The Nation Newspaper

Category: Emeka Omeihe

  • Restructuring versus power shift

    Those opposed to the compelling imperative of restructuring through a national conference, must now have cause to reason to the contrary. Contemporary developments in the country have shown very unmistakably that we can only continue to postpone this idea at our own peril. Events regularly underscore the need to engage the distinct groups in this country to fashion out safe routes out of the nation’s unresolved problems of existence.

    The war of attrition in the ruling Peoples Democratic Party PDP and efforts to recruit leaders from all sections of the country to resolve it can in a way, be regarded as PDP’s version of a national conference. What the party is currently passing through is a crisis of confidence among leaders due to failure to evolve acceptable templates to nagging issues of our federal order.

    One of it is the location of power at the centre and which of the geo-political divides should have control over it. That there is constant and very bitter struggle for power among the various ethnic groups to control the centre is no longer news. The fact of this inordinate struggle underscores the point that we are yet to arrive at an ordered way of circulating power between and among the various interest groups.

    But more than anything else, it clearly pictures the mutual suspicion and mistrust among these cleavages regarding the use to which they intend to deploy political power.

    Its logical corollary is that the struggle for power is fuelled by general thinking that those who hold it do so largely for the interest of their primordial units and members of their immediate families. That is what foremost Afro-American political scientist Richard Joseph referred to as prebendal politics. Or how else do we rationalize the inordinate domination of primordial sentiments in the current agitations for power shift? The fact that sections of the country are threatening fire, lime and brimstone should they fail to capture power come 2015 is a sufficient signal that all is not well with the power matrix in this country. It is a clarion call for all to sit down and address the power equation and all the issues that constantly breed suspicion and mistrust among our diverse peoples. If there are no problems with our federal order, such issues as which section of the country the president comes from would not have assumed the dangerous dimension it has now taken. It is obvious that all is not well with us as a country. It is also no less obvious that a way has to be fashioned out to resolve these recurring deficits and fault lines if we are to record any genuine progress as one indivisible country. These sore points include rising insecurity, increasing slide to primordialism, fiscal federalism; devolution and rotation of power and resource control.

    Scepticisms on the capacity of the federation to give hope to its constituents and the slide towards centrifugalism have been in the upsurge of recent. They got to such a point that two former rulers of this country, Olusegun Obasanjo and Ibrahim Babangida had to issue a joint statement lamenting that even (those they referred to as) patriots are beginning to question the basis for the continued unity of this country. Both personages should know what they are talking about. Embedded in this statement, is the current mood of the country.

    If after 53 years of independence and nearly 100 years of coming into being of this amalgam, patriots are still questioning the basis for our continued unity, then the frustrations of millions of ordinary people whose hopes this country has dashed can be better imagined. Our leaders must fashion out the right atmosphere to tap into the temperament of the citizenry. Information gathered will be a veritable tool in fashioning out policies and measures that will catalyze co-habitation and launch the country on the path to peace, progress and development.

    Before now, the ruling party had been under the illusion that all is well with us. This has resulted in the rebuffing of genuine agitations for restructuring through a national conference. Because a parasitic class monopolized the apparatus of governance and deployed it to self-serving ends, the impression had been conveyed that as long as they hold tenaciously to power, safety nets have been evolved for the nation’s political stability.

    That accounts for recurring references to the limitations imposed by the constitution against such a conference. But erudite constitutional lawyer, Professor Ben Nwabueze who spoke for the patriots has said there is a way out if the leadership is committed to the idea.

    For him, the 1999 constitution is a product of decree 24 of 1999 and once we repeal that decree, all impediments to full blown national conference by the 390 nationalities to fashion out a peoples’ constitution would have been removed. He therefore does not see any reason for official ambivalence to get the federating nationalities on a conference table especially now the controversy over power shift is upbeat.

    Good enough, President Jonathan told the nation a fortnight ago, that his regime is not averse to the conference. As a matter of fact, he said his administration was reviewing the possibility of a national conference among Nigeria’s various ethnic nationalities. The only snag he noted is that the constitution appears to have given that responsibility to the National Assembly.

    But Nwabueze has offered a way out through the repeal of the decree giving authority to that constitution. The fact of that decree is a potent reason that constitution cannot approximate the wishes and aspirations of the Nigerian people as they were not party to it.

    The question now is the propriety of the current negotiations within the PDP on power shift in 2015 when it is just a mirror to the systemic infractions that have held this country down over the years. Are we not about to fritter away a golden opportunity to redress all nagging issues of our federal order by confining that negotiation to power shift within the PDP in such an unstructured manner? And to what extent can whichever way the matter is resolved assuage the feelings and aspirations of the multifarious ethnic nationalities that also desire a shot at that office? These are the issues to ponder.

    The current negotiation within the PDP is limited in time and scope and therefore inherently deficient in charting the path for sustainable peace and progress of the country. It is incapable of addressing the fears, mutual suspicion and mistrust that propel bitter struggles for power among constituent units. What is now required is for Jonathan to set the stage for a national conference where the nationalities will brainstorm on various issues of our federation including but not limited to power rotation. This will not only save him the heat generated by raging agitations for power shift but more importantly, chart a roadmap for power sharing in a more ordered and sustainable way. The matter could also be resolved by diluting the concentration of power and financial resources at the centre through devolution. These are the real issues that must engage the minds of all those who do not desire the disintegration of this country. And only agreements reached by the federating nationalities hold the key for the peace, progress and development of the country. Jonathan has a golden opportunity to take advantage of the crisis in the PDP to transform this country for good through this conference. His contentious ambition to run again is also better resolved through it.

  • PDP and crises within

    That the Peoples Democratic Party PDP has been having a rough time building consensus among its members has not been in doubt. What has not been certain is whether the widening disagreement among its key leaders will either be amicably resolved or further tear the party apart. It had also not been certain the dimension the crises may assume.

    Before now, the PDP has been basking on the euphoria that its problems are family affairs. We have also been treated with the recurring claim that the party has developed foolproof capacity to internally resolve its challenges. Because it controls the federal government together with the enormous resources at its disposal, our largely unprincipled and selfish politicians will do anything to remain within its fold in the hope that someday, it will be their turn to be part of the cake sharing.

    Not unexpectedly, the party has overtime exploited this lure and self-serving weakness to advantage. That is why it can afford to impose candidates at will and pay scant attention to internal democracy. Our flawed electoral process that gives little room for the will of the electorate to have full expression has not equally helped matters.

    Given the above, many had hoped that the latest complaints of marginalization, lack of internal democracy, agitation for power shift in 2015 and high handedness by the leadership of the party and the presidency will somehow be sorted out as usual.

    But that has failed to happen. The party is now split into two factions following the pulling out of some of its governors and delegates from the venue of its mini convention. Apparently stunned by the turn of events, President Jonathan summoned a number of meetings to seek ways out of the embarrassing impasse.

