The Nation Newspaper

Category: Femi Macaulay

  • Lalong’s elephant

    An imaginative animal adoption campaign in Plateau State captured the imagination of Governor Simon Lalong. “They said everybody should adopt an animal,” he remarked in response to a request by the Acting General Manager, Plateau State Tourism Corporation, Mrs Salome Bidda, at a May 21 event to mark her 100 Days in Office.

    Lalong is expected to keep his promise to be responsible for the feeding of an elephant at Jos Wildlife Park. He was quoted as saying:  “My wife is keener about animals and has been keeping animals. She will take care of the feeding of the lion and lioness and I will take care of the feeding of the elephant.”

    Lalong, who has been reelected for a second four-year term that will begin on May 29, also  declared: “All government appointees; the Chief of staff, Head of Service and commissioners must adopt and take care of at least one animal in the park.”  According to a report, “The governor also said that all those seeking political appointment must also include the name of the animal they are feeding in their Curriculum Vitae. According to him, he would confirm from the Acting GM, when he sees the CV, to be sure that they are not lying.” This specified condition for political appointment is novel, and reflects Lalong’s inventiveness.

    By including political appointees in the animal adoption project, the governor indicated his administration’s commitment to the idea. So, the participants won’t be only Lalong and his wife.

    The governor added: “The 24-members of the State House of Assembly should also pick one animal each and take care of it.” He appealed to Plateau people outside the specific categories to adopt and take care of at least one animal. By seeking the involvement of the state’s lawmakers as well as the public, Lalong sent a message about the inclusiveness of the animal adoption promotion.

    This approach may be Lalong’s way of compensating for the state’s budgetary provision for its tourism sector. According to a report, “The saying that Plateau State is a “home of peace and tourism” might suffer a setback in the 2019 annual budget, because, only N337, 900.000.00, which represents 0.50 per cent, has been allocated to the tourism sector from a total budget size of 153 billion Naira.”  It is unclear why the Lalong administration allocated such level of funds to the tourism sector.

    It is striking that Lalong was quoted as saying he regretted the death of a lion about two years ago in the park. “I fasted for no less than five days when the lion died because it generated a lot of revenue for the state,” he said.

    An incident about four years ago drew attention to the dilapidated facilities in the park. According to a report, “The Park, on December 2, 2015, recorded a loss with the killing of Leo, a lion which escaped confinement through a rusty cage.” The lion was “killed by some soldiers, drawing worldwide condemnation by animal rights activists who insisted that the park needed to have used trained personnel to demobilise the animal, using tranquilisers.”

    The Nigeria Association of Zoological Gardens (NAZG) had attributed the lion’s escape to “manifest institutional neglect from cumulative arrears in scheduled maintenance and required upgrades.” The group urged Plateau State Government and other stakeholders to strive toward world standards “to avoid embarrassing circumstances,” and advocated a Tourism Intervention Fund.

    The needed intervention is more than compelling political appointees to adopt animals in the park. A holistic intervention is necessary. It isn’t enough to take care of the animals without taking care of the facilities.  It is reductive to conclude that feeding the animals will solve the maintenance and upgrading issues at the park.

    Jos Wildlife Park, established in the 1970s, is a major tourist attraction. There are 102 animals in the park, Bidda told the governor. It deserves better funding. The Lalong administration’s funding of the tourism sector contradicts the governor’s projection of a tourism-friendly image.

    Lalong’s adoption of an elephant puts elephants in the news. Not many Nigerians know there are elephants in Nigeria. Well, there are.  Last year, there was news that they were causing havoc in Lagos and Ogun communities. Elephants from Omo Forest Reserve in Ogun State were said to be on a rampage in some communities.

    The Chairman of Active Hunters’ and Farmers’ Club at Epe, Alhaji Ajagunoba Aribada, was quoted as saying in a November 19, 2018, report: “We have been facing this situation for the past seven months. The elephants have destroyed all our banana, plantain and cassava farms. We can’t even reach the other parts of the farm because the nursing female elephants are aggressive. This has caused food scarcity in the community.”

    The village head of Oki Gbode Imobi, Baale Adeleke Olaitan, corroborated the disturbing account: “Nobody can go to the farm for fear of being attacked. The elephants have eaten all the cassava crops and plantain on the farms. We want them out.”

    The elephant invasion also affected fishing business in the community. “The elephants enter the river to drink and bathe and ruin all the fish traps,” said one Ismaila Lekan. “My mother who is into fish business can no longer go about her business because of the fear of the elephants.”

    Why did the elephants move out of the reserve, described as “one of the last few elephant habitats in Nigeria”? Farming and quarry activities are to blame. The elephants forced to leave the reserve are said to roam at the Ogun-Lagos border, where Imobi – Itasin – Epe lagoon communities are located.

    The next question is: How were the elephants able to move out of the reserve?  If the elephants had a reason to leave the reserve, that shouldn’t mean they must have a way to leave. The elephants were able to leave the reserve because they could.

    If the reserve were properly managed, farming and quarry activities would not have been issues. Wildlife conservation is a serious issue. A report to mark World Elephant Day last year said: “The Wildlife Conservation Society has outlined and advocated the need to increase aerial surveillance in strongholds, train and deploy more rangers in the protected areas, supply new rangers with equipment, assist the authorities in tracking and shutting down trafficking networks, and grow our community development programmes to support local communities to co-exist with wildlife.” There are plans to create a wildlife sanctuary within Omo Forest Reserve.  The authorities should take action.

    Governor Lalong should bear in mind that August 12 is World Elephant Day. His adopted elephant is expected to get a treat.

  • Political flattery

    It was self-flattery when the Progressive Governors Forum (PGF), made up of All Progressives Congress (APC) governors, presented awards to President Muhammadu Buhari and Vice President Yemi Osinbajo on May 10 at the Presidential Villa.  The theme of the event: “Moving Nigeria’s Democracy to the Next Level.”  Buhari was honoured for his outstanding leadership qualities, according to the organisers.

    Whose idea was it? The organisers were overenthusiastic.  Seven APC governors received accolades at the event:   Rochas Okorocha (Imo State); Alhaji Kashim Shettima (Borno State); Tanko Al-Makura (Nasarawa State); Ibikunle Amosun (Ogun State); Abiola Ajimobi (Oyo State); Ibrahim Giadam (Yobe State); and Abdulaziz Yari (Zamfara State). A former Osun State Governor, Rauf Aregbesola, was also honoured. They were honoured for their leadership qualities and services to the APC since its formation in 2013.

