The Nation Newspaper

Category: Emeka Omeihe

  • Oguta by-election: matters arising

    Oguta in Imo State has become a metaphor for all that is wrong with our electoral process. More than two years after elections were conducted into state assemblies, it has remained a daunting task for any election to be successfully concluded in that constituency. Last week’s re-run, illustrates most poignantly, the bad example Oguta has become in the nation’s desire to enthrone free and fair polls.

    This sordid record is not entirely new, as the area is home to politicians very notorious for their awesome technology in election rigging and falsification of results. There was a time when election results were written in private homes and hotel rooms even before voting commenced. But all that suffered serious reverses with the insistence by President Jonathan on the principles of one man one vote and general awareness by the electorate for their votes to count. But the behemoths will not let go.

    We have seen how that principle succeeded in demystified prominent politicians in parts of the country as they failed to deliver their wards despite purported claims to huge electoral value.

    The turn of events in Oguta is the predictable outcome of a bad habit that has refused to give way. It is not surprising that the latest election ran into troubled waters; such that it was declared inconclusive by the INEC. According to INEC resident commissioner in Imo State, Prof Celina Okoh, the election was declared inconclusive because the difference in the number of votes between the first and second candidate which stood at 2,011 was lower than the 4,861 registered voters in the remaining eight polling units where election did not hold due to violence. This she said was in keeping with extant regulations in the Electoral Act.

    But this arithmetic is not as simple as it has been presented. A further examination of the ratio of those who voted in the 121 polling units will expose the glaring incongruity in canceling the entire election because of the unavailability of votes from just eight units. Going by the 4,861 registered voters in the eight units under contention, it is estimated that those who registered in the 121 units where elections held will be in the neighborhood of 73,522 voters. Of this figure, only 17,179 actually voted. This represents about 25 per cent of the total number of registered voters. So even if we calculate 25 per cent of the votes in the remaining eight units and add all of it to the figure scored by the PDP candidate in the 121 units, he will still not make it. Even then and going by the pattern of extant results, there is nothing to show that the PDP will win more votes than APGA in the remaining units. The message from this simple calculation is very clear to all. And it is that the people of Oguta have unambiguously demonstrated their preference for the APGA candidate. This must be respected.

    Governor Rochas Okorocha has cried foul blaming the turn of events as part of the grand plan by the PDP controlled government and INEC to rob APGA of its victory. He said APGA won with 9,595 votes as against 7,584 by the PDP in the 121 polling units where election results were collated. The governor also argued that if at all the need arose for any repeat; it should be confined to the eight units where polling did not take place. The last point is unassailable as it draws huge support from the calculations above.

    However, the PDP has equally accused the INEC of collaborating with APGA to rig the election, claiming that its candidate won. It accused APGA of masterminding the irregularities that stalled voting in the eight units. So the game of recrimination continues. From the point of view of both parties, the INEC has issues to resolve concerning its conduct of that election.

    This is about the third time elections into that constituency will turn out unsuccessful since April 2011. Events in Oguta raise serious questions not only on the commitment of the Jonathan administration to free and fair elections but more importantly INEC’s capacity to conduct credible polls. Moreover, reports of late arrival of voting materials in an election involving only a local government, amount to a scandal of unmitigated proportion. And when this is paired with the reported militarization of the local government through massive deployment of soldiers and armoured personnel carriers, it becomes more puzzling why the touted violence could not be contained for the election to proceed unhindered.

    Matters were also not helped by the so-called Abuja politicians comprising elected and appointed officers. They were reported to have stormed Oguta in convoys with their retinue of heavily armed security personnel who added to the tension that characterized the election. Ironically, most of these people had no business in Oguta as they are not even from that local government. Why INEC shut its eyes to the impudence of these politicians and the regulation that no security officer should come to the polling units with arms as was done in previous elections, is one issue that must be thoroughly investigated. Good thing, President Jonathan feels sufficiently concerned by this show of shame that he has tasked the security agencies and INEC to fish out those responsible for the violence. In this task, the first people to arrest are the so-called Abuja politicians, most of them members of the PDP who had no business in Oguta on that day. INEC must summon the courage to bring this category of politicians to book now it is at the receiving end from both parties. Any inquisition that ignores the brazen impunity displayed by these elected federal legislators will be patently meaningless. They are known and their presence and activities in Oguta on that fateful day cannot be denied.

    It has become paramount to check the impunity of these category people who have found it hard to part ways with their decadent and ruinous pasts. The way this singular incident is handled, will send signals as what to expect come 2015. It is either those responsible for this mess are brought to book or we should be prepared for the soaking of the baboons and the dogs in blood as has been forewarned.

    Oguta has become something else. In the April 2011 governorship and state assembly elections, it was the epicentre of popular resistance against high- tech subterfuge by the then government in power to manipulate the outcome of the election. It was a classic test of the will power of the people to take their destiny into their hands. Such was the situation that when the electorate sensed subtle efforts by the electoral umpire in connivance with law enforcement agents to manipulate the election, they rose stoutly and resisted it. Of the 27 local governments in the state, only in that constituency did election not hold due to stiff resistance by the people against attempts to manipulate the distribution of voting materials.

    What we see in Oguta, is the surge of popular resistance against elections that do not reflect the wishes of the people. That is perhaps, what Okorocha meant when he said Oguta has never had elections before now. INEC must rise to that challenge. If it cannot declare the APGA candidate winner because of the issue earlier canvassed, it has no business canceling results from the 121 units where voting successfully held. The right thing is to reschedule voting in the remaining eight units. We have a precedent in the same state to rely on. Canceling the entire results will amount to a plot to procure victory for the PDP through unwholesome means.

  • Again on NGF controversy

    It does appear the crisis generated by the disputed election into the chairmanship of the Nigerian Governor’s Forum NGF will for long, dominate public discourse. If some governors are not blaming their colleagues for alleged betrayal, some others are seen talking of collective failure for the pass that has become the outcome of that election. There are also others rooting for an amicable resolution of the matter. Yet, the same election is before the court as Lagos State governor, Babatunde Fashola has challenged his colleague of Plateau State, Jonah Jang for parading himself as the chairman of the forum when Chibuike Amaechi of Rivers state was actually elected by a majority of the votes cast.

    At another level, the presidency which should be working to resolve the impasse is neck deep in fuelling the controversy. At least on two occasions, it has taken actions that have portrayed it as the unseen hand behind the schism in the forum. President Jonathan has not only gone ahead to recognize Jang as the chairman of the forum, he also fixed a dinner for the governors on a date and time the first meeting of the Amaechi group was slated.

    This is so even as Jang and his group have held meetings in their newly rented office without being challenged or have their meeting clash with key events at the presidency. And after one of such meetings, Jang’s faction proceeded for a meeting at the presidency in which Jonathan recognized him as the chairman of the NGF, which he is not.

