. And they strike a chord with that of former President Jonathan in the aftermath of the last presidential election. Buhari would have preferred his party’s choices to prevail. But events did not dictate so. He has accepted the outcome and promised to work with the new leaders for the stability of Nigeria’s constitutional order and in the overall interest of the common man. The president’s decision has all the trappings of patriotism and shares much in common with that of Jonathan when he saw the outcome of the last elections had tilted in favour of Buhari. Both are concerned with order, peace and the deepening of the democratic process irrespective of their own interests and preferences. That is the way to go.

    There is little doubt that such compromise positions will go at length not only to stabilize the country but the democratic process especially given the schism that trailed the last elections. If this represents a new frame of mind by our leaders, we will soon be on the path to real progress and sustainable development.

    But for the APC, it will go for broke with errant members. It is utterly averse to any alliance with the PDP that would incapacitate the party from delivering on its promise.

    The party leadership is within its rights to be livid with errant members. They are also right in their anger especially given the emergence of Ekweremadu of the PDP as the deputy senate president. In their calculations, there is no way they would have factored in either the PDP or the South-east in the sharing equation.

    That alone may sustain allegations of betrayal, treachery and an attempt to ridicule the party. It is also at the root of the accusation that the action of the dissenting members would create obstacles for the new administration. Should it necessarily be so? That is the issue to ponder.

    The APC is at pains with the reality of sharing power with the PDP, a party they fought very hard to defeat at the elections. The feeling is that the PDP, still nursing the wounds from the last elections, may be out for vengeance. But the APC legislators will somehow, still have to work with their PDP counterpart even if things had gone their way. So instead of court action or the impeachment option, the legislators should cultivate each other and rise to the challenges of law making for the order and good governance of the country.

    We would not have arrived at this point if all were well within the party. And the situation may not easily abate as indications are there is more to it than the selfish interests of the dissenting members. Saraki and Dogara may be the arrow heads of the rebellion. But the tunes they are dancing are definitely coming from drum beats hidden elsewhere.

  • Amosun and LG autonomy

    Ogun State governor, Ibikunle Amosun struck the right chord last week when he lent his weight to the agitation for local government autonomy in the country. That was not all. He equally had pricking words for those of his colleagues opposed to it.

    Hear him: “I support local government autonomy. The autonomy issue is in my own interest. Some governors said that granting autonomy to local governments will not favour them. Those governors that the autonomy thing will not favour are those governors that deduct from local government funds”.

    He has said it all. Apparently drawing from President Buhari’s inaugural speech in which he promised to ensure probity and accountability at all tiers of government, Amosun touched the heart of the matter when he fingered duplicity as the leitmotif for some of his colleagues’ opposition to autonomy. Now one of theirs has spoken so forthrightly on the issue, we can now fathom why the local governments in many states have proved incapable of rising up to their statutory duties.

    In that speech, Buhari had said that though there are constitutional limits to the powers of the three tiers of government, he would not close his eyes to what is happening at the states and local governments especially with the operations of the Joint Account.

    This has been interpreted by many as an indication that the era of state governors unduly dipping their hands into the funds of the local governments will soon be over. That will be a great relief. No doubt, the joint account system has been variously abused. Instead of the process ensuring that funds meant for the local governments are deployed for meaningful development, some of the governors have turned round to appropriate them for purposes other than that for which they were meant for.

    What we have seen since the return of democracy in 1999, is a situation in which the state governors appropriate these funds and only remit to the local councils any amount it pleased them. This has left the local governments increasingly incapable of discharging their statutory functions.

    Not unexpectedly, agitations have arisen regarding the desirability of the joint account system in the face of the interferences and withholding of funds meant for the development of the local governments. That has also been the basis for the raging demands for local government autonomy. Not only do the state governments through the powers conferred on the state assemblies by Section (7) of the constitution incapacitate the effective operations of the councils, some have gone ahead to reduce their tenure to enable them take charge of the funds accruing from the federation account.