    He also met with his predecessor, Olusegun Obasanjo who undertook to summon elders of the party and its governors to seek ways out. As this piece was being put together, feelers had it that the meeting summoned by Obasanjo will no longer hold following protests against his competence to preside over it. There are allegations that he is an ardent supporter if not the prime mover of the splinter group. There are reasons this line of thought cannot be dismissed with a wave of the hand. That most of the dissenting governors and leaders of the PDP are his known loyalists cannot be wished away.

    Even if the meeting goes ahead as planned, there are clear indications that it may not achieve much. There are two reasons for this conclusion. The first is that the credibility of its convener as an impartial arbiter is in doubt. It is therefore doubtful whether he can command that trust and confidence of the parties that is in dire need in a very critical assignment of this nature.

    There is everything to suspect that Obasanjo is part and parcel of the group being the first person the five governors consulted earlier. He is also known to be a critic of the Jonathan regime. If he could not pull any surprise at the budding stages of the crisis, there seems little hope that he can do any magic now. Moreover, his absence at the mini convention is another factor why he cannot be trusted to shoulder the new responsibility.

    Besides, there are key demands of the new PDP that the meeting will find nigh impossible to resolve. And despite all pretensions, all the grievances can be conveniently subsumed into two. These are the twin issues of the removal of PDP national chairman, Bamanga Tukur for alleged dictatorial tendencies and the ambition of Jonathan to run for another term in 2015. Both are two sides of the same coin and therefore inseparable. Tukur is behaving the way he does because he is dancing to the drum beat of his paymaster. So there is some form of deceit in the mounting accusations against Tukur when it is obvious where he is coming from. Tukur can be removed only if the presidency buys the idea. But that has failed to happen.

    In two previous articles in this column titled “Reconciling the irreconcilable” and “Antics of five governors” I had among others, examined the grouse of the opposition within the PDP. I had argued in the case of the issues raised by the five governors during their controversial consultations, for which Ibrahim Babangida called them patriots that all can be encapsulated within the domestic affairs of their party. It is a huge surprise how such internal dissension could be elevated to national fame as Babangida would want us to believe. Today it stands to be seen the inappropriateness of that hurried assessment.

    In the case of the former, I had also pointed out that the crises in the ruling party have their roots in the speculated ambition of Jonathan for another term. Our conclusion was that if Jonathan opts out of the race for 2015, all issues to the crises will fizzle out unilaterally. But since it appears this is unlikely to happen, all efforts at reconciliation will come to naught because those opposed to him are irrevocably committed to the same agenda. There is no room for reconciliation in a situation where two persons lay claim to the same object and no one is prepared to let go. Such a scenario in game theory is called a zero-sum-game. Its payoff is a situation where one party gains all while the other loses all. That is what is bound to happen in respect of the recent implosion of the party. Renewed efforts to mend fences with the foregoing mindset will produce no fruitful result unless one of the parties gives up the quest for the presidency.

    Jonathan cannot now let go that ambition though he has not made his intention public. But his body language says it all. To give up now will amount to succumbing to intimidation, pressure and blackmail from his traducers. He will lose esteem and integrity for chickening out against his own volition. It would have made better sense he did it earlier than now he has been put on edge.

    There is nothing also to suggest the opposition, having dared the consequences, will back-pedal at this point in time. There is no indication to that effect. Not even the removal of Tukur can assuage their feelings. That is the foreboding scenario now.

    It would appear the PDP is bound to live with this crisis for quite sometime. Already, both parties have gone to court. They have also been trading words and soon everybody will be at each others throat. Accusations will soon start flying round on which part of the divide members stand. Cracks have already set in and shoulders ruffled. It will require daunting efforts and divine intervention for the centre to hold again.

    The next couple of weeks will witness renewed efforts by each of the factions to reposition themselves to struggle for the soul of the party. In this fight, the Tukur-led faction will obviously be at advantage of being recognized as the authentic PDP. The other group will not loose sleep if that happens. They have been able to demonstrate unambiguously that the party has broken into factions and that is the issue. Re-alignment of forces will follow next. And the way it goes will harbinger the direction of the nation’s politics. It could also utter the political equation in the country if it does not turn out nasty.

  • Between Kwankwaso and Odimegwu

    Last week’s query to the Chairman of the National Population Commission NPC, Festus Odimegwu, over his observations on the 2006 census, has again elevated the controversy over previous headcounts to the vortex of public opinion. Odimegwu had spoken variously on the flaws of previous census exercises especially that of 2006 which he classified as largely unreliable for planning purposes.

    When officials of the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC visited to demand certified data for the various localities to aid them in constituency delimitation, he had told them some of the enumeration areas do not exist in reality as people bought them in the same manner politicians buy ballot papers during elections to gain advantage.

    At other times, he had lamented that the nation had run on this falsehood for a long time with a promise to conduct a very credible and reliable census in line with international best practices.

    A new dimension was however, added to the matter when Governor Rabiu Kwankwaso of Kano State, raised a strong protest to President Jonathan on the propriety of the appointment of Odimegwu demanding his sack. He anchored his views on the claim that the appointment was a mistake in the first place because Odimegwu’s curriculum vitae showed he worked in the alcoholic industry all his life. Kwankwaso feels with this background, he must be taking a lot of his product and therefore not qualified for the job.

    He also contended that it is wrong for the NPC boss to be attacking what his predecessor did and that if the 2006 census was faulty, he now has an opportunity to correct it.

    Coming soon after Kwankwaso’s diatribe, there is every reason to believe that the query to Odimegwu was the predictable outcome of the Kano State governor’s protest.

    If there is any wrong by the NPC boss in the instant case, it is his seeming indiscretion in speaking publicly on the sensitive matter especially in his present capacity. That however, is not an excuse for Kwankwaso to disparage and hurl insults on him in the manner he did. Kwankwaso has no business with the eligibility of Odimegwu for the post as his opinion on the matter is of no consequence. He was only challenging the competence of the president in making that appointment. Kwankwaso, arrogating the campaign for Odimegwu’s removal to himself bandying warped and banal arguments is not for nothing. He may have a point in his contention that Odimegwu now has an opportunity to correct whatever flaws there might have been in the 2006 census. That can be conceded him especially given the type of bureaucracy we run in this country that permits little openness in public affairs.

    But what is wrong with the fact that Odimegwu pointed out these anomalies especially if they tally with subsisting realities? The issue is not about discrediting a predecessor. Neither is it an attempt to cast aspersions on a section of the country. It is a patriotic duty of calling attention to some of the systemic dysfunctions that have overtime stood on the way to national progress and development. If the 2006 census and those before it were flawed, there is no use sand papering the matter.

    The credibility of those who presided over them is irretrievably tied to the success or failure of those exercises.

    Kwankwaso trivialized his case when he sought to portray Odimegwu’s experience in the brewing industry as evidence of his non qualification for the job. He also descended to smear campaign unbefitting of his position by his tendentious statement that the NPC boss as a brewer, must be taking a lot of his products. Such a statement is demeaning of a person of Kwankwaso’s status and exposes the bitterness in him over the census matter. It is not for nothing that he has found willing allies in the Arewa Consultative Forum, ACF.