    The maiden meeting of the NGF called by Amaechi since the crisis came up last week. After notices of the meeting had been circulated, the presidency curiously summoned all the governors to Abuja for what it termed a mid-term dinner for the same day and time. The immediate reading of that meeting was that it was a subtle attempt by the presidency to throw spanners into the NGF meeting so as to promote the claims of Jang to its leadership.

    What had promised a test of power was maturely handled by 15 governors that attended the meeting summoned by Amaechi. Having shown their presence at the Rivers State Governor’s lodge venue of the meeting, the governors resolved to adjourn in deference to the dinner called by Jonathan. But they succeeded in making their point. From there, they proceeded to the venue of the dinner, though after the president had arrived.

    It is equally instructive that there were at least five PDP governors from the north in Amaechi’s meeting. This is very instructive as it goes to show that the so-called consensus within the PDP fold before the election was nothing but a ruse. If anything, the level of attendance has shown that those supporting Jang are being less than honest. The level of response and solidarity with Amaechi despite obvious attempts by the presidency to mess up that meeting is also very revealing.

    It leaves no one with any shred of doubt that those who voted for Amaechi were not ghosts. It also speaks volumes about the purported consensus to have Jang as the NGF chairman. And as the governor of Niger State Babangida Aliyu succinctly put it, though northern governors agreed on Jang’s consensus candidacy, “when the election took place, the conscience of the people prevailed over consensus”. That is the real issue.

    It is therefore puzzling that some governors who really took part in the election that produced Amaechi are latching on to a very questionable consensus when the ballot box has said it all. Having voted, its outcome takes precedence over whatever agreement previously arrived at by any other group. That is the only reasonable way to look at the matter.

    But rather than accept the outcome of the election, some 16 governors who voted for Jang opted to float a parallel forum with Jang as their leader. They rented an office and have been holding their meeting there. If this had come from some other quarters, perhaps we could have excused it. But since it involved chief executives of states, the matter becomes more puzzling. If anything, it casts the integrity of those governors in a very bad light. That is the point Delta state governor Emmanuel Uduaghan made when he said in a radio and television programme that the turn of events at that election has shaken the people’s confidence in them. Hear him “I think we (governors) owe Nigerians apologies for the turn of events at the forum. We have no excuse for what has happened at the forum because the people expect so much from us.” Uduaghan has said it all even though he was one of those who pitched their tent with Jang after he failed to secure the mandate of his colleagues. The lamentations of the Delta State governor mirror vividly the inherent contradictions in the raging disputations over the authentic leader of the governors’ forum. And as he rightly argued, there is no excuse for what happened. There was no excuse for forming a splinter group despite the fact that things did not go the way some highly placed government functionaries wanted them. It is one thing to be dissatisfied with the outcome of that election and a different kettle of fish declare Jang the winner when such a declaration did not tally with the facts on the ground. That is the very grave error those supporting Jang have committed. It would have been neater if those governors had stopped at rejecting the outcome of the election.

    Had it been so, discussions will now focus on how to resolve the areas of difference. Now a loser has claimed he is the authentic leader having rented an office and recognized by the president, the matter has become more complicated and messy.

    It is a mark of this mess that the sitting arrangement at last week’s National Economic Council NEC meeting had to be altered such that none of the disputants was recognized as the chairman. That is part of the monsters we create. But then, the NGF is a voluntary organization. Why it has attracted the kind of heat it is now generating can only be located with the ambit of partisan politics. It all has to do with the politics of 2015.

    Otherwise what is there in that seemingly inconsequential organization that should make the rest of us lose sleep? But politics is involved and Jonathan’s desire for another term is at the centre of it all. Those who support Amaechi both from the opposition and the ruling party are all united by one goal. And it is to ensure that Jonathan does not make it this time around. They could differ in their approaches but their goal is the same.

    But more fundamentally, by attending the meeting summoned by Amaechi, those PDP governors have made a very bold statement. They have said very unambiguously that the simmering schism within the PDP has come to stay. They are saying very boldly that they have a different political agenda that runs at cross purposes with that of Jonathan.

    Viewed within this context, it becomes clearer why the crisis within the NGF will not easily abate. Being irretrievably tied to the politics of power shift, its fate will depend on the direction of the unfolding political competition. Whether Amaechi can appropriately fit into that change agent, is a matter for another day.

  • Odimegwu’s fake census data

    A very revealing but stunning scenario played out last week when officials of the Independent National Electoral Commission, (INEC) met with their counterparts of the National Population Commission, (NPC). INEC chairman, Professor Attahiru Jega had asked NPC chairman, Eze Festus Odimegwu to officially release to him some certified data from the commission to aid them in the planned constituency delimitation exercise. But he must have got the shocker of his life, when he was told that, the NPC had no officially certified data for all the localities in the country as some of the enumeration areas do not exist in reality.

    Hear Odimegwu: “The enumeration centers we have, some of them do not exist in reality, some politicians bought them the way you will want to register voters and some people will buy voters’ cards in order to have an advantage”

    According to the NPC chairman, these people bought the enumeration areas and raised the number from about “250 to 500 and if you later count and discover that the population is 10, they will say no, but we gave you 500, you have to raise it to that number we gave you”.

    These disclosures are not only weighty but very revealing and sensitive. They are no doubt, at the root of the high wire controversy that trailed our past attempts at national head count. In the past 30 years or so, all the censuses held in this country were embroiled in intense controversy as the various sections of the country fiercely disputed their outcome. The two last ones held in 1991 and 2006 were no less contentious. But while that of 1991 posted a figure of 88.9 million people with a projected growth rate of 2.9 per cent, the 2006 census came out with a figure of 140 million people.

    Even before the 2006 headcount, intense bickering arose regarding the proposal to include the twin issues of ethnicity and religion in the questionnaires that will form part of the data to be furnished by individuals. The whole idea was to generate the statistics of the various ethnic and religious groups in this country given claims and counter claims regarding their relative strengths. And for a country that is still grappling with debilitating problems of development, the availability of these data will no doubt be of veritable aid for planning purposes. Despite the obvious benefits from these vital statistics, their inclusion was still highly disputed. The North threatened to mobilize its people to work against the exercise should these two indices appear in the questionnaire. There was equally a counter threat from the South-east to boycott the exercise if they were not included.

    And when eventually the NPC did not include them, some groups moved round the South-east campaigning against the headcount. This in part, accounted for the poor posting of that zone to the overall population figure. There was also the issue of state of origin as against that of domicile. It was vigorously canvassed that given the pattern of migration especially to urban centres in search of greener pastures, there was the need to add up indigenes of states counted outside to the total population of their home states. It was argued that in view of the unresolved issue of residency, states needed to have an idea of their entire population to enable them plan properly since their indigenes will ultimately have to rely for services provided by their home states. This was not adopted.