    Of course, it was a time to further celebrate Buhari’s re-election for another four-year term. PGF Chairman and Imo State Governor Rochas Okorocha said in his address:  ”Mr President, let me be personal with you this morning, the truth is, and you may not know, that you are a God-given asset to this nation. I am not saying so for purpose of flattery or praise-singing. I have observed all categories of leaders in this country, but you seem to have distinguished yourself. Most of the leaders in this country are those who either buy their love, fame or political position, but in your own case you don’t spend one naira and you have love come your way and you have leadership come your way. That is the only judgement I have to say that you are destined by God to govern this country.” If this wasn’t flattery, it was flattering.  The Buhari award event organised by the PGF under Okorocha made those involved look small. It was an example of vainglory.

    Predictably, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), which had disputed Buhari’s electoral victory, and is in court over the issue, came down on the ruling party. The opposition party’s reaction dampened the APC’s celebration. A statement by the PDP’s spokesman described the Buhari  award as “image laundering,” adding that the Buhari administration had failed to find a solution to ”the killings and kidnappings in Zamfara, Borno, Yobe, Taraba, Adamawa, Kaduna, Katsina and other states of the federation.”

    It is true that insecurity still poses a major threat to Nigeria. Indeed, the Federal Government needs to tackle the security crisis with a sense of urgency. The celebrators should have been guided by the reality of insecurity. Giving an award to the Commander-in-chief when the war has not been won is strange and sycophantic.

    Obviously, it isn’t enough for the Buhari administration to declare that it is fighting corruption and tackling insecurity when the results of the efforts are insignificant. The country’s corruption crisis and security crisis are of epic proportions. Solutions are needed, not a sycophantic celebration.

    It is interesting that Okorocha, who presented the award to Buhari, was among the applauded governors.  Governor Tanko Al-Makura of Nasarawa State presented Osinbajo’s award to him. Three days earlier, Okorocha had lamented to journalists in Abuja:  ”The evil I feared in the PDP has befallen me 10 times in the APC. Last week, I wrote a letter to INEC for the first time informing them of their wrongdoings and illegal actions to withhold my certificate on mere allegation of duress which was never founded, neither was there any committee set up to investigate the matter.”

    The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) had refused to give Okorocha a certificate of return validating his victory in the February 23 senatorial election, following an allegation by the Returning Officer, Prof Francis Ibeawuchi, that he had announced the outgoing governor as winner under duress. Okorocha, who has taken the matter to court, was quoted as saying he did not want to bother President Buhari by asking for his intervention.

    In a display of crude godfatherism, Okorocha and Ogun State Governor Ibikunle Amosun had shamelessly supported the governorship candidates of political parties different from theirs in the March 9 governorship election.

    Okorocha and Amosun of the APC had clearly carried godfatherism too far. It wasn’t surprising that their party decided to punish them. It was surprising that the party delayed the punishment till March 1 when its National Working Committee (NWC) suspended the governors “for anti-party activities.” In a statement, the party’s National Publicity Secretary, Mallam Lanre Issa-Onilu, said the NWC “has also taken a decision to recommend the expulsion of the suspended individuals to the National Executive Committee (NEC) of the party.”

    The APC statement stated that “the NWC had earlier written to the suspended governors on their anti-party activities, and several other steps were taken to ensure they desist from taking actions that are inimical to the interests of our party and candidates. Notably, these individuals have not shown any remorse and actually stepped up their actions.”  The party accused the suspended governors of “serial anti-party activities,” and “noted how the suspended members have continued to campaign openly for other parties and candidates that are unknown to our great party. They have in fact constituted themselves as opposition to APC candidates in their respective states.”

    It is strange that Okorocha and Amosun were honoured for their services to the APC. It reflected the flattery that characterised the PGF event. Having both been elected to the senate, if Okorocha wins his case, it is a cause for concern that they will sit in the Red Chamber pretending to be men of honour.

    When Osinbajo said Okorocha was “extremely commendable,” on May 17, while inaugurating the state government’s projects in Imo State, it was another instance of flattery. The Vice President said: “As a matter of fact, on one occasion, we went to see one of the universities that he had just completed. When I went round that university complex, I realised that there is simply no other university that has the kind of physical facilities that university has, at least in the history of Nigeria.”

    Osinbajo added: “I’ve always found him very strange. I must say so because he’s otherwise someone who is not quiet but decided to keep quiet about his achievements. I’ve not been able to understand that because anybody who knows him will not say he’s a quiet man. I want to say that he has done extremely well in this past eight years and sometimes his contemporaries will choose to make loud noise for very few they have achieved.” This portrait of Okorocha is too good to be true.

    When politicians publicly indulge in self-praise and flattery, they must not forget that the attentive public is watching.

  • Ajimobi and Tech-U

    First Technical University (Tech-U), Ibadan, Oyo State, is a visionary‘s idea. The institution’s Vice-Chancellor, Prof. Ayobami Salami, acknowledged the innovative inspiration of Governor Abiola Ajimobi, who leaves office this month after two pacesetting terms.

    Salami said:  ”I must give credit to the Visitor to this university, His Excellency, Senator Abiola Ajimobi, who conceived the idea. I keep on saying that he’s the dreamer and visioner, I’m just the interpreter of that dream. When we started, not too many people gave us a chance. People thought it was not going to work. We came at a point when the economy wasn’t too good. People wondered and asked how we were going to pay salaries, get students and all.”

    The university’s story is a study in focus and self-belief.  Salami was appointed in May 2017. Three months later, the National Universities Commission (NUC) approved 15 programmes for the university. The university’s first set of students started their studies within six months after the NUC’s verification. Its first matriculation in January 2018 involved 190 students.   Courses available at Tech-U include Mechatronics Engineering, Biomedical Engineering, Food Sciences and Technology, Cyber Security, Computer Science, Software Engineering, Physics with Electronics, Petroleum Engineering, Industrial Chemistry and Statistics.

    Obviously, the university’s courses have a 21st century character. Tech-U is designed to produce entrepreneurial techies.  French is compulsory for every student, which says something about the university’s international outlook. In addition, every student is required to take two skills in any field of artisanship along with any course of their choice, and must be certified in such skills before they graduate. This blend of academic, entrepreneurial and vocational education is expected to prepare the university’s graduates for the challenges of the 21st century.

     The university’s programmes show that it is on course concerning its orientation. Tech-U has demonstrated that it understands the meaning of specialisation.  This is a lesson in a country where specialised universities are known to have gotten off track.  Two years ago, the Minister of Education, Adamu Adamu, said: “Some of these specialised institutions include universities such as Universities of Agriculture, Universities of Technologies, Universities of Medicine, amongst others. The Federal government has observed that these institutions have derailed from their statutory responsibilities, thereby running programmes that are antithetical to their mandates.”