    The first set of elected local government officials in 1999 were supposed to serve for three years. Since then, state assemblies, goaded by the governors have reduced such tenure, some of them to one year. Even then, local government elections are rarely held and when it pleases them to do so, it is at the whims and caprices of the state governments. What has been in vogue is the aberration called transition committees- a subterfuge for handpicking local government functionaries who do the bidding of the governors. This is so despite the fact that the constitution guarantees a local government system by democratically elected local government councils.

    Questions have been raised as to the desirability of retaining the local governments as the third tier of government in the face of the refusal of some governors to have in place democratically elected councils. Constant interference with local government funds by governors has also been an issue. The continued relevance of the joint account system given that its operations have been at cross purposes with the spirits guiding the delineation of the councils as the third tier of government has also come under serious challenge. All these are clear indications that our local government system is sick and therefore in urgent need of a dose of therapy both on a short and long terms.

    Those opposed to the independence of the local government base their arguments on some warped, unverifiable and tenuous grounds. They allege among others, immaturity of the local governments and their leadership to be left unchecked by the state governments. They also cite aspects of the constitution that empowers the state government through the state assemblies to regulate operations at that level.

    The issue of immaturity is neither here nor there. At best, such a sweeping conclusion is nothing but a figment of educated guess. Sadly, empiricism places very low value on matters of educated guess.

    The conclusion runs into bigger problem if it conveys the impression that state governors are better managers of funds and their mentoring is required for effective deployment of local government funds. This suggestion pales into insignificance when weighed against the monumental corruption that goes on at the state levels.

    Just last week, the EFCC rolled out a list of governors who served between 1999 and 2007 that are currently facing prosecution. It also reeled out some of the properties so far recovered from some of them. Both the number of former governors under trial, the quantum of property and money involved put a lie to any claim that they are better managers of public funds. There is therefore no justifiable reason why they should be allowed to continue appropriating local government funds to help themselves. The spirit of the joint account system has been abused and bastardized by some state governors for self-serving reasons. That has been the basis for their continued opposition to local government autonomy. That is the point Amosun has put very succinctly and he spoke the minds of many.

    Moreover, the local government system has been recognized as the fastest vehicle to convey development to the grassroots. This is especially so, as the boundaries of the 774 local governments coincide with the boundaries of this country. Thus, any development strategy that effectively targets that level of government with a high degree of success, would ipso facto translate to the development of the entire country.

    That underscores the importance of the local government system. It is for the same reason that more discerning and enterprising states have gone further to create local government development centres. It would therefore smack of a huge contradiction for state governors that have gone ahead to create development centres because of their capacity to quicken development, to now turn around and oppose local government autonomy. That was the background from which Amosun was speaking.

    If the immaturity of the local governments being bandied is referenced upon the quality of leadership at that level, the governors are solely to blame. They are to blame for handpicking surrogates and all manner of stooges to stand for elections that have been predetermined by the so-called state independent electoral commissions. They are to blame for not allowing real elections to take place at that level. So if the competences of the elected or appointed local government officials are in doubt, the governors should take the blame. They cannot turn around and hide under some of the monsters they created to fault the capacity and ability of that system to function optimally.

  • End time signals

    Those tempted to construe this topic from the prism of the biblical end time should hold it. This is because the subject matter has neither anything to do with the scriptures nor the chain of events that will herald its projected end time.

    End time according to the scriptures, will be signposted by thunder, lightning, earthquake, fear and awe. On that day, humans, dead and living are expected to give account of their lives to the almighty God- a day of judgment with verdicts varying from the good, the bad and the ugly. That is as far as the scriptures are concerned.

    We are here concerned with events of politics and not religion. It would appear there is something in our current politics that shares some semblance with the biblical end time which should not be overlooked. This should not be surprising as the dividing line between religion and politics has always been a matter of intense debate.

    Medieval philosophers such as St Augustine and Thomas Aquinas made a classification between the corporal and ecclesiastical realms and contended that affairs of the state should be separated from that of the church. That has been a cardinal principle of the organization of modern governments in varying degrees.