    But that is besides the issue. The 1973 census was highly disputed and inconclusive. So also were those of 1991 and 2006. No less a person than late Chief Obafemi Awolowo vehemently faulted the 1973 provisional census figures as unreliable and called on the then Supreme Military Council to totally reject them. He had argued that not only was the overall census figure at variance with UNESCO projections, a situation in which the population of the North-east and Kano State were almost equal to that of the south put together was not acceptable.

    The same flaws identified in the 1973 census were replicated in 1991 and 2006. Kano State posted a population of 5.8 million and 9.4million respectively in the 1991 and 2006 census as against that of Lagos which stood at 5.7 million and 9.1 million even after Jigawa State had been carved out of Kano. The population of Jigawa in 1991 and 2006 was put at 2.8 million and 4.3 million respectively.

    Lagos State was so distressed by this outcome that it not only challenged the 2006 census but went ahead to conduct its own independent headcount which came out with a population of 17.5 million people. Besides, some local governments across the country have successfully challenged the figures credited to them on the 2006 census at the census tribunals.

    The point here is that all these censuses have before now, been largely faulted and challenged. And each time this happens, accusing fingers are pointed in the direction of the north for obvious reasons. There is practically nothing new in the issues raised by Odimegwu except perhaps, this is the first time somebody who should know has owned up to the subsisting reality. And we want to cut off his head for admitting the obvious? That is the problem with this country and that is why no real progress can be made until we come out of this deceit.

    Col. Tony Nyiam rtd, one of the prime movers of the Gideon Orkar military action as he would call it, admitted the manipulation of past censuses in a recent interview. He said the three priorities of his group had they succeeded were: to conduct a proper national census, organize a national conference and conduct free and fair elections. These nagging issues are still with us till date. He said, if we know what the Nigerian population is “over 40 per cent of the constituencies in the North-west and North-east would not exist”. He is not alone in this assessment. And my guess is that the tirade against Odimegwu has its root in this raging perception.

    It can now be understood why Kwankwaso and the ACF are leading the crusade for Odimegwu’s removal. It is all routed in selfish interests. But should Jonathan succumb to this blackmail aimed at perpetuating the decadent past or allow the satellite or aerial imagery in population counting which the NPC has promised? Must we continue to pander to the whims and caprices of those averse to new approaches to old problems? Can Jonathan afford to trivialize the compelling imperative for a reliable census devoid of the manipulations of the past?

    These are the real issues to ponder and not the hot air from the likes of Kwankwaso. Accurate national census is much more important to the peace, progress and unity of this country than the energy dissipated on the 2015 controversy. Jonathan owes it a duty to redress extant structural inequities in this country through a census that is in tandem with international best practices. That is the issue that should concern us most and not the vile agitation to have Odimegwu removed.

  • Beyond Shekau’s death

    The reported death of Abubakar Shekau, leader of the dreaded Islamic sect, Boko Haram is bound to generate considerable interest within and outside the shores of this country. The Joint Task Force JTF had last week announced his possible death as a result of injuries sustained in a clash with Nigerian troops.

    According to the JTF, “Shekau might have died between July 25 and August 3 in Amitchide, Cameroun, after being mortally wounded in an encounter at the Sambisa forest”.

    Since that report, opinions have been torn between optimism and disbelief as the JTF could not provide credible evidence to substantiate its claims beyond relying on intelligence reports. Its position is not remedied by the position of some defence officials who have described the announcement as hasty. The officials also queried why it took the JTF so long and the eve of their departure to make the purported death public.

    For the unnamed defence officials, the confirmation of such a report would involve a thorough scrutiny including substantive evidence from the Cameroonian side which the announcement by the JTF fell short of.

    The news of the purported death of Shekau should be of considerable public interest in more ways than one.

    First, it would signal a very significant success in the fight against terrorism that has in the past couple of years, held this country to its knees. Lives and properties of inestimable value have been lost in the process. It has also come with challenges that have thrown to question our corporate existence as one indivisible country that guarantees co-habitation among its distinct units. The death of Shekau will no doubt demoralize his supporters and change the tempo of the terrorism engagement. It will also be a huge moral booster for the military and the Jonathan regime that have told whoever cares to hear that they are winning the war on terrorism.

    Besides, it will equally enhance the confidence of the international community in the country’s capacity to take its destiny in its own hands. This is more so when it is realized that even the United States of America US had labelled Shekau and two other Boko Haram figures as “specially designated global terrorists” and placed the sum of $7 million on Shekau’s head. Thus, his death will be of considerable interest to the US especially given that those responsible for it might make claims to this hefty sum of money.

    Expectedly, the US has swung into action to ascertain the facts of the matter. Its State Department Deputy spokesperson, Ms Marie Harf believes the death of Shekau if it is true, will set back Boko Haram operations and remove a key voice from its efforts to mobilize violent extremists in Nigeria and around the world. What is evident from all these reactions is that though the death of Shekau will gladden the hearts of many, it is by no means the end of the war on terrorism. Equally evident is the fact that the report is still viewed with subdued caution.

    Reservations on the matter are therefore to be expected. More over, this is not the first time such a report on his death is making the rounds. With the hindsight of a similar report that turned out false, not many would want to buy the latest one until it is proven beyond all reasonable doubt. Osama Bin Laden, the world dreaded terrorist leader was severally reported to have been killed at the Afghan mountains by the US when the man was enjoying himself in his palatial Pakistan residence. All these finally came to limelight when he was hunted down and bombed at his mansion in Pakistan where he lived with his wives and children. So it is not out of place if the latest report on the death of Shekau is being viewed with studied caution. It could turn out a ruse. Shekau could be somewhere savouring the escapades of his foot soldiers. He may not even be part of the fighting force if he is real.

    But Minister of Information, Labaran Maku would want us to resolve the doubts created by the unsubstantiated report in favour of the military. His position is anchored on the fact that the killing of Shekau ought to be a logical progression of events since the onslaught against the insurgents started with the declaration of state of emergency in Borno, Yobe and Adamawa states. He said if the military was successfully prosecuting the war against terrorism, then there should be no reason to doubt its claim on Shekau’s death. Such a report he said, should give us more confidence on the capacity of the military to tame the monster.

    The optimism of the minister is not out of the way. There is no doubt that the killing of Shekau or the eventual defeat of the terrorists will gladden the hearts of our people who have suffered immeasurably since the terror war commenced. It is the wish of every fair-minded Nigerian that this senseless campaign be subdued. Thus, the killing of its leader would send the signal very clearly that the terrorists are being smoked out of their hiding places and the battle will soon be over.