    Adamu added: “The government notes the unfortunate situation where Universities of Agriculture offer programmes in Law, Management courses such as Accounting, Banking and Finance, Business Administration, among others. As if that was not enough, some institutions change the nomenclature of some of the courses to read, for instance, Banking Engineering, Accounting Technology, among other names. This is an aberration and should be stopped with immediate effect.”

    Deviation from specialisation has been attributed to funding challenges. On the issue of funding, Tech-U, according to Salami, has pioneered “a new model of tertiary institution entirely. This university is today the only self-sustaining public university in Nigeria.”

    Salami explained:  ”This is a university that was established from the word go to be self-sustaining; a public university with private-sector orientation. So with that, except the law is changed, I do not see any problem with that. Let me say clearly that this university is not running on government subvention. What government gave us is the take-off grant; apart from the take-off grant, we are supposed to really, you know, generate resources to actually forge ahead while the government takes care of infrastructural development and that’s what we have been doing in the last one year. We have been partnering with so many agencies and we have been running the university smoothly.”

    Governor Ajimobi had emphasised Tech-U’s public-private partnership model at an event last year:  ”The commitment of government is to provide resources for its takeoff; after this, you pay your bills. While government will honor its commitment in this regard, it is imperative that the university begins to look out for partnerships that would make it attain full financial autonomy as a self-sustaining university.”

    There is no doubt that the Tech-U model calls for creative thinking on the part of the institution’s management. It is a model that deserves to be emulated by tertiary institutions in the country that continue to cry about poor funding. Salami’s words: “We are supposed to solve problems and we can’t solve problems without having resources. We don’t depend solely on government subvention. Yes, government has a responsibility to support education but what we are saying is that we are not going the way of other public universities that rely solely on government. We are able to survive because we do not depend solely on government.”

    A particular arrangement highlights Tech-U’s internationalism. “We are focusing on the international – in terms of research, staff, content, faculty,” Salami said. “ To that effect, within the first one year, we have gone into collaborative arrangement with Texas Tech University, in America… we are signing ‘4 plus 1 X’ arrangement which allows our students to spend 4 years here if you have come for a 5-year programme. And once you can afford it, you spend the next one year in Texas Tech University and come back here to earn our degree and use that our degree to have automatic admission for master’s degree programme in Texas Tech in the U.S. This means that our curriculum (with what is going on in Texas) is comparable, and that means we can exchange our staff. We want to create an environment whereby our students can be here and get instructional materials from Texas Tech and then our staff will go into joint research partnership with the staff over there so that we look at the Nigerian environment and the challenges; and then we take advantage of the findings we have there to really deal with our local problem in the country.”

    Tech-U is for brilliant students, irrespective of their socio-economic context. Its scholarship basket, which attracts contributions from government and the private sector, had over half a billion naira in less than one year. “Those who ordinarily wouldn’t have seen the four walls of the university, even a public university, are now being brought to a university like this through scholarship and they are embracing it with both arms. They are very happy about it from the feedback we have,” Salami remarked.

    Governor Ajimobi’s Tech-U idea is the stuff of legacy. It should inspire forward-thinking governance.

  • The trouble with sexuality

    For a week in April, a selected group of six journalists and five lawyers participated in the 2019 edition of the Bisi Alimi Foundation (BAF) Media and Justice Fellowship held at a hotel on Victoria Island, Lagos. The fellowship is in its third year. UK-based gay rights activist Alimi is Nigeria’s most visible homosexual, and BAF is a vehicle to “accelerate social acceptance of LGBT people in Nigeria.” LGBT stands for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender.

    A participant said: “The fellowship had sessions involving Bisi Alimi himself, who shared his story of being gay and HIV positive; and two lawyers – a British lawyer who talked about the struggles of being an LGBT person in the UK and a Sri Lankan lawyer who talked about how India decriminalised gay rights. It also examined how the Same Sex Marriage Prohibition Act in Nigeria was passed by former President Goodluck Jonathan as a political tool to satisfy the masses.”

    According to the foundation, “The Media and Justice Fellowship is an initiative designed to train and support Nigerian journalists to report on LGBT issues in a balanced and fair way.”  The organisation campaigns for “the rights and dignity of LGBT people in Nigeria.”

    BAF is faced with daunting challenges because LGBT people in Nigeria are viewed unfavourably.  The disapproving, if not hostile, reaction to LGBT people in Nigeria is symbolised by the Same Sex Marriage Prohibition Bill 2013, signed into law by former President Goodluck Jonathan.  According to the law, which criminalised homosexuality, anyone in a same-sex marriage or union could face up to 14 years in prison. Also, it is illegal for anyone to operate or participate in gay clubs, societies and organisations, or to officiate, witness, abet or aid the solemnisation of same-sex marriage, which attracts a 10-year jail term. In addition, such gay partnerships concretised overseas are considered invalid in Nigeria.  The law states that “Only a marriage contract between a man and a woman shall be recognised in Nigeria.”

    Nigeria’s LGBT community has not known peace since the law came into effect. A report described what happened when the police raided a gay club:  ”In July 2017, at club Owode in Lagos, 70 men and boys were arrested by police. The area had been on alert after a spate of violence. According to Daniel Okoye, a paralegal helping LGBTQ people in Nigeria, the police saw the arrests as an easy way of extorting money. ”In the majority of these cases the police extort funds from them, knowing that any court case will out their sexuality,” says Okoye. “For most of them, their single wish is to pay and get out, and the police use it against them.”

    Blackmail, prejudice and persecution have forced members of the LGBT community to go underground, and even flee the country.  The point is that the anti-gay law hasn’t succeeded in preventing people of homosexual orientation from expressing their sexuality because they cannot behave otherwise. Central to the issue is the nature of homosexual desire in human beings. Is it biologically driven or socially acquired? Interestingly, there is reported evidence of homosexual behaviour in certain animals, including mammals, birds and fish. According to modern research, homosexuality relates to all sexual behaviour between animals of the same sex, that is to say, “copulation, genital stimulation, mating games and sexual display behaviour.” It is curious that there is a greater focus on males than females in this matter, for lesbians have relationships too.

