The Nation Newspaper

Category: Femi Macaulay

  • Abacha loot and other loot

    Something about the size of the loot says something about the size of the looter’s appetite. Take the infamous Abacha loot, for instance. Switzerland Ambassador Eric Mayoraz drew attention to the kleptocrat’s mind-boggling greed at a forum on asset recovery organised by the Swiss Embassy and the African Network for Environment and Economic Justice.

    Mayoraz was quoted as saying at the June 28 event in Abuja:  “All funds hidden in Swiss banks by Abacha were fully repatriated and so we don’t have any of such funds in Switzerland again. $752m was returned in 2005 and we discovered more and more in other banks and that involved the $322.5m that was repatriated earlier this year.” In other words, over $1billion Abacha loot had been returned.

    The diplomat employed diplomatic language when he justified the concern of the Swiss government that the latest $322.5m should be well managed and spent to enrich the poor. Mayoraz said: “Unfortunately, some of the assets that were returned, there was not so much transparency in it. So, we have to introduce the World Bank to get involved in this so that this particular one can be used by the Nigerian government with the monitoring of the World Bank.”

    This arrangement mocks Nigeria. It suggests that Nigeria’s leaders can’t be trusted with the returned Nigerian loot. More tragically, the arrangement is a response to a bad record regarding the management of the initial $752m.

    This time, according to Special Adviser to the President on Social Investment, Mrs. Maryam Uwais, who was represented at the forum, the returned money would be used to fund the government’s Social Investment Programme which would, among other things, give money to the poorest and most vulnerable households. She also said that the Federal Government would begin drawing money from the loot this month, and confirmed that the spending would be monitored by the World Bank.

    The involvement of another monitor, the United Kingdom government, clearly compounds the insult.  At the forum, Head, Department for International Development in Nigeria, Mrs. Debbie Palmer, said the UK government would spend £600,000 (N282m) to monitor the use of recovered assets.  She noted that Nigeria had recently received $322.5m Abacha loot from Switzerland and $73m and advised that the money should be put to good use. Palmer cited reports that said Africa was losing $50bn to political corruption every year.

    The late General Sani Abacha, who ruled the country dictatorially from 1993 to 1998, is believed to have stolen money to the tune of over $2 billion from the treasury. He ran a kleptocratic administration. The unending tale of his mammoth loot stashed away in banks across the globe continues to stretch the imagination 20 years after his death.

    In 2014, the United States (US) Department of Justice had highlighted Abacha’s looting methods, and reportedly froze $458 million in corruption funds linked to him in secret bank accounts around the world. The action was described as “the largest kleptocracy forfeiture ever in the US.” According to then Acting Assistant Attorney General Mythili Raman of the US Justice Department’s Criminal Division, “Gen. Abacha was one of the most notorious kleptocrats in memory, who embezzled billions from the people of Nigeria while millions lived in poverty.”

    This is the character President Muhammadu Buhari recently characterised in positive terms.  “No matter what opinion you have about Abacha, I agreed to work with him and the roads we did from PTF exist from here to Port Harcourt, to Onitsha, to Benin and so on,” Buahri had said while receiving a delegation of Buhari Support Organisation (BSO) at the Presidential Villa in May.  He also credited the Abacha dictatorship with other notable developmental projects in the education and health sectors.

    Buhari had served under Abacha as head of the Petroleum Trust Fund (PTF), set up to utilise the proceeds of a petrol price hike, and this may well have influenced his picture of Abacha.  But the reality is that much more could have been done to develop the country with the billions of dollars Abacha stole.

    It is noteworthy that the US Department of Justice had identified Abacha’s looting style which, interestingly, has not gone out of fashion. According to the report, “The prosecutor believes Abacha and his associates conducted three fraudulent schemes during his time in office.”  Chief among them was “the ‘security votes’ fraud, through which more than $2 billion was embezzled from the Central Bank of Nigeria.”

    This information shows how little has changed in the approach to looting   by political helmsmen.  The “security votes” camouflage is still in vogue and it is perhaps the least problematic path to illegal earnings in government.

    Not surprisingly, the Federal Government’s  announced plan to redistribute the returned loot to about 300,000 households, with each getting about $14 (N5, 000) a month, has drawn  public criticism, particularly because the sharing is unlikely to be inclusive and the beneficiaries are unlikely to be elevated.  Spending the loot to fund the government’s   National Social Safety Net Programme (NAASP) will ultimately prove to be counterproductive.

    Transparency and accountability in the use of the recovered looted funds are better achieved by investing the money in developmental projects. The Nigerian authorities need to pay greater attention to socioeconomic conditions. The country needs to make significant progress on poverty reduction and ensure that the majority of its citizens enjoy improved quality of life.  Sharing the Abacha loot based on a parochial perspective won’t achieve the desired development.

    It is interesting that the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) observed: “The return of the Abacha loot is a chance for President Buhari to commit to the enforcement of the 2016 judgment by Justice Mohammed Idris, which ordered his government to publish, disclose the spending of recovered loot since 1999 by past and present governments till date, as well as details of projects on which the funds were spent.”

    There is no doubt that the unavailability of such a comprehensive record of how recovered looted funds were utilised, or not utilised, for developmental purposes over the years is a discredit to the Buhari administration’s anti-corruption campaign.

     

  • Lawyers and limits

    It is intriguing that self-confessed big-time kidnapper Chukwudumeme Onwuamadike, alias Evans, has got a new lawyer.  Noel Brown, who announced appearance for Evans at the Lagos State High Court in Ikeja on June 22,   sought an adjournment to allow him prepare for the trial. He was quoted as saying: “The learned counsel who was handling the matter before did not do a proper handing over and we have written to the prosecution to give us a copy of the proof of evidence.”  The sensational trial will continue in September.