    Yet, such confidence in the capacity of the military to win the war cannot be earned when claims on successes are bandied without substantive evidence. We will be happy if Shekau is either arrested or killed given that he is the brain behind all the atrocities that have been committed in the last couple of years in this country in the name of terrorism. It will also gladden the hearts of many if terrorism can be brought to an abrupt end now.

    But such optimism must be anchored on credible and verifiable successes by the military in the battle field and not speculations that may turn out to be false. That appears to be the point of departure when the minister wants us to resolve scepticisms arising from the inchoate information on the purported death of Shekau in favour of the military.

    The dangers in accepting Shekau’s death in the absence of very credible evidence far outweigh its temporary gains especially if it turns out to be false. For one, it will give the military a false sense of success that may end up obfuscating its overall calculations on the war. It is more promising to have a correct picture of the battle on the ground than celebrate successes that may soon turn out pyrrhic. Calculations anchored on such inaccurate information may turn out very disastrous.

    For another, even defence authorities are not enthused by that report for the same reason of unreliability. There are insipient suggestions that the JTF released the information at the eve of its departure and after a message purportedly by Shekau to position itself for credit in the event he is eventually confirmed dead. All these do not imbue confidence in the overall credibility of the report.

    Before now, we were told by the amnesty committee that it had signed a ceasefire agreement with Boko Haram represented by Shekau’s deputy. Even when Shekau in his usual video message repudiated that report, the committee still insisted that the ceasefire agreement was real. But the JTF came out some weeks ago to tell the nation that Shekau’s deputy has just been killed in a battle in Borno. These contradictions do not help matters. Neither do they give confidence that the latest report should be trusted in the absence of credible evidence. It is therefore pertinent that the military should avoid dishing out information they are unsure of. That is the way to earn public confidence and enhance overall credibility in the very difficult engagement the military has embarked upon.

  • Reconciling the irreconcilable

    It would appear our political actors are currently in a season of reconciliation. Both the opposition and the ruling party have one way or the other been enmeshed in activities to reconcile differences either within the party or among seemingly ideologically different and independent parties. The latter crystallized into the merger of three political parties that have now been registered as the All Progressives Congress, APC. No doubt, it required enormous efforts at balancing and reconciliation for seemingly ideologically different parties to fuse into one political party.

    Whereas the promoters of the APC were concerned with the political engineering of the system towards a strong and an alternative political platform by bringing registered parties into a common fold, the ruling party the PDP, is having a hectic time pacifying aggrieved members. Not only is the party highly factionalized by the ambitions of its key leaders, there are also issues with its leadership.

    In its latest move to reconcile estranged members, the PDP seems to be drawing strength from religious injunctions that strongly recommend forgiveness and reconciliation as a way of bringing harmony, peace and order in our society. If the latest peace moves initiated by the PDP amounts to a genuine restitution for its sins, then it is a good omen for our politically volatile society. But, all restitutions go with the proviso that the offender will sin no more. Is it possible for the PDP to part with its ruinous past as the flurry of moves at reconciliation would seem to suggest?

    If its past is anything to go by, it will be a grave risk to nurse the feeling that the PDP has serious interest in changing its ways. Before the latest effort, we have had several attempts by that party to patch its torn umbrella especially as elections approached. But as soon as the objective of the patch work is achieved, the party relapses into its old and decadent ways.

    It has again instituted a national reconciliation committee and a national disciplinary committee which in the words of its chairman, Bamanga Tukur represents a carrot and stick approach to the matter. At another level, former President Olusegun Obasanjo is busy brokering peace for the party’s governors who have been torn to shreds by the crisis generated by the speculated second term ambition of President Jonathan. The schism in the Nigerian Governors Forum, NGF, which Obasanjo has set out to resolve is a reflection of the sharp divide in opinions on the matter. Even as these peace moves have swung into action, indications are that some of the issues in contention are still being played up by those parroting reconciliation among aggrieved members. This has raised fears regarding the sincerity and commitment of the parties to reconciliation efforts.

    One of such gross acts of indiscretion was the ill-advised hosting of a meeting of the NGF by factional chairman, Jonah Jang of Plateau State who lost out to Chibuike Amaechi of Rivers state at the last election of the forum’s chairman .The boycott of that meeting resulting in poor attendance is enough evidence that rather than abate, the ill-feelings among members have further been reinforced. And the party is deceiving itself parroting reconciliation.

    It is not surprising that Obasanjo’s efforts to resolve the leadership crisis among the two groups has hit the rocks. Reports from the reconciliation venue speak of the two groups rigidly sticking to their positions without compromise. This should be expected. But how on earth did Obasanjo expect he could resolve the NGF crisis which is just a symptom of the endemic crisis within the party?

    There is more to the NGF crisis than the issue of leadership. He may have dabbled into the matter out of pressure and perhaps just to be seen to have made some effort. Obasanjo knows that the leadership crisis in the NGF is just a manifestation of the larger disagreement in the party regarding Jonathan’s ambition. The northern governors opposed to the president are his well known loyalists. It is therefore curious that he set out on that mission without taking along its root cause. It is not surprising that effort came to naught.

    My reading of the situation is that the PDP is neither serious in its latest reconciliation moves nor is it capable of resolving some of the fundamental issues that currently confront the party. Before the latest move, we have seen committee qua committee reports that are rusting in the party’s shelves without addressing the issues. That is why key founders of the PDP have since left for other parties. So when spokesmen of the presidency recently chided the APC for parading former PDP members, they were only drawing attention to the contradiction that has become the PDP. Rather than constitute a minus for the APC or any other party where such members have now taken refuge, it is a sufficient indictment on the PDP. It shows there are endemic contradictions within the party that must at some point, shunt out its keys members.

    Ironically, these contradictions are again at play. That party acquired this notoriety during the regime of Obasanjo. His intolerance and overbearing influence were such that key founders who refused his bidding were shown the way out. We cannot forget in a hurry how some of the party’s chairmen were unceremoniously sent packing and how he manipulated the system to achieve his desires. His anti democratic tendencies were as scandalous as they were infectious. Jonathan is taking a cue from these. Obasanjo is the least qualified person to redress issues arising from the bad example he set. The truth of the matter is that there is only one issue that is at the root of the problem in the ruling party. And at the centre of it all also, is only one man. It has nothing to do either with the tepidity of the Jonathan administration or the manifest crisis in the NGF leadership. It has little to do with the style of leadership or even alleged incompetence of Tukur.

    There is only one man in that party who can resolve the crisis. And only one issue is generating the bad blood.

    That man is Jonathan and the issue is his ambition come 2015. The direction of the so-called efforts at reconciliation will depend on what Jonathan makes of his ambition. This is not in doubt. Those who are fighting him know this. Obasanjo knows this after all, he had similar opposition when the toyed with his ill-fated third term gambit.

    If Jonathan insists on running and there is every indication to that effect, the crisis will fester and even become more complex. That is the foreboding scenario we must inevitably face.