    However, it is noteworthy that lesbians and gays are not the only victims of social intolerance in Nigeria. Bisexuals also suffer for their sexual orientation. A case in point is the experience of one Osaze Osayande, a Nigerian who was forced to leave the country because of his bisexuality. He was a member of a secret gay/bisexual group in Lagos. In December 2016, members of the group got information that the police had declared them wanted.  The following month, the police raided their rendezvous, the residence of one Samson Ndem. Osayande, who was living at Ndem’s place with some other members at the time, managed to escape arrest. He took refuge in the home of his cousin, who was also bisexual.

    At this point, Osayande experienced a higher level of stigmatisation. His parents disowned him, his family and friends rejected him. He became depressed.  He nearly lost his life in an incident; he was mobbed by antagonists because of his bisexuality. Then he took the decision to leave Nigeria in May 2017, for personal safety reasons. Lesbians, gays and bisexuals caught in the act attract mob justice in Nigeria. Two months after his exit, the police raided Ndem’s residence again and arrested several LGBT people.

    Osayande’s story shows that being LGBT is a huge burden in Nigeria. It is noteworthy that a 2017 survey indicated that the acceptance rate of lesbians, gays and bisexuals among Nigerians was on the rise. The survey, conducted by NOIPolls, an organisation for country specific polling services in West Africa, was commissioned by The Initiative for Equal Rights (TIERs), a non-profit organisation working to protect the rights of sexual minorities.

    The Social Perception Survey on Lesbian, Gays and Bisexual Rights report indicated a rise in family acceptance from 11 per cent in 2015 to 13 per cent in 2017. A 2015 survey conducted by NOIPolls had showed that a majority of adult Nigerians, 87 per cent, supported the anti-gay law. The 2013 survey had showed that 92 per cent supported the bill.

    According to NOIPoll’s 2017 findings, 39 per cent of Nigerians said LGBT people should be allowed to have access to public services, a 9 per cent increase from 30 per cent of respondents in 2015. The report highlighted the finding that 17 per cent of respondents answered in the affirmative when asked if they knew someone who was lesbian, gay or bisexual- a family member, friend, or someone within their locality. Participants in the survey were selected from the country’s six geo-political zones through a proportionate stratified random sample design. The survey method involved a random nationwide sampling of 2,000 respondents whose views were obtained through telephone interviews.

    In the final analysis, LGBT rights are still intensely controversial in the country, and LGBT people have no peace of mind. The trouble with sexuality in Nigeria is that the heterosexual imagination doesn’t accommodate the possibility of other orientations.

  • Ngige’s hidden agenda

    Why is the Minister of Labour and Employment, Chris Ngige, opposed to the inauguration of a former Secretary-General of the National Union of Petroleum and Natural Gas Workers (NUPENG), Frank Kokori, as chairman of the Nigeria Social Insurance Trust Fund (NSITF)? How did Ngige get President Muhammadu Buhari to review Kokori’s appointment as NSITF chairman?

    These questions naturally followed the April 18 disruption of a move by the minister to inaugurate the NSITF governing board at the Ministry of Labour, Employment and Productivity in Abuja. Protesting unionists disrupted the planned inauguration of an NSITF board without Kokori as chairman.

    An April 17 statement by the labour ministry, signed by the Assistant Director, Press, Rhoda Illiya, had announced Mr. Austin Enajemo-Isire, a chartered accountant, as the new NSITF chairman approved by President Buhari. According to the statement, Chief Kokori had been appointed to head the Michael Imoudu National Institute for Labour Studies. It’s unclear why Kokori’s initial appointment as NSITF chairman was reconsidered. The labour ministry explained that the change followed due process and had the approval of the President.

    Ngige claimed on Channels Television: “The truth of the matter is that labour made a recommendation for somebody to be chairman of the NSITF board. It was not in the labour’s ambit to do so. We have the NSITF Act. The power to make recommendations to the President or Acting President for the chairman of the NSITF board rests solely on the minister.” This suggests Ngige had recommended Kokori’s replacement. But who initially recommended Kokori for the NSITF position?

    President of the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) Ayuba Wabba described as “falsehood of the highest order” Ngige’s claim that labour had recommended Kokori for the NSITF position. According to Wabba, Kokori “got his nomination to chair the Board of NSITF as a chieftain of the ruling party in Delta State and in his own right as a distinguished and forthright elder statesman.”

    About four months after Kokori’s appointment was announced in October 2017 by then Acting President Yemi Osinbajo, Kokori had protested during the 14th edition of the Gani Fawehinmi Annual Lecture/Symposium held in Lagos on January 15, 2018:  “Today, my rights are being abridged by a minister. You have this Nigeria Social Insurance Trust Fund (NSITF) where Nigerian workers and employers contribute money to, their pensions, their gratuities, their compensations are all there. Anytime they put a board in place, the board will almost eat the whole money. Now they sacked the board, a woman was the chairman; they say they are looking for her…The government, in its wisdom, when Nigerian labour and organised private sector, NECA, went to meet the president and said, please this is our board, reconstitute this board for us…we have two members, NECA has two members, Central Bank has one member, just like that, and three executive directors, we want to protect our money.”

    Kokori continued:  “The Minister of Labour, Chris Ngige, phoned me and congratulated me that the president has made me the chairman of the NSITF. I should come to Abuja for us to negotiate the inauguration. Since then…I go to Abuja every day. Ngige now runs the board. A board that was set up, where I am the chairman, I now go and beg Ngige every day. Let us swear in…he will say tomorrow he is going to bury his grandmother. The next day, he is going to a naming ceremony. Ngige has no time to swear in the board. He was busy employing hundreds and hundreds of his own community people until recently they had to stop him…Up till today, four months after I was appointed by the president Ngige runs the NSITF singlehandedly and as a minister, and he does what he likes. This is what we call impunity.” If Ngige had congratulated Kokori on his appointment as NSITF chairman, why is the minister singing a different tune now?

    A month later, Ngige inaugurated a nine-member Administrative Panel of Inquiry (API) to probe the finances of NSITF, saying the move was in line with the Buhari administration’s anti-corruption war.  Ngige had said: “The last Board and Administration of the NSITF left negative trails inimical to any advancement and progress for both the human and infrastructural components of the NSITF. The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had discovered various acts of fraudulent diversions from the Federal Government and Private Sector Contributions amounting to N62.3 billion as at 2015, allegedly perpetrated by the past board and management staff of the NSITF.”

    It is noteworthy that the EFCC had arraigned a former NSITF managing director, Umar Munir Abubakar, and four others for alleged diversion of N18bn of the said money. The EFCC had also questioned and detained a former NSITF chairman, Dr. Ngozi Ojeleme, for alleged diversion of over $48m from the agency’s account.