    However, the headcount went on and posted a figure that has at best, remained a matter of disputation. Its outcome did not depart substantially from the pattern that had characterized previous attempts further fuelling feelings that there is more to these figures than ordinarily meets the eyes. The revelations by Odimegwu only confirms the wildly held view that our previous attempts at reliable head count had along been heavily manipulated to gain advantage and cannot be relied upon. The desperation to falsify population figures should not be surprising given the crucial role vital statistics play not only in national planning but in the sharing of our national resources. Apart from its use as one of the indices for revenue sharing, it also constitutes a key factor in determining representation into the national legislature.

    It was in furtherance of this role that the INEC had to approach the NPC for the release of some certified data to aid it in its planned constituency delimitation exercise only to be told that previous population censuses were heavily compromised. Sadly, it is the same manipulated data that has been used to arrive at the subsisting constituencies. It is also the same spurious data that is considered in revenue sharing. We can now better appreciate the fate of sections of this country that have expectedly been short-changed through fake enumeration areas. Ironically, since that very embarrassing disclosure, much attention has not been drawn to that national disgrace such that it may soon be swept under the carpet in the typical Nigerian fashion. But that must not be allowed to happen given the centrality of accurate population data to the good health of any nation. It is good a thing Odimegwu summoned the courage to expose a festering cankerworm that has been at the root of nation’s fictitious census figures. It is also very refreshing that we have now been let into the main source of that fraud. Before now, the major sources of population fraud had largely been in the areas of double counting and counting of people in absentia. It has never been envisaged that politicians bought enumeration areas that never existed in reality and posted results for them. It is a similitude of the writing of election results after elections that have no semblance with the actual number of votes cast at the ballot box. It is fraud of unmitigated proportion that has been allowed to fester for quite some time. Given the way political affairs have been handled in this country, it may not surprise anyone to hazard a guess as to which sections of the country have mostly taken undue advantage of this malfeasance.

    It is thus not sufficient for the NPC chairman to have identified these fraudulent practices. He must proceed beyond these to plug all loopholes that were hitherto exploited by politicians to sabotage the realization of a credible headcount. The heuristic value of his revelations is that we can only rely on existing census figures at a very great risk. He must therefore work very assiduously to give this nation a census that can be relied upon. Thus, the proposed constituency delimitation by the INEC is already encumbered by the very fact that the population data that should aid the exercise cannot be relied upon. Putting it to use in the impending exercise will amount to double jeopardy as it will further perpetuate extant inequities between sections and groups.

    The idea of both commissions working in tandem to produce the digital photography of the country and give us a reliable census by 2016 is most welcome. But the NPC must weed out the bad eggs in its midst that had aided and abetted these high profile fraud. At no time in the life of this country than now is the imperative of a reliable population census more compelling.

    For once, we must ensure that the figures we post bear close semblance with extant facts on the ground. We can no longer afford to manipulate the actual population of this country because of the political advantage higher figures confer on constituent units without subjecting our collective fate to mortal harm. Can Odimegwu do the magic without being frustrated by the powerful forces that sabotaged previous attempts? Only time will tell.

     

  • Borno’s civilian JTF

    Reports that some youths in Borno State floated a vigilante group to hunt suspected Boko Haram members must have come to many with mixed feelings. Operating under the banner “Civilian JTF”, the youths go from street to street and house to house, arresting suspects who they subsequently hand over to the “military JTF”.

    Clutching cutlasses, iron rods and wooden batons, the youths were apparently emboldened by the relative successes by the military since the declaration of state of emergency and disenchantment with the lingering insecurity that has made life unbearable for them.

    They had to take resort to self-help ostensible to complement the efforts of the military.

    Given the intractable dimension the insurgency has assumed especially in that state, the reaction of the youths is quite understandable. With increased military presence forcing insurgents to flee, the youths must have mustered confidence that they can now turn against the insurgents without fear of reprisals as was hitherto the case. In the past, any attempt to expose the insurgents attracted severe repercussions from the marauders who had become law unto themselves. This made it difficult for civilians to volunteer information to the military and emboldened the insurgents to unleash more lethal attacks on their targets.

    The reaction of the youths could therefore pass for a vote of confidence in the activities of the JTF. With increased cooperation from the civilian population, there is hope that the insurgents will soon be smoked out of their hideouts. This should be something to cheer not only for the military that has been battling allegations of human rights violations, but the entire Nigerian citizenry that is equally terrified by these terrorist acts.

    Even then, the self-assigned crusade of the youths is equally laden with potent dangers. There is the risk of abuse. There is also the issue of the genuineness of those purportedly crusading as anti-insurgents. There is nothing to give comfort that the said civilian JTF is not a decoy by fifth columnists to mess up the renewed onslaught on the insurgents. Some other miscreants could equally hijack the exercise to wreak more havoc on the same society they purport to be crusading for. It could also turn out as another avenue for witch-hunting and scores-settling by the sponsors of the insurgency. These fears are real and have to be very carefully monitored.

    Rather than take to the streets clutching dangerous weapons, the youths would be more effective in the areas of information gathering and espionage. They should be encouraged to supply whatever intelligence information they have on suspects to the JTF. They cannot possible be a parallel unstructured army because of the frightening prospects of sliding into lawlessness. We say so because there is the possibility of politicizing the entire exercise with more devastating consequences for the overall health of the campaign. Signals emanating from the political turf indicate a deliberate attempt by the political parties to put the Boko Haram insurgency to partisan advantage. At the moment, there is a deliberate attempt by the political parties to place the blame of the heightened security challenge at the door steps of each other. In a desperate attempt to gain partisan advantage, the parties now, seek ways to label their opponents supporters or sponsors of terrorism. The issue is not helped by the utterances of key political persons since state of emergency was announced in the three states of Borno, Yobe and Adamawa.

    PDP publicity secretary, Olisa Metuh labeled the coalescing opposition as terrorists, sequel to a statement from the Action Congress of Nigeria ACN urging the National Assembly not to approve the declaration of the state of emergency by President Jonathan. Though the ACN later modified its stance urging the National Assembly to take a very dispassionate perspective of the matter, the cat had already been let out of the bag.

    As that was not enough, Mohammed Buhari’s statement that the state of emergency is anti-North equally drew the ire of the government. It has elicited calls for his arrest and the trading of words between him and the president of the Christian Association of Nigeria CAN.

    The Boko Haram challenge is no doubt a very sensitive one. A lot of families have suffered immeasurably both in human and material losses. It is one issue that is laden with the prospects of inflaming tempers not only along sectional but ethnic and religious lines.

    The positions political parties take on the matter are bound to affect their perception by the electorate and ultimately their electoral fortunes. Nothing illustrates this slide to partisanship more poignantly than a statement issued by the publicity secretary of ACN, Lai Mohammed in which the party reacted to insinuations by the PDP and the presidency that are intended to rope in the opposition or the leadership of ACN as sponsors of terrorism.