    The end time setting may be handy in capturing the chain of events that played out in this country in the last two weeks or so leading to the change of leadership. Within that time frame, several negative events were either activated or played out within this country to raise fears as to whether we were about facing our own version of the political end time? With a few days to the handover to the Buhari administration which was eventually consummated at the weekend, the nation virtually came to a halt. It all started with independent oil marketers refusing to dispense petroleum products until they were paid all outstanding arrears of fuel supplied to the government. They were said to be afraid that the incoming government will not be willing to pay them especially given the controversy and scandals that have hallmarked the so-called subsidy payments. Then came in very quick succession, a plethora of strikes from sundry oil workers and organized labour unions demanding salary increases and all that.

    Their net effect was a virtual halt in economic and social activities such that raised fears as to whether our democracy and the impending handover would be eventually imperilled. The situation was so bad that banks had to cut down their working hours for lack of diesel. GSM providers also threatened to shut down for the same reasons. Not unexpectedly, these had very deleterious effects on power supply which further dipped to an all time low on account of non supply of gas and vandalism of critical power supply equipments. The nation was on edge as everything came to a near standstill. It was a period never witnessed even in the days of acute fuel scarcity which had stabilized in the last five years or so in many parts of the country.

    Since then, there have been varying views as to who to hold responsible. Accusing fingers have been pointed at the government since the buck stops at its table. Many see it as ample evidence of the running aground of the nation’s economy by the Jonathan administration.

    Yet, for some others like the Arewa Consultative Forum ACF, it was a deliberate plot by Jonathan to hinder the smooth take-off of the Buhari regime. Citing the energy crisis and fuel scarcity, the forum said the situation was a bad parting gift from Jonathan.

    But as the forum spoke, Jonathan was at the Federal Executive Council meeting blaming the chain of events on those who are out to sabotage his administration. Describing the situation as outright sabotage, he queried the coincidence of these strikes and demands for salary increases just a few days to the expiration of his administration.

    Before Jonathan spoke, the outgoing Minister of Finance, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala had on another occasion sought to know why diesel that has already been deregulated was also scarce. She left his audience without doubt that there is more to the strikes than the dispute between the government and oil marketers on subsidy payments.

    That has been the blame game even as the situation has been stabilizing as the strikes have been called off with fuel selling well above the controlled price. With these, our fears of the political end time has been stymied albeit, temporarily.

    But issues regarding who was responsible for those chains of events would linger for quite some time. Discerning people would have to make up their minds between the ACF and Jonathan who is saying the truth. They will have to make up their minds on whose side the weight of guilt tilts. We need to consider the possibility that Jonathan engineered those who nearly brought his administration down in its last days, vis-à-vis what he stands to gain from it. There is also the need to take a critical perspective of the alleged plot to scuttle the smooth handover to Buhari through contrived strikes. What gains are there for him to make by activating a chain of events which outcome would eventually ridicule his regime in its last days in office? And at any rate, who takes responsibility for anything that imperils the nation before the handover? These are the issues to ponder.

    They should be resolved taking into account the issues raised by Jonathan that the strikes were unleashed to sabotage his administration with only a few days to go. They should be resolved taking copious cognizance of the scarcity of diesel that has long been deregulated. What were the demands of the marketers on the issue of diesel that it also went scarce during the period? These are some of the moot questions that may lead us to resolve some of the issues that have been bandied.

    Beyond these, Jonathan appeared to have raised the bar of these contradictions when in response to calls for his regime to be probed, he accepted the challenge but with a proviso that it should go beyond his administration.  He wants the probe to include the way oil wells and fields were allocated in the past. He wants such a probe to unravel how oil fields, marginal oil wells and others were in the past allocated and if extant laws of this country were followed.

    Since it is all about oil and oil revenue, the challenge by Jonathan must be taken up by Buhari having now been sworn in. There is a lot going on within the oil sector that needed to be exposed. Jonathan must have some vital information from his vintage office and Nigerians should demand full investigations into the entire oil sector. Much of the corruption we finger in the oil distribution chain may be a child’s play in the face the monumental rot in the allocation of oil fields and wells. He has let out the cat and no attempt should be made to cover it up. The time has come to expose the cabal that is making a fortune of our oil resources taking advantage of the high positions they hitherto occupied.