    Following the disruption of the curious inauguration, Wabba had highlighted Ngige’s curious delaying tactics.  “The first was that the appointment was made by the Acting President and that he needed to revalidate it from the President which he did,” Wabba said. “The second reason was that there has been corruption in the place and that he needed to clean it up and we said there was no problem because we are against corruption.”

    Wabba alleged in his statement: “Perhaps, unknown to the Presidency, the Minister had within this period that he was the sole manager of NSITF, recruited hundreds of people, majority of whom are from his community. He has also been in the habit of forcing the approval of hundreds of millions of Naira for dubious induction trainings, procurement and monetisation of jeeps for himself and the Minister of State in the Ministry, among other spurious expenditure.”  Observers have noted that without a proper board, there are serious issues that cannot be properly addressed. The picture suggests Ngige has a hidden agenda.

    President Buhari’s aloofness is indefensible. The President needs to break the deadlock to show that he is not only in office but also in power. He must not give the impression that the issue is beyond his control.

  • A notable intervention

    Nigeria’s corruption crisis and security crisis need critical interventions.  The President Muhammadu Buhari administration’s war on corruption and struggle to tackle insecurity need more creative approaches.

    On the anti-corruption war, the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) showed the way through an April 18 Freedom of Information (FOI) request to Dr. Muhammed Isah, Chairman, Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB), urging him to use his “good offices and leadership position to urgently provide information on specific details of asset declarations submitted to the CCB by successive presidents and state governors since the return of democracy in 1999.”

    SERAP is “concerned that many politicians hide behind the fact that members of the public do not have access to their asset declarations to make false declarations, and to cover up assets illegally acquired in corruption or abuse of office…The grim condition of many of our citizens since 1999 has been worsened by the deterioration of public services whereby access to clean water and affordable health-care has become a pipe dream and the supply of electricity became epileptic and irregular due to years of grand corruption by many politicians at the highest level of government.”

    The organisation argued that “Nigerians can no longer accept the excuse by high-ranking government officers that declaring their assets before the CCB is enough, as such pretext is not supported by the oaths of office by elected public officers. The failure by successive presidents and state governors to voluntarily make public their asset declarations would seem to suggest that they have something to hide.”

    It also said: “Given that many public officers being tried for or convicted of corruption are found to have made a false declaration of their assets, the CCB should no longer allow politicians to undermine the sanctity and integrity of the asset declaration provisions of the Constitution by allowing them to continue to exploit legal gaps for illicit enrichment.”

    In SERAP’s view, “while elected public officers may not be constitutionally obliged to publicly declare their assets, the Freedom of Information Act 2011 has now provided the mechanism for the CCB to improve transparency and accountability of asset declarations by elected public officers.”

    The organisation added: “By Section 1 (1) of the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act 2011, SERAP is entitled as of right to request for or gain access to information, including information on the asset declarations by elected public officers since the return of democracy in 1999.”

    According to SERAP, “provisions on the declaration of assets by all public officers in Nigeria are entrenched in the Code of Conduct for Public Officers, contained in Part I of the Fifth Schedule to the 1999 Nigerian Constitution. The primary objective is to prevent corruption and abuse of office and to ensure transparency in public officers.”

    Public officers for the purposes of the Code, said SERAP, “include the President and the Vice-President of the Federation, state governors and their deputies; the President and Deputy-President of the Senate, the Speaker and Deputy-Speaker of the House of Representatives and Speakers, the Chief justice of Nigeria, justices of the Supreme Court, the President and justices of the Court of Appeal, and other judicial officers and all staff of courts of law.”

    On the question of security, SERAP wants to know how governments in Nigeria spend public funds meant to provide security for Nigerians.  President Buhari and the governors of the 36 states of the federation are expected to provide answers. SERAP sent Freedom of Information requests, dated April 12, to them, asking for information on specific details of spending of appropriated public funds as security votes between 2011 and 2019. The organisation limited its request to details of visible, specific security measures and projects executed, excluding spending on intelligence operations.

    The organisation’s move was prompted by “the growing level of insecurity, violence, kidnappings and killings in Zamfara State and other parts of Nigeria.” According to SERAP, “Section 14(2) (b) of the 1999 Nigerian Constitution (as amended) provides that the security and welfare of the people shall be the primary purpose of government. It is the security of the citizens that is intended and not the security of select individuals in public office.”

    SERAP added: “Available evidence would seem to suggest that many of the tiers of government in Nigeria have used security votes as a conduit for grand corruption rather than spending the funds to improve and enhance national security and ensure full protection of Nigerians’ rights to life, physical integrity, and liberty.”

    Indeed, it is disturbing that the organisation quoted a former governor of Kano State, Musa Kwankwaso, who it said “once described security votes as ‘another way of stealing public funds’.” It also said: “The current security realities in the country would seem to suggest massive political use, mismanagement or stealing of security votes by many governments.”

    SERAP’s letter, no doubt, puts the concerned governments on the spot. This is what happens when governments do not govern as expected. It’s a shame that the concerned governments are being asked to account for security votes between 2011 and 2019. When insecurity reigns, it is unsurprising that a concerned organisation wants to know how security budgets were spent.

    The CCB boss is expected to provide the requested information “within 14 days of the receipt and/or publication of this letter,” while the concerned governments are expected to provide the requested information “within seven days of the receipt and/or publication” of the organisation’s letter. In both cases, SERAP said “If we have not heard from you by then, the Registered Trustees of SERAP shall take all appropriate legal action under the Freedom of Information Act to compel you to comply with our request.”  It remains to be seen whether the CCB as well as the concerned governments would obey the law or disobey the law.

    It isn’t enough to declare that the country is fighting corruption and tackling insecurity when the results of the efforts are insignificant.  Corruption and insecurity still pose a major threat to Nigeria. SERAP’s notable intervention shows that the solutions to the country’s corruption crisis and security crisis must be pursued with greater seriousness.

  • A destructive election

    After the mayhem, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) declared Rivers State Governor Nyesom Wike of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) winner of the governorship election held on March 9. After the collation of results,  INEC’s returning officer, on April 3, said Wike polled 888, 264 votes to defeat  Biokpomabo Awara, the African Action Congress (AAC) candidate, who got 173, 859 votes.

    Wike is reported to have been close to tears after his re-election. He dedicated his victory to “God and those who were killed.” He was quoted as saying:  “Those who died not because they were criminals, but because they wanted to defend their votes…They protected our votes and they defended us. We pray God to grant their families the strength to bear the losses. We shall continue to support the families.”