    In that statement, Mohammed contended that the sponsors of terrorism in Nigeria are either within the PDP or are somehow associated with it. The party drew attention to a publication in the journal of the New York-based World Policy Institute in which some names of Nigerian sponsors of terrorism were published. Mohammed said a perusal of that document shows a former Nigerian Ambassador to Sao Tome and Principe and a serving Nigerian state governor, all members of the PDP as alleged sponsors.

    Before now, we have equally been told by no less a person than the late National Security Adviser; Andrew Owoye Azazi that terrorism took to an all time high after the last presidential primaries of the PDP. The issue was also raised by Niger State governor, Babangida Aliyu when he tasked the committee on amnesty to focus on the sponsorship of the insurgency as a way of getting at the root of the mater.

    The point here is that there is an increasing focus on the sponsors of acts of terrorism in the country. What this indicates is that unless we expose those surreptitiously backing the Boko Haram insurgents, we are only scratching the surface of the matter. This point is unassailable.

    It is in this effort to expose those responsible for the huge resources that sustain the insurgency that the parties want to take political advantage. As we get closer to electioneering campaigns, terrorism, religion and ethnicity will turn out as irreducible decimals that will shape political discourse. We will also begin to see attempts to link some of the candidates to Boko Haram. Issues as the sections of the country and states most prone to terrorism; the parties that control them and the positions of leaders on the matter are bound to be played up. From the current posturing of the PDP and the opposition, sponsorship of terrorism has become a major issue that will be put to advantage when the ban on campaigns is lifted. The way it is handled will determine the success or failure of the coming elections. Time will bear this out.

  • Ominous signals

    There is a huge cloud hanging over the Nigerian political space. It is evident from the utterances of groups and individuals. It can be seen in their actions or inaction. And the body language of key political personages also betrays this slide to the precipice. At the centre of the heating up of the polity, is the competition for the highest political office in the country-the presidency. Any and every issue sacrosanct for the overall survival of this country is now unduly politicized, trivialized and sabotaged.

    Even with two years to the next general elections, statecraft has been relegated to the background as sections are pitched against each other bandying spurious claims and counter claims. Not unexpectedly, these have resulted to threats and counter threats as to what harm awaits the nation should things not go the way of the contending interests.

    Much of these threats have come from the North and the South-south for very obvious reasons. But the North has been the greatest culprit in these divisive actions and utterances. It feels it has been badly shortchanged from that elated office given the eight years of Obasanjo; the six years Jonathan would have completed by 2015 and his touted desire to run again despite the purported agreement he signed in 2011 to serve one term. For these, northern leaders feel it is their turn to take a shot at the presidency and nothing can stand on their way. Also to their advantage is the original zoning in the PDP; an arrangement currently shrouded in controversy.

    But the South-south feels their son, Jonathan has a constitutional right to a second term and nothing should stop him from availing himself of that right. Their years of neglect even as the source of the nation’s wealth is also cited as a key reason they should be allowed for once, preside over the sharing of the nation’s wealth that is earned from their backyard. They are also piqued that Jonathan has not been allowed to do his job through contrived insurgency from the Boko Haram sect. The senseless killings in some parts of the North and the constant avowals by the insurgents to force Islam on the rest of the country are viewed with serious apprehension. This is more so, with the body language of some northern leaders which tend to lend tacit support to the violence in that part of the country. There are valid issues in the contending viewpoints. But a key point of note is that the two contending paradigms are being sponsored from within the ruling PDP. For a party that has boasted to rule for 100 years irrespective of its performance rating, it is not surprising why it is being seen as the surest way to power. Those threatening fire, lime, and brimstone should Jonathan run and make it or fail to make it, have their eyes on the capacity to manipulate that office to achieve electoral success. If they have faith in the sovereignty of the electorate; if they are firm believers in the sanctity of free and fair elections, their indecent desperation in concentrating all efforts in the PDP would have been needless. Even with the bitterness and hostility in that party that has seen it suspending two governors, its leaders still boast of the successes they intend to record in coming elections. One begins to wonder the source of this optimism if we remove the power of incumbency that has become a euphemism for rigging and falsifying election results. Rather than threats and counter threats, it would have made sense if the aggrieved were exploring other democratic methods of achieving their goals. And these abound in a truly democratic setting.

    However, Jonathan has the final decision to make. The success or failure of which will definitely shape the direction of events. There are two scenarios. The first envisages a situation where Jonathan runs and secures the ticket of his party. Going by the threats from the north, he should be prepared for the worst. We should expect civil unrest, escalation of violence and violent activities. After all, we now know that violence in the country peaked after the last primaries of the PDP. It will be worse this time around. These could manifest even before elections and degenerate thereafter as its outcome will be fiercely disputed. And if our experience in such matters is any thing to go by, the incumbent will be hard put to convince the world that he did not manipulate the outcome to personal advantage. Any observed infractions will be latched on to fault and discredit the outcome of that election.

    In the event of this, Jonathan, still wielding the instruments of coercion, will come down heavily on the anarchists. But the success or failure of this strategy will depend on the volume of violence that may erupt. Even then, the threats would have become a self-fulfilling prophesy. There is also the possibility of violence erupting from the opposition if the election fails the test of free and fair polls. We may witness a verity of the ‘dogs and baboons soaked in blood’. From both the point of view of the PDP and the opposition, possible sources of violence abound.

    The second scenario is a situation where Jonathan declines to run or runs and fails to secure his party’s ticket. This will see a northerner flying the flag of the PDP in 2015. Jonathan’s kinsmen said they will take resort to full blown militancy that can bring this country to its knees. This could commence before the elections or thereafter. If it begins before the election, then that election may not hold. Jonathan will then find himself waging a war against his kinsmen. If it commences after a new president, possibly from the north has been sworn in, the Niger Delta people are in for serious trouble. They may witness the treatment meted out to the Boko Haram sect in an escalated and vengeful proportion. The situation will be worse if the north succeeds in defeating Jonathan at the primaries and eventually wins the election. They could even become very vindictive, using power the way it pleases them.

    They will rule for eight years and then hand over to another zone in the north to compensate for their thirst for power. No body in the PDP will have the moral right to challenge them given that zoning in that party has almost been considered dead. But then, that would be another source of conflict within the nation’s body politic. Other sections that have been denied that office will commence another round of agitations. The country will know no peace. And the prediction that the Nigerian state will fail, may inch nearer. The PDP should therefore take the blame for overheating the Nigerian political environment. All the bickering, intolerance and tension are traceable to their doorsteps.

    It is getting clearer that the party does not have what it takes to steer the ship of this nation safely. Going by these threats, whichever way the political pendulum swings in that party, is bound to midwife violence of inestimable proportion.