    Perhaps, the reconciliation the PDP should concern itself more with is that which engages Jonathan on his desire to run for a second term which has drawn very strong opposition from the North. That ambition has also pitted the North against the South-south with each threatening dire repercussions should the matter be resolved against them. The battle line is already drawn with only two legitimate options to its resolution. One is for the North to allow Jonathan go for another term. The other is for Jonathan to drop his ambition. These are the issues to reconcile. In their absence, any talk of a truce will amount to an exercise in wishful thinking.

  • And father beheads son

    It is increasingly getting clearer by the day that Nigeria is home to all manner of crimes considered taboos in our traditional African societies. Hardly does any day pass by without reports of sundry blood-chilling crimes in parts of the country. Even societies that ordinarily should be expected to maintain some level of moral decorum are turning out the worst culprits.

    Or how do we explain the recent report of the beheading of a five-year-old boy in Adamawa State by his father for money? The man identified by the police simply as Bappah allegedly beheaded his son Buba Bappah with the intent of selling the head to a ritualist just for N1million. Having struck a deal with a ritualist, the man lured his son out to the farm ostensibly as a helping hand. While in the farm, he beheaded the poor boy and returned home having concealed his decapitated head.

    The grand father of the boy, worried by the inability of Bappah to return with him inquired on his whereabouts. He was told that the boy was still at the farm. Suspecting something amiss, he raised a search team to the farm which discovered to their astonishment the beheaded boy lying in a pool of his blood. Subsequently the grandfather reported the matter to the police which led to the arrest of the suspect.

    On interrogation, he confessed he intended to sell the head for N1million and use the money to buy cattle and take care of his aged parents. Ironically, it is the same parents that handed him over to the police. The above incident underscores very clearly, the degenerate level our society has sunk. As despicable, callous and inhuman as the action is, it has more than anything else shown the extent people can go to make quick money.

    Or how do we explain a 24-year old man beheading his own son with the sole aim of raising money to buy cattle and take ‘care of his aged parents’. If his confessions are anything to repose hope on, the life of his son is not worth that of cattle. For this, the boy had to die in the cruelest manner so that his father can buy cattle.

    Yet, we all know that the human being is the greatest gift God gave to the earth. He is undoubtedly the greatest asset on earth and the key to all productive activities. All these were lost on this obviously morally depraved man. Nothing can be more asinine than this. Even his other alibi of using the proceeds from his demented action to take care of his aged parents is not only puerile but very laughable.

    Though the lives of his aged parents are equally important, it is an abomination to kill anybody not to talk of ones own son just to make money. The urge to buy cattle or take care of one’s own parents cannot be a ground for this bestial and very reprehensible conduct. Children are considered very great assets to their parents. That is why parents toil day and night in order to cater for their children who will in turn take care of them at old age. It is not envisaged that a man will kill his son under any guise how much less on the grounds confessed by the suspect. The fact that it is the same parents he claimed he will use part of the money to take care of that handed him over to the police, shows the abnormality of his inhuman action.

    Sociologist and criminologists have extensively identified the various reasons and factors that can lead people to crime. But the willful beheading of a son by his father just for monetary reward will obviously strike them as a big puzzle especially in a society as ours where morals still occupy a prime position in people’s daily conduct.

    It is true that urbanization and sophistication in life activities have brought with them a variety of crimes that were hitherto considered alien on these shores. But in most of those criminal engagements, those who indulge in them do so mainly to take care of themselves and their immediate families.

    And in the consideration of this immediate family, ones children, wife or husband come into prime focus.

    It therefore runs contrary to the normal course of events for a man to kill his son for the purpose of raising money to take care of aged parents. Children are the greatest assets any parent can boast of. All parents treasure their children and expect that with them, their families will not be cut off the face of the earth. They also envision that at death, it is their children that will ensure they are given a befitting burial. In most parts of the country, it is considered an abnormality for a child to die before his parents. In some of those cultures, parents are not even allowed to see the corpses of their children.

    The point here is that we attach so much value on our children that it is neigh inconceivable for a father to harm his son. And this man had the courage to lure out and behead his son just for money to buy cattle and cater for his old parents who may be nearing their graves on account of age. If a man could kill his son for money, then such a person is a great danger to the society. He has no value for human life and therefore ought not to live.

    The law enforcement agencies should thoroughly investigate this man further. It is possible this is not the first time he is getting involved in this devilish act. A man, who kills his own son just for that amount, is a very potent danger to the society. Who knows the number of those who have fallen prey to his craze for money before he opted for the life of his own son?

    After investigations to ascertain whether he has been on ritual business before now, he should be promptly arraigned at a court of competent jurisdiction together with the person who offered money for the boy’s head. They should be made to account for their misdeeds. Perhaps, had the man not offered to buy the head, Bappah would not have been tempted to kill his son.

    It is to be imagined the type of scenario that played out as this man lifted his knife to kill the poor boy. I can see the boy confused at the first instance wondering whether it was a play. I can also see the poor boy holding his father and begging him to spare his life. But despite all cries and entreaties the devil that was Bappah refused to be moved and had to cut off the head of the poor boy. What an extreme act of callousness! Nothing can be more blood chilling than this.

    But beyond this, the law enforcement agencies must investigate the veracity of the claim that people use human heads and vital organs of the body for ritual purposes. The common belief here is that human parts are used by native doctors and sundry occultist persons to make money or gain power. The ever rising rate of murders involving the severance of vital organs of victims that dot the entire gamut of the country are attributed to the thriving mill of ritual activities. It is high time we got at the root of these senseless killings and utter disregard for the sanctity of the human life.

  • As APC comes on board

    Those truly committed to the survival of democracy in this country must have heaved a heavy sigh of relief at the registration by the Independent National Electoral Commission, (INEC) of the All Progressives Congress (APC). Announcing the registration of the new party which is a coalition of three registered political parties, INEC anchored its decision on the fact that they complied with all the statutory requirements for the merger. It therefore approved the withdrawal of the registration certificates of the three parties and will in turn issue them with a single one for the APC

    Expectedly, many well-meaning Nigerians have been showering encomiums on both the INEC and the merging parties for what is largely seen as the opening up of the political space for the electorate. This is more so given the dominance of the ruling Peoples Democratic Party PDP and fears of a slide to a one party state. The current acrimony and tension in that party resulting from the ambition of contending interests is largely because of its dominance in the political affairs of the country in the absence of a strong alternative party that could pull a serious challenge at the national level.