    It is unclear how many people died as a result of the governorship election crisis in the state. It is unclear how many families were affected by the anarchy. But a March 10 statement by INEC, suspending “all electoral processes in the state until further notice,” indicated the degree of the chaos.

    INEC had said: “Based on reports from our officials in the field, the Independent National Electoral Commission has determined that there has been widespread disruption of elections conducted on March 9, 2019 in Rivers State. These initial reports suggest that violence occurred in a substantial number of polling units and collation centres, staff have been taken hostage and materials including result sheets have either been seized or destroyed by unauthorized persons. In addition, safety of our staff appears to be in jeopardy all over the state and the commission is concerned about the credibility of the process.”

    It is noteworthy that, ahead of the governorship election, the All Progressives Congress (APC) in Rivers State had entered the arena when it wasn’t a participant in the election. The APC had been legally barred from fielding a candidate in the state’s governorship election. The Supreme Court had upheld the order of a Federal High Court, Port Harcourt, nullifying the APC primaries in Rivers State.  With this judgment, Rivers State APC candidates were disqualified from the National Assembly election as well as the governorship and state House of Assembly elections.

    The situation favoured the incumbent governor, Wike, who was seeking re-election.  With the APC out of the race, the PDP was expected to win easily. Only the APC was strong enough to seriously challenge the ruling party in the state.

    However, the Minister of Transportation, Rotimi Amaechi, an APC leader in the state and a former governor of the state, had told the party’s supporters: “The leadership of the party met and agreed that we would work with a party called the African Action Congress, while we are still in court to reclaim our mandate. So… we will vote for the AAC. You must go home and vote for the AAC. There should be no excuse not to vote because there will be security for everybody. You must prepare and make sure you win the governorship election.”

    But APC National Chairman Adams Oshiomhole had contradicted Amaechi. Oshiomhole was quoted as saying: “I have never spoken at any forum that we have aligned with any party. There is only one party I oversee and that is APC; if there is going to be alignment, I will know. I can’t choose to be in the know. That has never been discussed with me or with any of the members of the national working committee.”

    This contradiction suggested that Amaechi was fighting solo. Considering that there is no love lost between Amaechi and Wike, it looked like Amaechi was interested in a grudge fight.

    Then the AAC deputy governorship candidate, Akpo Bomba Yeeh, dropped a bomb. He not only left the party “with effect from… 25th March 2019,” he also defected to the PDP.

    Yeeh said in his resignation letter: “My decisions were informed by the complete hijack of the structure and administration of our Party by a faction of the APC in Rivers State led by the Minister of Transportation, Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi, for his personal political ambition. Furthermore, the Rotimi Amaechi led faction of the APC is not letting in its determination to subvert the will of Rivers people and cause crisis in the State using the platform of our promising Party. In the circumstance, I cannot in all conscience continue to lend support to the selfish political venture of the Minister of Transportation, which does not mean well for the progress and development of the people of Rivers State.”

    It is noteworthy that he added: “As a budding and promising politician, I also appeal to you to accept the reality of your crushing defeat and liberate yourself from being used by Rotimi Amaechi to cause unnecessary political crisis in our dear State.”

    It is interesting that at the time Yeeh left the AAC, INEC had suspended collation of results midway because of widespread violence and disruption of voting. But he probably knew enough about the party’s strengths and weaknesses, which is why he referred to a “crushing defeat.”

    When INEC finally announced the winner, the loser protested. The AAC governorship candidate, Biokpomabo Awara, claimed that INEC had turned the loser into the winner.  Awara said: “I have the unit by unit results of the March 9, 2019 elections in Rivers State. When they observed that I was leading and they saw the danger coming, they quickly moved on March 10 to save Wike, by suspending the collation of the results, which they resumed on April 1. As at the time the collation was suspended, I had 281,000 votes, as against Wike’s 79,000 votes. So, they (INEC officials) quickly came to his rescue.”

    The AAC’s loss deflated Amaechi, who had no business in the election since his party wasn’t a participant. His involvement was based on self- importance.  No doubt, his strange support for the AAC contributed to the sorrow, tears and blood that marked the governorship election in Rivers State.

  • Majority party, majority power

    Majority power is more powerful than minority power. This logic of power is expected to prevail in the Ninth National Assembly.  With 65 senators-elect, the All Progressives Congress (APC) will clearly be the majority party in the next Senate.  The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has 42 and the Young Progressive Party (YPP) has one. The APC will also be the majority party in the next House of Representatives with 223 seats. The PDP has 190 and other parties have 10.

    So there should be no confusion about which party should get the leadership positions in the upper and lower chambers of the Ninth National Assembly. Specifically, the President and Deputy President of the Senate, as well as the Speaker and Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives, should be APC legislators.

    It is curious that there are those who think this clear situation is not so clear, or not clear enough. For instance, PDP spokesman Kola  Ologbondiyan said in a statement: “The PDP… does not only have a constitutional say in the process of the emergence of the leadership of the Ninth National Assembly, but will, as a matter of constitutional right, field candidates into presiding offices of both chambers, if need be.”

    Also, a former President of the Senate and PDP member, Senator David Mark, said to journalists at his residence in Otukpo, Benue State: “The election of the President of the Senate also translates to the selection of the chairman of the National Assembly because the person who emerges as the President of the Senate automatically becomes the chairman of the National Assembly. Nobody should interfere in the selection of President of the Senate. The senators should choose amongst themselves who should be their leader not based on number of political parties that won elections into the chamber.”

    That was Mark’s response to the question whether the Senate President should come from the ruling party, or the party that is the majority party in the Red Chamber. Mark, a retired Nigerian Army Brigadier General, was President of the Senate from 2007 to 2015 when his party was in power and the majority party in the Senate.  Now he thinks numerical strength does not matter, but it did when he was at the helm of the Senate.

    The outgoing Senate President, Bukola Saraki, and his deputy, Ike Ekweremadu, had created an abnormal situation when Saraki, then an APC member, and Ekweremadu of PDP controversially combined to lead the Senate. Surely, that era of political absurdity is gone, and only absurd politicians would imagine minority party members in the major leadership positions in the Ninth National Assembly.

    APC’s National Publicity Secretary Lanre Issa-Onilu told reporters in Abuja:  “You have principal officers and all of them are determined by simple majority and because Nigerians have given us more than enough, we have enough to elect all our officers. We don’t need a single vote from PDP. In any case, we don’t envisage any election on that day because we are going to present our members to occupy these positions as the collective position of the party and all our members are experienced politicians who understand what this means.”