    That is the harm champions of regional or sectional causes for the sake of cornering the presidency are doing to this country.

    But the big question is, should Jonathan run or not given the foregoing circumstance? Rational calculations instruct that he should run and he will run. What are the issues? He is still allowed another term by our constitution. Two, if he chickens out, he would have been seen to have succumbed to intimidation. Three, he could fathom that he has not been really allowed to fully implement his programs through contrived violence that has held this country down in the past two years or so. Again, he might consider it risky to relinquish power now given the way the north is going after it.

    To chicken out, will be at the risk of posting an unenviable record of the worst president this nation ever had.

    Jonathan will run; threats of violence notwithstanding. Instead of violence, those aggrieved should explore alternative avenues to vote him out. Happily, there is a coalescing opposition capable of tilting the balance. In it, the various zones may find, a more orderly and rancor-free circulation of power and through it, safely navigate the impending doom.

  • Amaechi’s many troubles

    Amaechi’s many troubles

    It has become obvious that Rivers State governor, Chibuike Amaechi is in for serious trouble. Not only is he dogged in a battle of survival to retain his current position as the chairman of the Nigerian Governors Forum NGF, the rug is about to be pulled off his feet in respect of his control of PDP party structures in the state.

    Already, the PDP has formed its version of the governors’ forum and is assiduously working in concert with the presidency to ensure that Amaechi does not return to his seat when the governors elect their chairman next month. Series of meetings are reportedly being held at the presidency to whittle down the support which Amaechi enjoys not only among PDP governors, but also others from the opposition. As things stand, it will only take a miracle for Amaechi to emerge victorious when that election comes up. As if that is not enough trouble, a high court sitting in Abuja last week sacked the Chief Ake-led state executive committee of the party considered loyal to Amaechi and upheld his rivals led by Felix Obuah as the duly elected state executive committee of the party. Yet the Ake-led executive had emerged victorious at the state congress of the party held about a year and half ago. And immediately after that court decision, the national chairman of the party Alhaji Bamanga Tukur hurriedly inaugurated the rival state PDP executive committee in Abuja.

    If there was any shred of doubt regarding those behind that curious court judgment which has been largely spurned by stakeholders in the state, that inauguration gave clue as to where the drum beat was coming from.

    And to cap the suspicion that the new executive was on a vengeance mission, no sooner had they arrived Port Harcourt than the new chairman issued an order that they will probe the leadership of the state including all other elected and appointed officers of government. According to them, at the end of the probe, they will issue certificates of clearance to those they find nothing against while the indicted ones will be referred to anti-graft agencies for further investigations and trial.

    The same Obuah-led executive is also spoiling for war with governor Amaechi and the state assembly over the sacking of the leadership of the Obio/Akpor local government council. It has issued an ultimatum for the sack order to be rescinded threatening fire, lime and brimstone. As things stand, there is palpable tension and fear of threat to law and order with allegations that some unseen hands are simulating conditions that will precipitate the declaration of a state of emergency in the state.

    Curiously, the tension in River state is the making of the ruling PDP. This is a party that has of late, been going round the country preaching peace and reconciliation among its factionalized members. At a time, both Tukur and Anenih the BOT chairman were involved in such parallel peace moves ostensibly because of their genuine desires to repair their umbrella torn by lack of internal democracy and brazen acts of impunity. Incidentally the peace Tukur and Anenih offered with the right hand, they are now taking with the left hand. So who says that the chameleon can ever change colour? That is the PDP for you.

    At the centre of the raging crisis is the scant regard by the party to internal democracy. That has been the main source of disenchantment by aggrieved members of the party. Those who have left, have series of stories to tell in this regard. If with all these, the PDP still conducts business as usual, then its avowal to free and fair polls cannot be trusted. What is all the fuss about the control of party structures if the sovereignty of the electorate as expressed in the ballot will be respected? What difference does the control of party structures make if votes will count? These posers have been raised to underscore the point most poignantly that there is yet to be a change of attitude by the PDP to electoral matters. And the crisis in Rivers State is necessary to the extent that it will help the PDP to capture the state come 2015.

    The crisis in Rivers is all about 2015. Governor Amaechi is said to be enjoying wide support among his peers. They want him back as the chairman of the governor’s forum. But Jonathan does not want to see that happen. His touted ambition to run as a vice presidential candidate with Sule Lamido of Jigawa state has not gone down well with the presidency and everything must be done to cut him to size and teach him a hard lesson.

    The ruling of the Abuja high court that ousted the state executive committee loyal to him is seen as part of the plot to clip his wings. It also fits into the character of the ruling that ousted erstwhile national secretary of the party Olagunsoye Oyinlola and some other leaders of the party in the South-west. Those axed were ace loyalists of former President Obasanjo who was also involved in a battle to control the soul of the party. Since that deadly blow courtesy of the judiciary, not much has again been heard of the all powerful Obasanjo in the calculations of the party. Incidentally also, all these fit into the devious strategy adopted by Obasanjo when he held sway. Off course, the outcomes of elections conducted under that regime were anything but free and fair. It is obvious that Jonathan is going the inglorious path of Obasanjo even with the armada of opposition against his running in 2015.

    In all these, the role of the judiciary has been anything but inspiring. The impression is fast gaining ground that the judiciary is increasingly lending itself to ease of use by the executive to settle political scores. And that is the greatest danger to our democracy.

    It is issues like this that the US must have taken copious note of when in its 2012 report, it posted very negative verdict on the Nigerian judiciary. The report spoke of monetary inducements and the increasing loss of confidence in the capacity of the judiciary to serve as the last hope of the common man. These are the issues to watch. The judiciary must begin to take a serious view of its increasing perception as being amenable to manipulation by the ruling class in order to settle political scores. For now, that appears to be the reading of events that led to the sacking of the national secretary of that party and the state executive committee of the Rivers State chapter.

    Allowing such an impression to fester will be counter productive in our quest for a stable political order. We should be wary of lending the judiciary to Marxian postulation that sees it as part of the structures that exist to serve and sustain the interest of the ruling class. If that happens, the predictions that the Nigerian state will soon fail, would have taken the pattern of that vividly captured by Karl Marx.

    The posturing of Obuah since the judiciary armed him with the contentious leadership of the party in that state is something to watch. All of a sudden, he has emerged from the blues to arrogate to himself all manner of powers issuing sundry orders. It is obvious that he is on a vengeance mission which sooner than later will snowball into a crisis of unimaginable proportion in the state.

    With the state assembly disowning his so-called leadership and vowing not to have anything to do with him, it is clear that danger is lurking in the air in that state. He must be restrained from turning Rivers state into a battle field.