    On account of this, internal democracy and sovereignty of the electorate have been relegated to backdoor. Though there are many registered parties, some cannot even field candidates during elections and where they manage to do so, the impact is almost zero. The very relatively strong ones have their strengths largely confined to their zones. Thus, we had been left with the PDP as the only party with the strength to prosecute national elections; deploying the power of incumbency to advantage. The matter was not helped by the continuous registration of all manner of parties seen in some quarters as a deliberate ploy to weaken the emergence of a formidable opposition to confront the ruling PDP. But all that has been substantially altered with the registration of the APC. This should be something to cheer for all those who have had their ambitions shattered by lack of accommodation in the ruling party in the absence of a viable and broad based alternative platform. There is also the higher danger posed to democracy through the dominance of the political horizon by a single party. Apart from denying the electorate the right to choice both in terms of candidates and programs, a one party state stifles new ideas and innovation. In fact, it is another name for dictatorship. And we have seen these features play out since our return to democracy. That was why the PDP had the temerity to dare Nigerians with the trash that it will rule the country for as long as it pleases them. Such a statement given the performance profile of that party must be a serious insult to the sensibilities of the electorate. But the PDP had its reasons for so doing. Then was the time when some of the parties had no visible structures in many parts of the country. And at elections, the PDP had a field day doing whatever pleases it given the absence of representatives of some parties at the polling booths. This has become a thing of the past.

    Given the way APC emerged and the political figures driving it, there is no doubt that we are in for a serious competition between the two parties.

    In the days ahead, we expect to see the PDP making frantic efforts to mend its tattered umbrella. At present, the party is deeply embroiled in serious crises with many futile efforts to resolve them. Even the most recent effort at reconciliation, has again run into serious hitch because the issues at stake are largely irreconcilable.

    Thus, the APC enjoys a lot of goodwill which must be put to advantage. The sacrifice all its promoters made to see the new party to fruition must be commended even by the most incurable antagonist.

    As heart-warming as the development is, there is a lot of work awaiting the new party. Happily, the merger arose as a protest against the undemocratic tendencies of the PDP and the desire to give the electorate an alternative platform for political action and choice.

    Every effort must be made to live up to this bidding. There have been predictions by the opposition that the new party will soon rupture on account of disputations when sharing offices. This must not be allowed to happen. Like in every human organization, there are bound to be those posturing to take advantage of the new party without due regard to all the interests in the coalition. There are some others waiting in the wings to capture its structures for their selfish interests. These must not be allowed to happen as the new party cannot afford to commence this journey with disenchantment and schism in some of its chapters. Political recruitment must be broad based and all inclusive.

    There are also critical issues of our national being that the new party must as a matter of deliberate policy balance. There is the need to reassure the various geo-political zones that their interests and sensibilities will be accommodated and protected in the new arrangement. This is pertinent in view of the raging crisis in the ruling party on which of the geo-political zones will produce the president come 2015. The APC must come out clearly on the way power has to rotate among the contending blocks in this country.

    As at now, that of the PDP has run into mud waters and stuck. The APC must reassure Nigerians that the presidency is not the exclusive preserve of any body or any part of the country as all Nigerians and sections have inalienable right to that office. It must ensure that the sensibilities and interests of all sections are placed on the table and accommodated at this initial stage of its coming into being and learn from the mistakes of the PDP. It must be seen from its actions and programs as the real alternative to the ruling party. Some of the issues that are increasingly playing up in this country and which may shape the unfolding competition are the twin issues of religion and geo-politics.

    They must be handled very carefully so as not to injure the feelings of any group or section. Happily, we are in a secular state. That secularity must not only be upheld but must be seen to be so. These are the issues the people will be looking out for and the way they are piloted in the days ahead will make the difference.

    It is therefore good a thing that the APC has come on stream despite the efforts of some phony groups to lay claim to its acronym. Those promoting all manner of groups, inventing acronyms that are similar to that of the APC were obviously at mischief. The target was to frustrate this bold and high-minded effort by three registered parties to coalesce into a single political party. The merger strikes as a landmark event in the annals of this country.

    Those who sought to frustrate it were people benefiting from the subsisting but decadent order. They must hide their faces in shame. Why the interest in the acronym APC? If they are that serious, let them pursue their vaulting ambition for national recognition through another name. After all, it is not the acronym that will win election when the time comes. All said, the registration of the APC is a thing whose time has come.

  • Antics of five governors

    Apparently piqued by the worsening political temperament of the country, five governors from the north, last week embarked on consultations with some elder statesmen with a view to stemming the slide. The governors- Aliyu Babangida (Niger) Murtala Nyako (Adamawa), Sule Lamido (Jigawa) Rabiu Kwankwaso (Kano) and Aliu Wammako (Sokoto) held discussions with Olusegun Obasanjo, Ibrahim Babangida and Abdulsalam Abubakar, all former military rulers of this country. Feelers from some of those who attended the meetings indicated that top on their agenda were the festering crisis in the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), the feud in the Nigerian Governors’ Forum (NGF) and the political crisis in Rivers State. Also on the table was the marginalization of some PDP governors by both the party and the presidency as well as the hurling of pebbles on the convoy of these governors when they visited their colleague of Rivers State.

    They were equally reported to have said that their main concern is not with where power swings in 2015 but the prospects of the tense political atmosphere derailing that election. For them, the road to the election is strewn with thorns such that the former leaders needed to intervene before things go awry.

    Not much has been heard from those they visited. But Babangida must have been so impressed by the concerns raised by the governors that he did not waste time in describing them as patriots. By that, the impression we get is that they are genuinely concerned and prepared to sacrifice for the peace, unity and progress of this country. That should be good news to all fair-minded people.

    This is not an attempt to diminish Babangida’s assessment of the motive behind the governors’ action.

    This is more so as the issues raised are already in public domain. There is no doubt that recent events in the country, especially the crisis in the ruling PDP, that of the NGF and its manifestation in the show of shame in Rives State have elicited genuine concerns about the fate of democracy. If the five governors were moved by genuine desires to save the country from the slide to the precipice, they may well qualify as patriots as Babangida has labeled them.

    But there are issues that can be raised against their composition and agenda. It is curious why the ‘patriotic’ governors did not include the menace of the Boko Haram insurgency as a very potent destabilizing factor requiring urgent therapeutic response. Boko Haram is even more threatening and devastating to our corporate existence than the items in their agenda. Moreover, most of the issues raised can be encapsulated within the domestic problems of the ruling party. No doubt, they could have wider repercussions for the country but they are the making of the PDP. Boko Haram is of a wider and more destructive dimension. To have left it out of their agenda did considerable harm to the credit which Babangida sought to give them. It is difficult to fathom how their largely skewed agenda can lead to national fame.

    It is not clear how the five governors were selected. But they are all members of the PDP. Incidentally also, they are known to hold views contrary to those of the presidency and the PDP especially on the country’s power equation. They are known sympathizers of Governor Chibuike Amaechi of Rivers State who has turned out the anchor point of the opposition to President Jonathan.

    The five governors are entitled to their views. The opinions they currently hold on issues of our national being cannot be circumscribed. In fact, some of them have won the admiration of some people for their principled stance on issues.

    But their inability to attract some of the pro-Jonathan governors in that part of the country to their team lends their motive to suspicion.

    Hard as they try to convince the rest of us that power shift is not at the centre of their self-assigned consultations, it is still hard to believe.

    The problems the governors raised are just symptoms of the innate political sickness afflicting the country. They are all linked to 2015. If Jonathan announces today he will not present himself for the 2015 election, they will fizzle out unilaterally.