    That should be the heuristic value of the dialectics that have been activated by the clash of interests among the ruling elite bent on circulating power between themselves. Buhari must take up this challenge to disprove the Marxian notion that the state and its structures are instruments of oppression in the hands of the ruling class. The probe must reassure Nigerians that oil is our collective patrimony rather than that of a privileged class. The time for reckoning has come; our political end time.

     

  • As Buhari takes charge

    Four days on, the mantle of leadership of this country will switch over to president-elect, Gen. Mohammed Buhari. On that day, he would be sworn in as the president of the country for the next four years following his successful election.

    Preparations are on top gear with expectations very high on the good things to come with the change of leadership in national affairs. Representatives of governments, groups and individuals have been generous with suggestions on what the incoming government should do to make the needed difference. Issues that have been a recurring decimal, among others include the urgency to battle corruption, insecurity and the parlous state of the nation’s economy.

    Incidentally, these were some of the key campaign promises of the All Progressives Congress (APC) under which platform Buhari won the election. If there are constant references to them, they serve as reminder to the incoming administration of the imperative to live up to the high expectations of the people.

    In this wise, institutions, persons or groups that ought to attract the prying eyes of the new government in its new direction have been fingered very relentlessly. So also are the necessary policy measures to be initiated for our economy to rebound.  There seems to be a wide range of consensus that things must be done differently for this country to move forward. Not surprisingly, corruption in all its ramifications stands out as one cankerworm that must be uprooted for these high-minded expectations to be met. There seems to be a wide range of consensus that we are now ready for this all important crusade irrespective of the pervasiveness of the malfeasance and envisaged reluctance of some vested interests to embrace the new direction.

    The way the issue of corruption is being bandied, the impression one gets is that people are expecting a very quick fix to the cankerworm. But that would be a very limited understanding of the pervasiveness of the matter. It would imply that we are yet to come to terms with the dynamics of the matter. Corruption is more encompassing and pervades the entire gamut of the nation’s social fabric. It is every where. It has eaten very deep. Such a debilitating problem cannot lend itself to a quickly procured remedy as is currently being expected. This is more so because some of the systemic dysfunctions that are at the root of corruption will take a long time to lend themselves to serious therapeutic response. Some of them are deeply rooted in the very structure and organization of governance framework. Others have their root in the defective manner the Nigerian federation evolved. The role of ethnicity, religion and some other primordial influences in

    sustaining corruption can only be ignored at a great risk to the envisaged fight. So also is the defective federal structure that vests the powers of life and death on the central authority. There is also failure on the part of our leaders (past and present) to institute socialization processes capable of producing true Nigerians (in the way an American will regard himself) – the kind the Israeli did through their Kibbutz system.

    It is nigh impossible to fight corruption in a setting where ethnicity and religion are in constant competition with the government for the loyalty of the citizens. It is difficult to fight corruption in a milieu where civic institutions are seen as instruments of dominance by one ethnic group against the others. That exactly is the point the Nigerian federation finds itself now. So if we focus on institutions of governance without taking into account the latent sources that influence behavior at those formal levels, we may not get the right handle to it.

    If we focus on proper husbanding of our revenue without considering how to whittle down the prebendal nature of our politics, we may not achieve optimal results. This point is further underscored by our geo-politics that places higher premium on where the candidate comes from rather than suitability and ability to do the job. The logic of geo-politics in our case is rooted in the warped notion of sharing the national cake rather than issues of affirmative action or balance. The underlying thinking is that it is only when one of theirs ascends to that high office that their interests can be adequately taken care of. That has been the general feeling and it cannot make for real progress.

    Even with many years of living together since independence, rather than wane, these tendencies have been on their ascendancy. They got to a point about two years ago that two former heads of state, Olusegun Obasanjo and Ibrahim Babangida had to issue a joint statement lamenting the degenerate level the nation had sunk within this ignoble matrix. They were alarmed at a situation where some of those they hitherto regarded as patriots were increasingly beginning to question the basis for Nigerian unity. And their ranks are not few. The fears they then expressed were further taken to a dangerous level during the last electioneering campaigns and are bound to influence public perceptions for some time to come.