  • Amnesty and its payoffs

    Decision making in the face of uncertainties has been an integral part of the human organization. Confronted with such uncertainties, man in the medieval age, took resort to consulting oracles and sundry soothsayers to predict the future for them. Decisions were therefore taken depending on the perceptions of those concerned and sometimes in conformity with the instructions of the seers.

    Though these practices have not completely disappeared, they are increasingly getting irrelevant in modern day calculations that place heavy reliance on science and empirical theory. Science has been able to develop a variety of models not only to analyze, interpret and predict future occurrences but more importantly to aid decision making.

    That is the major concern of Decision Theory. Essentially, the theory deals with the principles for making correct decisions. Both in our daily lives and the running of modern governments, leaders face serious challenges of decision making. And the success of such decisions is intricately tied to the level of available information and rational calculations that go into them at the level of formulation. These entail rational calculations, choice, risks and payoffs.

    Today, the Jonathan administration is confronted with a serious challenge of decision making in respect of the Boko Haram insurgency. The card on the table is whether to grant amnesty to the deadly religious sect or not. Northern leaders of various shades have been at the vanguard of the campaign for amnesty arguing that it holds the ace for the resolution of the seemingly intractable insecurity in that part of the country. They want the Jonathan regime to give it a trial.

    But this idea has been vehemently opposed by the Christian Association of Nigeria CAN and many other well meaning Nigerians who would rather have the war concluded very decisively and culprits punished accordingly. All along, the government has not been swayed by the calls for amnesty or dialogue predicating its reasons on the fact that the group had remained largely faceless. But key northern leaders amongst them, the Sultan of Sokoto, Sa’ad Abubakar have remained unwavering in their belief that amnesty is the solution to the festering problem.

    Apparently succumbing to pressure, Jonathan had a forthnight ago set up a committee to advise the government on the desirability or otherwise of amnesty for the group. But the authentic leader of the sect, Abubakar Shekau scorned the move stating that it was they who are in a position to grant pardon to the federal government. From all Shekau said, proceeding with the amnesty deal for his group is bound to be an exercise in futility. That ought to have been the end to the entire idea. But northern leaders have pressed on urging the president to trudge on with the move. The issue now is the propriety of granting amnesty to a group that has unabashedly repudiated the entire idea. Should the Jonathan regime still proceed with the idea of amnesty despite opposition to it by CAN whose members have suffered incalculable losses; the rejection of same by those for whom it is meant and the not too convincing reasons for placating a largely unprovoked murderous group? That is the hard decision Jonathan has to take. And in this he is left with two options- to grant amnesty to the sect or not to grant. He has proceeded further to set up a 26-man committee to engage the Boko Haram sect. Its terms of reference are to develop a framework for the granting of amnesty; setting up of a framework through which disarmament could take place within a 60-day time frame; development of a comprehensive victims’ support programme and development of the mechanisms to address the underlying causes of insurgency that would help to prevent future occurrences. Even then, two key nominees Dr Datti Ahmed and Mallam Shehu Sani have declined the offer. Both have issues with the composition of the committee and the sincerity of the government. Incidentally, these two personages command the respect of the sect.

    Decision theory is concerned with the rational choice open to Jonathan in the face of the conflicting signals on the matter. It also envisages that the option he eventually settles for should be that which will minimize his losses in the event of the worst outcome. Should he still proceed with the exercise despite the conflicting signals from the north? And what are the consequences of aborting the process at this point in time?

    Rational calculations instruct that he should still go for the amnesty deal. What are the reasons? Northern leaders in whose domain the insurgency is largely domesticated have said time without number that that is what is needed to stem the tide. Even the two declining leaders share this view. Added to this is the seeming inability to win the war on the battle field. If Jonathan does not yield, there is everything to suggest that the insecurity will continue. It may even assume greater ferocity as some of those at the vanguard of the amnesty campaign could now find reasons to further fuel the insurgency to score the point that it is a consequence of the refusal of the government to buy the idea. This is a foreboding possibility.

    But then, there is no guarantee that amnesty is the necessary and sufficient condition to stem Boko Haram insurgency. There is therefore the possibility of policy failure. This could arise either from the discordant tunes from the north; the fact that there are many factions of the Boko Haram insurgents or the absence of facts on the ground to support amnesty as a therapeutic response to terrorism. The latter point is given credence by the fact that terrorism which the sect purveys is a global phenomenon and no where has it been solved through amnesty. Unless ours is substantially propelled by other factors, there are ample reasons for skepticisms regarding it capacity to stem the tide. There is thus the chance of failure. But the government should not be deterred by this. Failure could also arise from the type of package the committee would come up with; how it is received by the sect as well as the victims of their atrocious undertakings. It is therefore clear that the path to the success of the 26-man committee is strewn with dangerous thorns. Even with all these, the idea should be given a trial.

    Where whatever recommendations they arrive at fail to stem the tide, the government can now feel safely betrayed by the northern elite. The point would have been sufficiently made that those who have been at the vanguard of this campaign did not have the confidence of the sect. They would have lost any iota of credibility they purport to hold on issues concerning the insurgency and the objective conditions that sustain it. Then, the government can take liberty to do whatever it deems appropriate to stem the slide without apology to anyone.

    The northern elite now has a daunting burden to discharge by ensuring that the sect accepts whatever propositions the government may come out with as a solution to the killings in their zone. Fears have been raised about monetary gains being at the center of the amnesty calls. Such fears must be proved wrong. We are all watching!

  • Burying the dead

    A very interesting but unusual event played out in the Awka diocese of the Catholic Church in Anambra State last week. According to reports, the Catholic Bishop of Awka, Rt. Rev. Paulinus Ezeokafor has banned the compulsory levying of church members in the diocese. For him, members should rather be encouraged to donate freely.

    The Bishop also banned the practice requiring relatives of a dead person to clear their church dues before their dead relation can be buried. He said, such clearance should be for the dead alone and not include their relatives. Bishop Ezeokafor justified his decisions on the ground that the church should show “compassion to the bereaved as such insensitivity makes people leave the church after burial”.

    Bishop Ezeokafor has said it all. He has demonstrated that he is at home with the realities and sensibilities of the people of his diocese. He must therefore be commended for this visionary and compassionate decision. Catholics in the Awka diocese who would have been grieving under the yoke of sundry levies will now heave a heavy sigh of relief. It is very surprising that relatives of the dead are made to clear their dues in the church in addition to those of their dead relations before the dead can be buried.

    Given the high cost of burials especially in the eastern part of the country, such a practice adds up to increase the burden of the bereaved while trying to bury their loved ones. And in a cultural setting that has been contending with sundry demands on the bereaved, asking them to clear their debts before their relations can be buried amounts to adding salt to injury. Little wonder those who have had the misfortune of losing their loved ones usually post a record of debts after such burials. Burials in that part of the country have turned into a huge business. There are minimum standards a burial must meet irrespective of the financial standing of the families involved. And by a very conservative estimate, that minimum is definitely beyond the reach of an average family. That is why most families resort to taxing adult members each time they are faced with burial plans for their loved ones. But for the small gifts that come by way of condolences, the situation would have been something else.