    But, that will not be the end of our problems. Sooner or later, they will rear up their ugly heads in other forms as we are yet to tackle the root of them all. And as long as we fail to genuinely address these fundamental distortions, so long will they remain a recurring decimal in our national affairs. Even if power moves back to the north in 2015, it is no guarantee that these systemic frictions will abate. They will not. At best, we would have succeeded in assuaging the feelings of a section of the north albeit temporarily. Within this north and south dichotomy, the fate of the Igbo, one of the tripod on which this country was erected and northern minorities has been relegated to the background. Moving power back to the north has not in any way addressed the grouses of these sections. They will be worse off when this happens given the number of years the north has held that post. With the posturing of the north, it is uncertain the use they intend to put political power when once they get. Key northerners are known to have said that rotation is dead. And when we juxtapose this to recent statements from northern elders and Arewa Consultative Forum that the north has the population to snatch power and retain it as long as it pleases it, then the danger lurking around becomes very manifest.

    It stands to reason that reverting power to the north is not a solution to the centrifugal tendencies that have gained higher momentum in the last couple of years. It will rather reinforce the fears of sections continually shunted out of the commanding heights of key national positions and institutions. These groups will in no distant time, begin to vent their pent up grievances. There is mistrust, suspicion and ill-feelings among the diverse groups on these shores due to inequitable distribution of power and resources. It is on account of these that some people organized themselves to throw stones on the northern governors who were on a legitimate solidarity visit to their colleague in Port Harcourt.

    Some of those who spoke accused Amaechi of wasting their money hosting the northern governors. What money one may wish to ask? Their posters had some unprintable inscriptions that could further fuel embers of discord. That is how bad the mistrust is. But that is their mood. One of the governors succinctly captured this dilemma when he wondered what would have happened in the north had harm come their way.

    It is vital we give deep thought to stemming the recurring frictions that have over the years, stood against national integration. Power shift being a symptom of the larger national disorder cannot effectively address the nagging issues of our federal order. Power is sought desperately in this country because sections want to gain advantage over others. Such a posturing cannot promote fairness, justice, equity and national cohesion. Jonathan may as well vacate office for the north in 2015. But the manner he is being harassed out of the contest may end up swelling a groundswell of public sympathy for him both in the south and the Middle Belt.

     

  • Northerners and power shift

    Ango Abdullahi, secretary to the Northern Elders Forum (NEF) reopened the debate on power shift when he declared last week, that the north was determined to reclaim power come 2015. Exuding incredible confidence on the prospects of the northern project, Abdullahi anchored his optimism on two key planks. The first is the logic of rotation while the other draws impetus from the touted demographic advantage of the region.

    He said the north will rely heavily on the fact that it is its turn to have a shot at that office as was agreed by stakeholders before and during Obasanjo’s regime and in keeping with the constitution of the ruling party. Where this fails to sail through, they will call to action the sheer weight of their numbers to win the ensuing election given the principles of one man one vote.

    Hear him, “the north is determined and insisting that the leadership of the country will rotate to it in 2015 and I am making that very clear to you. If it is on the basis of one man one vote, the demography shows that the north can keep power as long as it wants because it will always win elections”.

    He went on to show how the rotation of power as a way of giving a sense of belonging to the distinct groups in the country was arrived at the 1987 National Political Reforms Conference. Obasanjo became its first beneficiary because of events of the annulled June 12, 1993 elections. According to him, it was supposed to last for four years but later extended due to pleas from Obasanjo to serve for another term since the constitution allows that.

    “With Obasanjo’s eight years and six years of Jonathan come 2015, it would amount to taking the north for granted if Jonathan who was part of this agreement (having signed as number 37 in his capacity as deputy governor of Bayelsa State) puts himself forward for another election”, he would further contend.

    It is difficult not to admit the weighty argument by the north in respect of rotation of power in this country. Obasanjo must have paid heed to it when he manipulated his way to have late Umaru Yar’Adua run as the presidential candidate of the ruling party. He won. But his death after two years in the saddle, unleashed a chain of events that are at the centre of the current crisis of confidence among key political gladiators in this country. The management of his sickness left much to be desired even as contrived obstacles were placed on Jonathan’s way to assuming his constitutional role as acting president until the Senate intervened. All these may have ruffled nerves. We were told by late National Security Adviser, Andrew Azazi that violence in this country peaked following the primaries of the PDP that threw up Jonathan. It would appear security challenges since Jonathan came to power, complicated the disposition of the geo-political zones to the power equation in the country. They also gave rise to palpable fear and apprehension regarding what use the north intends to make of political power. No thanks to the killings of innocent people and destruction of their properties by the Boko Haram sect obsessed with enthroning an Islamic state after the south has been sacked out of the north.

    One mute point here is that, the north intends to realize its power shift project by rotation through the ruling Peoples Democratic Party PDP or where this fails, they will prosecute the same goal through any other party. On the latter, the sheer weight of their population promises to be the game changer. They are saying very unambiguously that power must shift to the north in the next election whether Jonathan runs or not. If the logic of rotation fails and they corner power through their demographic advantage, then it is good by to power shift as they can decide to retain power as long as it pleases them. That is the clear message Abdullahi has sent across which should not be ignored.

    But then the political arithmetic canvassed by Abdullahi is not as simple as it has been put forward. By the 2006 census figures, the north accounts for 52.56 per cent of the population while that of the south is 46.35. Even then, these figures represent the absolute population and not the number of eligible or even registered voters. There is also the misplaced and untenable assumption that all northerners will vote for the northern candidate while all southerners will queue behind a southerner. This is not borne out of our electoral history and strikes as an act of desperation. Moreover, the concept of a monolithic north is by all accounts stale even as Abdullahi would want us to reason to the contrary. Whatever led northern elders to the conclusion that the 2015 election can be fought solely along the north and south divide must be a huge disappointment to the unity of this country. Is it not an uncanny twist of fate that, youths under the umbrella of Northern Youths Network have dissociated themselves from statements credited to NEF and ACF on return of power to the region come 2015? Its president Mallam Alli Kano said those canvassing power shift to the north in 2015 are doing so for selfish reasons as ethnicity, religion and primordial sentiments which the elders had employed to sway choices during elections must be discarded as we prepare for 2015. The elders can as well dismiss this. But such dissenting views were unthinkable in the past.

    There is even a more grave danger in an election that is fought along the lines of the north and south divide. Its outcome given extant realities is loaded with frightening prospects of facilitating the failure of the Nigerian state. Then, earlier predictions from the US would have become a self-fulfilling prophesy. These are the potent dangers in the NEF argument. If the 2015 election is fought and won along these divisions, it will be nigh impossible for the winner to take off as he will not be able to muster the required majority in the National Assembly. The ensuing disputations will quickly catalyze the same disastrous end.