    He added: “When they get to the floor, they are going to read out the names and if the PDP so desires, they can bring a candidate up and follow that candidate with the number they have. It will be an exercise in futility for them to want to share from what Nigerians have taken from them. There are positions for minority party and the APC will not contest those positions because it belongs to them.”

    It is interesting that the majority party could become the minority party in the exercise to pick the principal officers of the next Senate.  A March 31 report said: “The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has launched an audacious move to win to its side 13 All Progressives Congress (APC) Senators-elect as part of a grand design to hijack the leadership of the 9th Senate. But the alleged plot has leaked to the APC which has launched a counter move of its own to avoid a repeat of the 2015 infiltration of its ranks in the National Assembly by the PDP, highly placed party sources said.”

    The opposition party, which is the minority party, is reportedly targeting APC senators-elect from Borno, Abia, Oyo, Gombe, Bayelsa, Bauchi, Ogun, Kogi, Sokoto and Imo. What manner of APC senators-elect would yield to such absurd overtures that would give majority power to a minority party?  It is noteworthy that such absurdity has happened before in the Senate. With the help of senators from the majority party, APC, Ekweremadu of the minority party, PDP, became Deputy President of the Senate. Saraki, then an APC member, became President of the Senate through anti-party scheming. The result was a queer leadership combination.  Of course, the negative arrangement brought negatives.

    It remains to seen whether the APC would allow history to repeat itself.  The party must take advantage of its position as the majority party in the next national legislature, and ensure that it benefits maximally from majority power. If the party is supreme, then its members in the National Assembly have no reason to go against the party’s desire and decision.

    A functional interpretation of party supremacy must be informed by the logic of supremacy. Supremacy is supreme. Certainly, supremacy cannot mean infallibility. So the party can err. It does not guarantee fairness. So the party can be unfair. The essence of party supremacy is its conclusive collective voice.

    The path to follow is to enforce party supremacy erected on party discipline, party cohesion and party integrity; and that path must be followed wherever it may lead.

    It is important for the ruling party to have a productive relationship between its members in the executive arm of government and its members in the legislative arm of government. The people deserve good governance. The ruling party cannot afford to have its badge of progressivism torn to shreds by the party members themselves.  But this may happen if the party does not get its act together.

  • Ambode and Lagos History Lecture

    When the Governor Akinwunmi Ambode administration organised the Lagos History Lecture to celebrate the 50th anniversary of Lagos State in May 2017, it wasn’t expected to be just a one-off.  However, two years after the first lecture, there are indications that the idea is going nowhere.

    The title of the lecture: “Lagos: Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow.” Prof H. O. Danmole, who delivered the lecture, was at the time Dean, Faculty of the Humanities and Social Sciences, Al-Hikmah University, Ilorin. The event happened on May 24, 2017 at the Eko Convention Centre, Lagos.

    In his welcome speech, Ambode had said:  “The gathering of today goes beyond the periphery; this is because today offers us all, an opportunity to have introspection into the past, engage in an objective appraisal of the present and, a realistic prognosis of the future of another fifty years… It is important for us at this epochal gathering to refresh our memory about the beginning.”

    He added: “I have no doubt that this assemblage will at the end of its sitting put an end to the erroneous impression by some in the public space that Lagos is no man’s land. The need for this becomes imperative so that today’s young folks will know the truth and be able to stand on the right historical platform.”

    It is noteworthy that the government had reportedly planned to distribute printed copies of the lecture to the public, particularly public secondary schools in the state, as a way of publicising “the truth” about “the beginning.”  Two years after the event, this hasn’t been done. Ambode had observed:  “What we are doing here today is another history and as such I urge all to take it serious so that history will be kind to us all.” Ironically, it seems the Ambode administration itself didn’t take the event seriously enough, which explains why the lecture has not been printed and circulated as initially planned.  This isn’t the way to be history-friendly.

    Danmole’s lecture, divided into eight parts, covers The Early Years; The British in Lagos Affairs; Establishment of Colonial Rule; Colonial Government and Traditional Politics; and Lagos: Nigeria’s First Capital City. Other parts are: The Creation of Lagos State; Lagos: The Era of Action Governor, Jakande Years; Tinubu to Ambode Revolution; and Lagos of the Future.

    “The history of Lagos has received attention from historians and others; and a single lecture cannot do proper justice to it,” Danmole notes.  “However, this lecture shall try to give some insight into major developments in its history. Lagos Island (Eko), which is the epicentre of our present Lagos State, is one of the oldest kingdoms on the West African Coast. Incidentally, the kingdom of Lagos was also one of the earliest recipients of European traders and travellers in what is now modern Nigeria. Reportedly, Portuguese merchants, because of the geographical location of Lagos on the lagoon, gave the Island its name Lagos.  Lagos Island, to the indigenous population, is called EKO, a name whose origin is told in two well-known traditional but controversial accounts.”

    Danmole continues: “Nevertheless, it is important to note that one version of the name relates to the advent of the Awori, while the other is connected to Benin adv entures in Lagos. Our knowledge of the early history of Lagos is enriched by the accounts of European travellers, historians and traditional accounts. What is fairly certain is that the Awori settlement in Lagos was earlier than that of the Benin which eventually subjugated the emergent settlement. Lagos continued to evolve as a veritable place of migration for many Yoruba groups; some of these included the Ilaje and other groups who were attracted to Lagos because of their fishing activities.”

    According to Danmole, “The idea for the creation of a Lagos region could be traced to a suggestion by C.D. Temple, who was Lieutenant Governor of the Northern Protectorate in 1914 when Nigeria was created. He suggested that Nigeria should be divided into seven regions, the Lagos Colony being one of the regions. Conversely, the Governor-General of Nigeria, Sir F.D. Lugard, rejected his suggestion. It was not until after the Second World War, during the process of decolonisation that the thought of dividing Nigeria into regions or states resurfaced on the political scene… With the creation of Lagos State on 27th May, 1967, the task of administering the state fell on Brigadier (then Colonel) Mobolaji Johnson, who had earlier been appointed the Administrator of Lagos before the State was created.”

    Danmole sheds light on the state’s divisions: “The military administration under Mobolaji Johnson issued an edict on 1st May, 1968 which divided the state into five divisions, namely Lagos, Ikeja, Badagry, Ikorodu and Epe. These administrative divisions represented, in our view, the old Lagos colony and province, and this perhaps explains the term IBILE, being the first letters of the names of the five administrative divisions.  Thus, the acronym IBILE signifies the long standing administration and socio-cultural relations which had existed among the divisions before, during and after colonial rule.”