    Beyond all these, the decision of the bishop has brought to the fore the attitude of the church and the larger public to the dead. I do not know what obtains in other churches. But in the Catholic Church which is under focus, there is the need to show more compassion to the bereaved especially in the rural areas. The conduct of some church leaders when it comes to securing clearance from the church to bury a dead member is something to watch. Some of those charged with overseeing such matters sometimes go outside their mandate to enter judgment on the conduct of a dead member. They behave as church judges with awesome powers to determine who to bury or not. And at issue most often, is money. Given the limitations of some of those who preside over these decisions, their rulings on matters brought before them can sometimes irritate.

    Little slips are blown out of proportion sometimes to settle personal scores. Families have been denied their burial rights on issues that ordinarily should be resolved in their favour. Many of those who could not bear it are known to have even left the church in protest. That is the point the Bishop raised when he spoke of compassion and how such insensitivity compel people to leave the church after such burials in protest.

    The issues the bishop addressed are so fundamental that they should not be limited to the Awka diocese alone. Multiplicity of levies and the issue accountability for such have to be looked into. There are several levies members are asked to pay in the rural areas that sometimes end up in the pockets of some unscrupulous officials. These should be streamlined. Sometimes, it is also difficult to say with some measure of accuracy what constitutes the mandatory levies members should pay.

    It may be on account of the confusion that goes with this that the bishop had to take the radical decision of abolishing all forms of levies. Good as the decision is, the real problem with the levies is in the manner concerned church official deploy them to deny members of their rights especially at death. They exploit the desire of every catholic to be buried by the church to intimidate, harass and deny members of their rights on very flimsy grounds. Admittedly, a church member should be up and doing in his church obligations. But the church is not all about money. The church should not discriminate between the rich and the poor. Where a member is unable to meet all his financial obligations at death, the church could still bury such a person. It is our duty to bury the dead. That is the compassion the bishop talked about.

    More seriously, traditional churches are increasingly facing serious challenges from the new ones. Some practices are also being challenged by events in the new generation churches. Some of these new generation churches, even with all their limitations focus more on the welfare of their members. Little wonder the increasing patronage they are getting. The Catholic Church cannot shut its eyes to these developments.

    The bishop struck the right chord when he averred that multiplicity of levies and requiring members to offset their dead relations’ debts before they can be buried sometimes compel members to leave the church. It is a statement of fact which the Catholic Church cannot afford to ignore. It is true that the Catholic Church is a universal church. It is also true that apart from some of these levies and the abuse of them by sundry church officials; it is one church where people contribute according to their volition.

    It is good a thing that the bishop has spared some thought to practices that are capable of demoralizing ardent members to the extent of leaving the church. Before now, such decisions to leave the church were hard to come by. But not anymore as things are fast changing. The subsisting protests at the Ahiara diocese of the Catholic Church in Imo state over the appointment of a new bishop are clear indications that it is no longer business as usual. Before now, such protests led by very senior priests against the decision of the Pope were unthinkable.

    The Catholic Church must therefore rise to the challenge of identifying extant practices that create problems for members and modify them in keeping with the realities of our time. Bishop Ezeokafor has taken the lead and it is in the overall interest of the Catholic Church that such practices that force members out of their faith are either modified or abrogated. Where there is need to maintain some of these levies, steps must be taken to reduce abuse.

    Above all, the church must do more to prune down the high cost of burials in the eastern part of the county. That is the key message brought to the fore by Bishop Ezeokafors’ directive.

  • Uwazuruike’s war drum

    Perhaps, nothing illustrates more clearly, the contradictions in the senseless killings in the north than recent statement by the leader of the Movement for the Actualization of the Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB), Chief Ralph Uwazuruike. He had threatened to launch a war against the north if the killing of the Igbo persists.

    But he was quick to add a caveat, “the Hausa community living in the South-east should not be afraid, no one will attack them. We are not going to resort to reprisal attacks but soon I will declare a full scale war against northerners in the north. We can’t take it anymore. We will take the war to their doorsteps now”.

    It is evident from the above that the MASSOB leader is not happy at the unprovoked killing of the Igbo in the north since the Boko Haram insurgents struck. He feels his group can no longer watch helplessly while their people are killed daily for no just reason. The bombing of a motor park in Kano in which scores of people were killed may have further angered him.

    For these, he is now ready to do battle with the north and northern interests. But the battle is not going to be waged in any other place other than northern soil. That is why he has urged northerners living in the South-east not to worry as nobody will attack them. And that is what makes this battle a very peculiar one indeed.

    No doubt, it is going to be a difficult battle. It remains to be imagined how MASSOB hopes to wage war against the north on northern soil and hopes to succeed. Not with the sophistication of the insurgents and their easy resort to suicide bombings. It also remains to be imagined how MASSOB will move its members to the north in large numbers without being confronted by the security agencies.

    It would appear therefore that Uwazuruike and his group may be heading for a suicide mission if they make good their threat to attack northerners on their soil. What one can glean from the dilemma posed by this resolve is the frustrations of the group in the face of the regular killing of the Igbo without the government finding a quick handle to it. Such killings have forced many to flee the northern states thus questioning our claims to one and indivisible country. Matters are not helped by the selective nature of the killings which seem to be in line with the avowed commitment of the sect to drive southerners out of the north.

    But despite all moves to force southerners out of some of these states, many have refused to abandon their hard earned investments and are not likely to do so.

    The terror group seems to be saying that since southerners do not want to leave, they have to pay dearly for it. Hence the selective attacks as witnessed in the Kano suicide bomb at the motor park. Of course, the sections of the country anticipated to die in that attack were known. The luxury buses, those who patronize them and their owners were selected for maximum impact. It is true that some other people died from the attack especially hawkers and sundry helpless people. But that does not in any way obliterate the target population as the casualty figure will reveal.

    Uwazuruike’s threat therefore brings to the fore the frustrations of a people that profess one and indivisible country yet citizens cannot freely live in some other parts of it. It also raises question as to what remedy there is for these non indigenes in the face of constant and unprovoked attacks on their lives and properties. This is more so when the government has found itself incapable of finding lasting solutions to the menace.

    The MASSOB leader thinks the Igbo should no longer be at the receiving end of these senseless attacks. He thinks it is a huge contradiction that citizens of this country can no longer live freely in some other parts of the country. He also reasons that such a situation should not be allowed to persist. He has a point here.