    The thing to consider is why we have not progressed beyond the things that divide our people. We need to factor in the role of the elite in sustaining and reinforcing these centrifugal tendencies and whose interests such divisions largely serve- that of the elite or the fetchers of wood and drawers of water.

    As Buhari moves to confront issues of corruption and development, he is bound to be challenged by these systemic dysfunctions some of which will entail fundamental restructuring of the polity.  He has to take both a short and long term perspective of them. Yes, he can start with the leakages in the system. He has said every Nigerian would be made to live within his means. For this to happen, all avenues for fleecing the government must be plugged and blocked. But corruption is not all about stealing money from the government coffers. It is also about giving disproportionate attention to some geo-political zones to the detriment of others. It is all about a skewed distribution of public goods based on some other hazy exigencies.

    It is the same phenomenon that gives rise to allegations of alienation and marginalization by the constituent units. Things must have to be done the right and proper way for the fight to be won. There are institutions of government that have been notorious in shortchanging the public. They too must have the searchlight beamed on them. One of such institutions is the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

    The corruption that goes on within that organization during elections must be stamped out without much delay. Since elections are the basis for conferring legitimacy in a democratic setting, a corrupt electoral process is unlikely to produce leaders who can meaningfully wage a relentless war against the cankerworm.

    So the fight must start from the electoral body. Much of the problems that marred the last elections in many places were as a result of INEC officials compromising their positions. Not only did they sell authentic results sheets to the highest bidders, falsification and mutilating of results sheets were all traceable to these officials.

    Somehow, there is the feeling that we should let go and move forward. Fine! But there is no guarantee people will be that patronizing the next time round.

    Buhari must move to unite the country; give all a sense of belonging through inclusive policies. He must at once, identify and redress the sources of frustration which forced Obasanjo and Babangida to deplore the increasing loss of confidence by patriots on the continuing basis for the nation’s unity 54 years after independence.

  • Jonathan and price of change

    It is difficult to ignore two aspects of the speech by President Goodluck Jonathan during a thanksgiving and farewell service organized in his honor at the Cathedral Church of the Advent, Life Camp Gwarimpa, Abuja. He had told his audience that he and his ministers would be persecuted by the incoming administration because of the hard decisions they took.

    Hear him: “I have run the government this way that stabilized certain things, the electoral process and other things that brought stability to this country. They are very costly decisions which I must be ready to pay for”.

    He also spoke of desertion and sabotage from some of his close friends. “Some people come to me and say this or that person is he not your friend that benefited? But this is what the person is saying”.

    He said his reaction was that worse statements will still come and that if you take hard decisions, even some of your very close friends will abandon you at some point.

    Jonathan underscored this point by drawing analogy with Fredrick de Klerk who he claimed abandoned by his wife for abolishing apartheid in South Africa-a decision, which he further opined, positively changed the face of that country. He said he sympathized with ministers and aides who served under him because they will be persecuted and urged them to be ready for it.

    Apparently sensing the gravity of the allegation, the incoming government of the All Progressives Congress APC reacted very swiftly. Its national publicity secretary, Lai Mohammed said the Buhari administration will not persecute anyone and that only those who are guilty of crimes against the Nigerian people need to be afraid.

    There are two planks to the issues raised by Jonathan. This first has to do with what he perceives as the likely attitude of the incoming government to some of the decisions of his regime. The other relates in the main, to the conduct of trusted friends and close collaborators once there is a change of government.

    The two issues are weighty and fundamental. And in them you are likely to find some of the problems that have overtime worked against the progress and development of this country. In them also, you can locate the subsisting attitude of leaders and followers alike that have continued to pose serious impediments to statecraft. For us to make real progress, the disruptive influences of these issues on governance need to be closely studied and remedial measures taken.

    Jonathan said his government took hard decisions that stabilized certain things and feared he and his ministers will be persecuted for them. The immediate question this evokes is why should it be so? Its corollary is why any leader in his right senses should persecute his predecessor for hard but well-tailored decisions? These are the issues to ponder.  Apart from the electoral process, Jonathan did not mention those other hard decisions that brought stability to the economy for which he fears persecution. But the overall impression he conveyed is that such decisions are in the overall public good as they will lead to the greatest good of the greatest number. He captured that much when he said “if you take certain decisions, it might be good for many but it might affect others differently”.