    So Abdullahi and his likes are not doing this nation any good by inventing warped and self-serving arguments all in the desperation to corner power by all means. It would have been of more national appeal if they had argued that where rotation fails, the north will work with fair- minded people from the south to prosecute the same goal. But to give the impression that the north can do away with the south and retain power for ever is the height of deceit and stupidity.

    Even as the logic of rotation is very valid, the posturing of the NEF on the issue of demography brings into focus some of the systemic dysfunctions that are at the root of the festering mistrust and suspicion among our people. Some weeks back, the chairman of the National Population Commission, Festus Odimegwu shocked the nation when he revealed that some of the enumeration centres we have do not exist in reality as some people bought them same way politicians bought voters’ cards to gain advantage. The figures the NEF is bandying may not scale the test of this revelation.

    More fundamentally, the dispute over power shift points to the fact that there some irreducible issues of our federal order we need to reach common agreement on for us to make any progress.

    We need to address more seriously, the inequities and structural imbalances of our national existence contrived to gain advantage over some other sections. Curiously each time the idea of a national conference is canvassed the same north will be the lead opposition.

     

     

     

     

     

  • Danger signals from Rivers

    Rivers State House of Assembly played host to a theatre of the absurd last week. Five errant lawmakers in a 32-member assembly, apparently emboldened by support from ‘above’, hatched a devious plan to impeach the speaker and elect one of theirs as the new speaker. The planned resumption of sittings which the assembly had communicated the Police commissioner and the Army commander to provide adequate security turned out the undoing of the speaker and majority of the law makers.

    Unknown to them, the five dissenting legislators who take orders from Abuja had perfected plans for a showdown by importing ex-militants and thugs into the assembly complex preparatory to acting out a script crafted for them. In arriving at this suicide mission, it never occurred to them that both in terms of numbers and extant constitutional requirements, they were heading for an impossible task. But they trudged on apparently buoyed by recent events at the Nigerian Governors’ Forum election where a minority has since laid claim to its leadership with the full support of the presidency. If the five legislators had come to the conclusion that they could as well pull a surprise despite the heavy encumbrances on their way, it should not surprise any one. Basking on the backing or anticipated indifference of the law enforcement agencies, they made good their plan to stir trouble on the floor of the assembly. Curiously, five of them succeeded in instilling fear into 23 legislators loyal to the Rivers State governor to the extent that they had to scamper for safety. This further spurred them to the point of purportedly electing a new speaker. It took the intervention of Governor Amaechi for order to be restored after the ensuing confrontation. The assembly subsequently sat and approved an amendment to the 2013 budget presented to it by the deputy governor. That amendment was the main purpose for which the speaker summoned the assembly.

    Events in the assembly have generated condemnations from a broad spectrum of the Nigerian people. Not only are they irked by the seeming indifference of the police, accusing fingers, for good reason, have been pointed at the presidency for simulating the crisis in that state. The confrontation is generally viewed as a continuation of the crisis in the NGF since the dramatis personae has not changed. As was the case in the NGF crisis, the presidency has washed its hands off that show of shame. In a tepid statement hurriedly put together following its fingering for tacitly supporting the dissenting lawmakers, its spokesmen put up futile efforts to deny complicity from Abuja. Not many believed them anyway. It was a rehearsal of the same stale denials that hallmarked the crisis in the NGF until Jonathan openly roped himself into the matter by publicly recognizing the losers as winners. So if the same presidency is again denying vicarious culpability in the latest crisis, no body will take it serious. Not with the purported recognition of the so-called new ‘speaker’ by the Peoples Democratic Party PDP. Since it is the same enemy that is involved, the warring five may have come to the conclusion that any thing is possible in this country including an insignificant minority impeaching and having its way over the majority? After all, this will not be the first of it in our recent political past. We saw such a charade in its worst form during the regime of Obasanjo. We are all witnesses to the abduction of former Governor Chris Ngige of Anambra state by a band of marauding buccaneers bent in sucking the state dry.

    Yet, nobody was punished for that odious conduct except perhaps, the AIG of police in charge of Zone 9, late Raphael Ige. The same impunity played out in Bayelsa and Plateau states where officials of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC used a few lawmakers to impeach the governors in the most kangaroo manner. It was the impeachment of the governor of Bayelsa State where Jonathan was the then deputy that opened the door for his meteoric ascendancy to power.

    So if Jonathan is now seen to be taking the footsteps of his mentor in a very cruel manner, we can understand him. In a previous article in this column titled ‘Jonathan going Obasanjo’s way’ we had drawn attention to the observed inclination of Jonathan to the undemocratic pranks of Obasanjo. We had predicted also that the logic of self preservation will drive him into such frenzy that he may soon become an ardent apostle of those anti-democratic tendencies that marred Obasanjo’s regime.

    Successive events have borne out these predictions. Today, Obasanjo has been effectively sidelined in the PDP in the same manner he did to those who were instrumental to his release from prison and subsequent drafting into that party. Nemesis one may wish to call it!

    More fundamentally, all these anti-democratic tendencies are neither being spurred by public good nor in the interest of our floundering democracy. At the centre of them all, is the lure of primitive accumulation of power, influence and capital. We saw Obasanjo manifest this in his obnoxious third term ambition even as our constitution has no room for such a self-serving contraption. Jonathan’s is manifesting in the desire for another term despite the dire straits the nation is currently passing through. He may be within his rights to desire another term. But his current posturing that seeks to cut down anybody or processes seen to be standing against his ambition is potentially dangerous and may spiral a chain of events with dire repercussions for this country.

    It is very hard to exculpate Jonathan from the chain of embarrassing events that have been the lot of Rivers these past days. It is a big shame that the deputy governor was ambushed and cars in his convoy damaged by hired thugs. Equally inexcusable is the report that teargas canisters were hurled into government house even as soldiers there have been withdrawn together with the armoured personnel carrier. Why these are happening in very quick succession can only find explanation in a subtle attempt to simulate anarchy so as to declare a state of emergency.

    Or how else can we rationalize the effrontery of the five legislators despite their incapacitation on account of numbers? Obviously, they were responding to drum beats from those who control the instruments of coercion?

    If it took Amaechi to personally intervene before order was restored in the assembly, then we can better understand all that has been said about the bias of the commissioner of police, Joseph Mbu. If not for connivance, how on earth can five people intimidate and overpower 23 others to the extent that they had to scamper for safety? These are some of the issues to ponder. Even then, why was the initial screening at the assembly’s gate relaxed such that thugs had to enter with dangerous weapons? This question is pertinent for us to locate what must have spurred the recalcitrant five to take on their colleagues despite the futility in so doing. In all, both the five law makers and Mr. Mbu should take responsibility for the sordid outing of the assembly that day. They prepared for trouble and were the purveyors of the fight that ensued. They stand condemned in very unequivocal manner.

    Mbu has lost the confidence of the Rivers people and must not be allowed a day longer. His continued stay has become a big liability and clear evidence that some body somewhere kept him there for some odd job.