    As a solution, he has vowed to levy war against the north on their soil to make the point very clearly that no citizen should be debarred from that inalienable right to live in any part of the country. By promising to fight back on northern soil, he is saying that this country belongs to all of us and not body should force any citizen out of his area of abode through acts of intimidation and violence. He is saying that the Igbo have the right of self defense and could also turn out to be purveyors of violence even in the north.

    And that even the northerners themselves could also be attacked on their own soil as no body has the monopoly of the means of violence. He is saying that the Igbo have a right to live and do business in any part of the country just as other ethnic groups live in other parts of the country including Igbo land.

    Is it not a contradiction that southerners are being driven out of the north through selective attacks and killings yet northerners are comfortably living and doing their businesses in the south? One had expected that if Uwazuruike really wanted to do battle with the north, the starting point would be the South-east where his men hold sway. But he says no. He has urged northerners living in the south-east to go about their normal businesses as his group will not attack them. For him, the war will only be fought on northern soil. It is therefore not that the MASSOB leader is a war monger. Far from that! The nature of his anticipated war and the difficulty in prosecuting it, underscore the inherent contradictions in the continued violence in the north against southerners. He is drawing attention to the danger in allowing these unprovoked attacks and killings to fester and the wider repercussions should those at the receiving end resort to self help.

    That to me is the symbolism of the threat of MASSOB to wage war against the north on northern soil. If they were really interested in waging a war, the starting point could not have been northern soil.

    In effect therefore, the threat of the MASSOB leader should be seen as an act of desperation of a people who have constantly been victims of acts of violence in the north. It is an indication that their patience is fast running out and government must take decisive steps to reassure them that their lives have value. The impression is fast being created that each time there is crisis in the north the South-east must suffer for it. This has to be quickly arrested.

    Northern leaders must take the responsibility of ensuring that non indigenes live and do business in that region without let or hindrance. That way, we can stave off the temptation for those who have been at the receiving end of these attacks to take laws into their hand.

  • Tukur’s frustrations

    Tukur’s frustrations

    Obviously, the PDP national chairman, Alhaji Bamanga Tukur is rattled in many fronts. He is rattled by the crisis in his state’s wing of the party. He is at war with PDP governors. And at the national level, he is faced with a daunting crisis of confidence. All of these challenges may not be his own doing per se.

    Much stem from the ambition of President Jonathan to control the structures of the party albeit unconventionally. Many interests have been hurt in the process and Tukur is expected to clear the Augean stable. The thinking within the party before now is that you can bulldoze your way to dominance and latter reconcile.

    Because of the influence of the party, this strategy had before now, worked successfully since members did not seem to have an alternative. That was the style of Obasanjo that shunted out the founding fathers of the party. Those who felt their ego was bruised and could no longer stomach the insult, were shown the way out and business continued as usual. That has been PDP for you. They do this because they are sure to win elections even if it is by hook and crook. So it matters little if people leave the party in droves. After all, it prides itself as the biggest party in Africa with a vaulting ambition to rule for the next 100 years. So what difference does it make frustrating foundation members when those angling for a place in the party are not in short supply?

    As usual with this make-shift fence-mending agenda, after Jonathan had captured the party’s structures with impunity, Tukur had to embark on zonal tours during which he was expected to reconcile aggrieved members. But the outcome this time around, has been largely disastrous. Not only were the tours boycotted by key personages in those zones, there was practically nothing to show for it. It was obvious that the old strategy could no longer hold water.

    Those being pacified had become tired of the brazen disregard of the constitution of the party, especially its principles on internal democracy. They were no longer enthused by acts of lawlessness by their leaders only for the same people to turn around to plead for questionable forgiveness. They seemed to be saying that the quick resort to Machiavellian principles of the end justifying the means has to stop. Such were the sentiments Tukur met on the ground that his reconciliation tours turned out a total fiasco.

    The failure was such that the chairman of the party’s Board of Trustees BOT Tony Anenih had to embark on his own version of reconciliation tours. His success is also yet to be seen.

    Apparently for want of any credible reason to offer aggrieved members, Tukur took resort to the absurd. He told stakeholders in the north-west zone that PDP is “all about patronage” In his own words, “we are going to dole out patronage to all our members who remain in the party”. This patronage he further explained, will also be extended to members who contested and lost election. He said there is enough to go round every one and that there is no need for any member to leave the party.

    These statements are to say the least, a great disappointment. They cast the PDP as a party with the ‘food is ready for sharing mentality; one whose quest for power is driven by the sole desire to share our collective resources among its members. And in a clime that is characterized by brazen corruption and mismanagement of public funds, Tukur has led us into why this malfeasance has festered. We can now understand why nothing is working in this country despite the 14 years the PDP has been in power. It is now becoming clearer why the EFCC has been unable to successfully prosecute the ex- governors they arraigned for sundry financial misdeeds while in office.

    It is also becoming clearer why the fuel subsidy probe and the fraudulent abuse of the scheme by sundry highly placed persons cannot go far. That is the folly of Tukur’s revelations and it should not be treated lightly.

    It may not be completely out of place for party members to benefit from the government of the day. This could come in form of appointments and contracts provided such contracts were competitively bided and conformed to best practices. But it is reckless to emphatically state as the PDP chairman did that the party is all about patronage to its members.

    Where do we then locate the place of the electorate within such a scheme? This poser is further reinforced when it is realized that the people constitute the ultimate sovereign on whose behalf power is held in trust. When therefore a government in power exists mainly to service the interests of its members, such a government has become a similitude of the salt that has lost its taste. That is the kind of emotions Tukur’s statements evoke about his party. Can any thing good come out of such a warped view of politics and governance? It is doubtful.

    Perhaps, the only ground the PDP chieftain can be forgiven for such a vacuous statement is that he spoke out of frustrations and want of any credible thing to tell aggrieved members.

    This line of argument is further given credence when we call to mind that he had in the same venue, told his audience that the party would face a “heavy war” ahead of the 2015 elections as a new group has come up to pull the rug off their feet. This was an obvious reference to the merger of four political parties ahead of the 2015 elections.

    It may also be for the same reason that he is finding it very difficult to push through the old idea that members could be bruised and disgraced only to turn round to pacify them. Then, the PDP was having a field day. With a multiplicity of weak parties, it was sure to win elections at least at the centre. It could therefore afford to disregard rules, impose candidates and still have its way through the advantage of the power of incumbency. His reference to “heavy war” is also very instructive. It is only hoped that this war will be prosecuted with conventional weapons.

    The emergence of a credible opposition is a very bold statement. And aggrieved PDP members are not oblivious of this heart-warming reality. That is perhaps, why Tukur had to take resort to promising them heaven and earth in a bid to sway them. But the promise is neither here nor there since out of office, the PDP will have nothing to dispense. Aggrieved members may be saying: to hell with your patronage; it is time to pay the party in its own coins.

    After all, you can deceive some of the people some of the time but not all the people all the time. I think, the PDP has got this message.