    Given his elated office, it is safer to presume he has sufficient grounds to speak in the manner he has done. But for some reasons, he refrained from details. However, the inevitable impression the allegation conveys is that the incoming Buhari government may be embarking on a voyage of witch-hunting and vendetta against his government for some unwholesome reasons.

    There is also the undertone that the incoming government may be upturning some of these hard decisions he considers good for many for reasons that are less than salutary. That is crux of the matter. Mohammed has dispelled insinuations that his ministers and aides will be persecuted. He said only those who have committed crimes have something to fear. That is the right way to look at the matter.

    The attitude of the incoming government to policies that are popular but may have affected some other interests differently as alleged is yet to be addressed. There is the need to clear the air on that aspect of Jonathan’s speech. Minister of Finance, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala appeared to have spoken along the same line when she cautioned against the penchant with which some people are running down the economy through unguarded statements. She reasoned that these utterances some of which are at variance with extant economic indices, could pose serious challenges for or imperil the incoming government. That point goes without saying.

    Those still concerned with what the outgoing government did wrong or how it mismanaged the Nigerian economy may want to paint the picture of an economy that has gone awry; where nothing is working. But in this desperation to discredit that regime, they inadvertently create a new set of problems for the incoming government. First, the unmistakable impression is created that Buhari is a miracle worker who will find a quick fix for the multi-dimensional problems of this country. Casting the incoming government in that mould may soon create problems for it if the high hopes raised are not quickly met.

    The other is that it might be a subterfuge for the incoming government in case it is unable to rise to the high expectations generated by its campaign promises. When that happens, attention will be drawn to all the wrongs the Jonathan government allegedly wrought on the economy and the huge time they will require to clean up. That will not impress anybody as we have gone far beyond that point now.

    Elections have been won and lost and these were the issues on which basis they were fought. The incoming Buhari government will be benchmarked against what it does to put things right rather that finding excuses on the failures of the outgoing government. That is exactly where we are now.

    The other issue raised by Jonathan is the ease with which trusted friends and close collaborators desert leaders whence they are out of office. Some of them even go at lengths to divulge sensitive information in order to curry favor from the new government.

    That is the fad. It did not start with Jonathan and will unlikely end with him. It is a malady just like corruption that pervades all strata of our nation’s social fabric. It is propelled and reinforced by the lure and logic of the stomach.

    With an opposition government coming on stream, such a tendency is expected to be at an all time high. That has been the raison d’être for the embarrassing spate of defections we have witnessed. It has not got much to do with the hard decisions taken by the government but hinges more on lack of principles and desperation to be part of every government in power.

    It is a lesson for all those in power. But can they reasonably avoid a repeat? That is the moot question.

  • Revisiting past probes

    President-elect Gen. Muhammad Buhari (rtd.) has been speaking variously on his plans to tackle corruption when sworn-in. This should not be a surprise given that the fight against the malfeasance was a key campaign promise of the All Progressives Congress (APC) under which platform he won the election.

    If he is hammering on this battle, it is in part informed by this campaign promise and the fact that corruption stands out as the most singular problem that has overtime, stunted the growth and development of this country. So whatever attention that is given to the imperative of waging a conclusive war against corruption is very well deserved.

    Apparently to keep this promise in public domain, Buhari has indicated his intention to probe the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) to unravel the circumstances behind the $20 billion oil fund which the corporation allegedly failed to remit into the purse of the federal government. He is also interested in investigating allegations of electoral malpractices by INEC officials and sundry security agencies.

    At another level, he has been credited with saying he was going to re-visit reports of panels set up by the National Assembly to investigate allegations of financial scandals in federal government ministries and agencies.

    Top among the reports which the President-elect intends to re-visit are the fuel subsidy scandal, the N255 million bullet proof cars scam and that of the pensions fund investigated by the senate.

    What can be deduced from all these, is that he does not want to leave anyone with any shred of doubt that he is going to pursue the campaign against corruption with all the seriousness the matter deserves. In the days ahead, we are likely to hear more about these cases. We are more likely to witness the implementation of aspects of the reports that have hitherto been in the cooler for whatever reasons. Similarly, more heads of those indicted by these reports are likely to roll.