    Speaking about the future of Lagos, Danmole argues:  “I make bold to say that the commitment which those in government have been giving to the state since it was created in 1967 has continued to give Lagos State a central position when compared with other states in the Federal Republic. The expanding economy of the state, the infrastructural growth and continued investment in human capital, will lead to the rapid growth of Lagos State in the future. The megacity that Lagos has become is a result of encouragement given to organised initiatives that contribute to social and economic development of the state. This must continue, if Lagos must be among the frontline megacities in the world.”

    It is interesting that Danmole emphasises the importance of planning for development. He says: “For Lagos to reach greater heights there must be adherence to development plans. Development plans assist governments to achieve their focus within a particular time frame. Furthermore, development plans allow for measurement of growth. Two examples will help to illustrate this point. Nigeria and India were almost at the same level of development in 1960, but India has left us behind because of her strict adherence to development plans. India is currently on her own 17th development plan. Also, Malaysia was behind Nigeria in terms of development some decades ago; however, through development plans, Malaysia has overtaken Nigeria. I do know that Lagos State is a part of a whole, but as a state, Lagos can show leadership for others to emulate.”

    It is inexcusable that this enlightening lecture is gathering dust.

  • Anti-party godfatherism

    In a display of crude godfatherism, Ogun State Governor Ibikunle Amosun and Imo State Governor Rochas Okorocha shamelessly supported the governorship candidates of political parties different from theirs in the March 9 governorship election. It remains to be seen how their disloyalty will benefit the candidates they backed.

    Amosun and Okorocha of the All Progressives Congress (APC) had clearly carried godfatherism too far. It wasn’t surprising that their party decided to punish them. It was surprising that the party delayed the punishment till March 1 when its National Working Committee (NWC) suspended the governors “for anti-party activities.” In a statement, the party’s National Publicity Secretary, Mallam Lanre Issa-Onilu, said the NWC “has also taken a decision to recommend the expulsion of the suspended individuals to the National Executive Committee (NEC) of the party.”

    The APC statement stated that “the NWC had earlier written to the suspended governors on their anti-party activities, and several other steps were taken to ensure they desist from taking actions that are inimical to the interests of our party and candidates. Notably, these individuals have not shown any remorse and actually stepped up their actions.”  The party accused the suspended governors of “serial anti-party activities,” and “noted how the suspended members have continued to campaign openly for other parties and candidates that are unknown to our great party. They have in fact constituted themselves as opposition to APC candidates in their respective states.”

    At the APC presidential campaign rally in Abeokuta, Ogun State, on February 11, Amosun had openly opposed his party.  “You know what to do when it is March 2nd, but please honour me on February 16 and vote for our father, President Muhammadu Buhari,” he had said to his supporters, referring to the governorship election, which was moved to  March 9,  and the presidential election, which was moved to February 23.

    Amosun refused to recognise Dapo Abiodun as the APC’s governorship candidate. Abiodun had defeated Amosun’s preference, Adekunle Akinlade, in the APC primary, leading to Akinlade’s exit from the party and his candidacy on the platform of the Allied Peoples Movement (APM).

    Curiously, Amosun, whose second term ends this year, defied his party by endorsing Akinlade for governor, but chose to run for senate on the APC platform. Interestingly, Amosun won the senate race. Amosun was free to support Akinlade, but it was absurd that he did so at the expense of Abiodun, his party’s candidate. No rationalisation can make this rational.

    There were levels of drama at the January 29 APC presidential campaign rally at the Dan Anyiam Stadium in Owerri, the Imo State capital. The party’s chairman, Adams Oshiomhole, had presented the APC governorship candidate, saying, “Senator Hope Uzodinma will win and restore good governance in Imo. APC will win in Imo State.”

    Remarkably, Okorocha’s son-in-law and Action Alliance (AA) governorship candidate, Uche Nwosu, was at the APC rally. Okorocha wants Nwosu to succeed him, and had said so loud and clear. Okorocha, who has also won a senate seat on the platform of APC, supported Muhammadu  Buhari for president and Nwosu for governor. Nwosu had defected to AA from APC after failing to get what he wanted.  The state chapter of AA had endorsed Buhari, and promised to secure one million votes for him in the presidential election.

    Buhari obviously needed all the votes he could get. His re-election campaign was a serious matter and he meant business.  Perhaps this explains why he dramatically asked his party members to vote for a candidate of their choice in the Imo State governorship election, and not necessarily the APC governorship candidate.

    A report of the APC rally said: “President Buhari, who broke his silence on the crisis rocking the party since the party’s governorship primaries, urged APC members to vote for any candidate of their choice across party lines irrespective of inter or intraparty squabbles.”

    This means Buhari and Oshiomhole were not on the same page regarding who APC members should vote for in the Imo governorship poll. This also means Buhari and Okorocha may be on the same page concerning the governorship election. Obviously, Okorocha doesn’t want the APC governorship candidate to win.  He wants the AA governorship candidate to win. Though Buhari stopped short of endorsing another party’s governorship candidate, his non-partisanship was odd because he was expected to endorse his party’s governorship candidate. The rally was a partisan event. In partisan politics, there is no room for non-partisanship.

    When Okorocha first publicly expressed his preference for Nwosu, who was the Chief of Staff, Government House, he had said:  ”Uche Nwosu is hardworking and never gets tired. He is a very humble young man. Not proud. Not arrogant. So, power won’t enter his head. In spite of the position he occupies you can’t see him quarreling with anybody or maltreating anybody. He does not segregate against anybody whether from Orlu or Owerri or Okigwe zone… I have checked him in and out; I have not found him wanting… The young man is a team player, who does not use his office to molest anybody. He has the qualities of a good leader.”

    Okorocha added: “You see, you don’t hide a good product. And the joy of every leader is to have a worthy successor. You don’t mind political opportunists. We have done very well as a government and we should be concerned about what happens to the achievements after.”

    Amosun and Okorocha have shown that they are birds of a feather when it comes to their thinking on succession. Believing they must pick their successors at any cost, they seem desperate to remain in power after their tenure.  It is contrived continuity.

    If their governorship favourites win because of their support, it will be a Pyrrhic victory for the governors.  By their anti-party activities, Amosun and Okorocha showed an arrogant contempt for party supremacy. Their suspension and possible expulsion from the APC is bad for their image and good for party supremacy.

    Having been elected to the senate, it is a cause for concern that these dishonourable politicians will sit in the Red Chamber pretending to be men of honour.