    It is also possible that an entirely new insight may be thrown open in the circumstances surrounding these scandals. If and when these happen, the nation would have commenced the much desired fight against corruption. Without doubt, Nigerians are full of expectations on the renewed interest on the war against all forms of corruption. The general feeling is that Buhari can fight corruption. This has more to do with his personality rather than concrete evidence on the ground that the fight will be that easy. Buhari is seen in many circles as a very disciplined and selfless man. He is reputed to be in a position to fight corruption because he is not corrupt himself. So the renewed optimism on the war against corruption hinges more on his personality and reputation than the campaign promise of his party. How far this can take us, will become self evident in the days ahead.

    Re-visiting past probes as desirable as they are, may not produce the kind of results this country direly needs to battle the scourge to the ground. First, it gives the impression that all it takes to commence the huge war against corruption is taking on these probes that were solely recorded during the period of the outgoing administration of Jonathan. That would amount to a very circumscribed and narrow perspective that erroneously conveys the impression that corruption is all about the outgoing government. We can start with these. But corruption is more deep rooted and more entrenched than re-visiting past probes as has been touted. It would therefore amount to scratching the surface of the matter to nurse the feeling that corruption can be conclusively battled through such ad hoc probes.

    Yes, the fight can be kick-started by probing allegations of financial impropriety against the Jonathan government. If it takes having another look at some of the probes, so be it. After all, there must be a point at which the battle has to commence. There is no intention here to undermine the heuristic value of such engagements. Neither is the impression being conveyed that the fight can only commence when it is holistic in nature.

    But the real fight against corruption goes far beyond such isolated probes or re-visiting of past ones. It goes beyond the impression that it is all about getting even or probing the Jonathan administration. Yes, Jonathan can be probed. It is also not unlikely that his administration could be found wanting in some respects given the way our governments have been run overtime. It may not be a surprise that many of those who worked in his administration may have mismanaged public funds just as those in previous governments both military and civilian. It is even safer to presume that many of the functionaries past and present would score low when weighed on the corruption index.  After all, we are all privy to the monumental scandals that pervade the oil subsidy regime and the pervasiveness of the scourge in all facets of our public life.

    Thus, fighting the scourge would require more than ad hoc measures. It would definitely entail a revolution of sorts. It would require a total overhaul of the way government business is run in this country. It would involve fundamental altering of socialization processes to elicit attitudinal changes that are supportive of civic structures. It would require positive dispositions to things that have to do with the government. Sadly, the way the government is perceived today, cannot conduce for effective battle against corruption. Governments at all levels still compete with primordial groups for the loyalty of the citizens. It is still seen as an avenue that needs to be impoverished for the benefit of the primordial groups.

    That is why it is not considered a taboo to steal from the government till. But the same people, who steal the funds of the government, find it difficult to tamper with the funds of their ethnic unions. The amoral relationship between the government and the individuals has to be tackled and redressed for the fight to have real meaning.

    It is this amoral relationship that in the main, accounts for the perception that appointment into key positions of government is an invitation to partake in the sharing of the national cake. The general trend in many parts of the country today is to deride anybody who has had the opportunity of occupying key government positions but still unable to make sufficient money to take care of his needs thereafter. Such ruinous dispositions must change.

    Since after the just concluded general elections, there have been copious references to the sharing and allocation of juicy government portfolios to sections of the country that massively voted for the incoming federal government. What can be juicy about these portfolios except the undue advantage they will be deployed for personal ends? That is the crux of the problem and the beginning of corruption.

    The fight against corruption must be all embracing and far reaching for it to achieve the desired result. It must permeate all strata of the nation’s social fabric. It will not only require very radical measures to discourage the feeling that government business is nobody’s business but the strengthening of all institutions with the duty to bring culprits to book. It will require government by example rather than precepts.

    The fight must not discriminate between persons no matter their connection with the powers that be. It is not going to be that easy. If Buhari can win this war, he would have etched his name in the sands of the nation’s history.