    Evans’ former lawyer, Olukoya Ogungbeje, had withdrawn from the case based on “personal reasons.” Did he use the expression “personal reasons” euphemistically?  He had said in a statement:  “For the avoidance of doubt, we wish to state categorically that we have fought a good fight this far despite repeated and sustained threats to my life and my co-defence lawyers; I dare say we have no regrets whatsoever having conducted the criminal charges involving our client this far.”

    From the beginning, someone should have told Ogungbeje: Don’t start what you can’t finish. Perhaps someone did, but he rejected the wisdom. Ogungbeje should have anticipated the reason he gave for withdrawing from the case.

    Ogungbeje exhibited irrationality when he said: “For the sake of history we have been able to enrich the basic principles of our Criminal Jurisprudence, especially the principle premised on an accused person being presumed innocent until the contrary is proved no matter the public opinion and the criticism.”

    Evans, a native of Umudun, Nnewi, Anambra State, was arrested on June 10, 2017, at his classy home at Magodo, Lagos, about three weeks after the announcement of N30m bounty by the Inspector General of Police, Ibrahim Idris, for information that could lead to his arrest. He had been on the wanted list of the police in three states, Edo, Anambra and Lagos, for over four years; and police interest in him was renewed by his alleged involvement in the kidnap of Innocent Duru, the prosperous owner of a big pharmaceutical company in Ilupeju, Lagos.

    When Evans was arrested, he painted a picture of how he started kidnapping, which added colour to the thriller: “I was into auto spare parts importation but lost all my money (over N25m) when Customs seized my goods. From there, I relocated to South Africa, where I started peddling drugs. But along the line, my business partner shot me and passed me off as dead. I recuperated, returned to Nigeria and decided to start kidnapping rich men for ransom.”

    Within 10 years, Evans acquired a reputation as a high-profile kidnapper.   A report that captured his criminal trajectory said: “Chief Raymond Okoye was kidnapped in 2015 and was detained for two months until his relatives raised $1million. A trader, Uche Okoroafor, was whisked away in 2015 and held captive for three months until his family paid $1 million. Another businessman, Elias Ukachukwu, was kidnapped in November 2015. He paid $1 million. But the kidnappers refused to release him after collecting the initial ransom.  They demanded another $1million on grounds that the victim’s relatives were rude to them. Ukachukwu stayed in their den for several months and it is unclear how and when he regained freedom. Francis Umeh, an auto parts dealer, was kidnapped in July 2016 at Raji Rasaki Estate, Ago Palace Way, Okota, Lagos. He spent two months in the kidnappers’ den and paid an undisclosed amount of dollars.”

    Evans expressed remorse after his arrest: “I am feeling bad. People who are still into kidnapping should quit. They should learn from what has happened to me. ”

    This is the character Ogungbeje tried to defend in court. In other words, the lawyer tried to prove the innocence of a self-confessed criminal. Was that reasonable?

    Ogungbeje had grabbed the headlines by declaring that his client was forced to plead guilty. On August 30, 2017, Evans was arraigned for alleged kidnapping of Duru Donatus, a Lagos-based businessman. Evans and five suspected members of his gang, who had been in police custody since June 10, 2017, faced “a two-count charge offence bordering on conspiracy and kidnapping.” The others were “a woman, Ogechi Uchechukwu, the third defendant; Uche Amadi, Okwuchukwu Nwachukwu, Chilaka Ifeanyi and Victor Chukwunonso Aduba, second, fourth, fifth and sixth defendants.”

    A report said: “In count one, the defendants were alleged to have “on February 14, 2017, at about 7.45pm along Obokun Street, Ilupeju, Lagos, conspired to commit felony to wit kidnapping.” In count two, they were alleged to have “between February 14 and April 12, 2017, along Obokun Street, Ilupeju, Lagos,  while armed with guns and other weapons, captured, detained and collected a ransom of 223,000 Euros from one Duru Donatus for release”…. Evans, Amadi and Nwachukwu entered a guilty plea. His other three alleged accomplices, Uchechukwu, Ifeanyi and Aduba, pleaded not guilty to the charges.”

    The case looked straightforward enough until Ogungbeje entered the picture, and issued a statement that said: “After the purported guilty plea of our client and the court rose, our client told us clearly that the police told him to plead guilty failing which the police will kill him…Our client pointedly told us that being informed now, he will change his ‘police motivated guilty plea’ to ‘not guilty’ at the next adjourned date.”

    It is interesting that Evans and two others pleaded guilty to the crime while the three other suspects pleaded not guilty. If Evans was forced to plead guilty as Ogungbeje claimed, were the other two who pleaded guilty also forced to do so? Did the three who pleaded not guilty do so because they were not forced to plead guilty, or because they refused to plead guilty?

    It is noteworthy that Evans had confessed to the crime right from the time he was arrested, and before he was charged to court. By pleading guilty in court, Evans only restated his guilt.

    So, why did Evans’ former lawyer try to complicate an uncomplicated case?  It remains to be seen how his new lawyer will prove the innocence of a self-confessed criminal. Shouldn’t lawyers know their limits?

     

  • Buhari’s friend

    To know President Muhammadu Buhari’s friends, just observe their words and actions. The things former Secretary to the Federal Government Babachir Lawal reportedly said during a Channels Television programme on June 15 deserve attention.

    Lawal was removed as SGF in October 2017, following a probe by a committee headed by Vice President Yemi Osinbajo. The Senate had alleged that Babachir favoured a company associated with him with a grass-cutting contract to the tune of N223m. Lawal’s removal suggested that the committee found him guilty.

    It is interesting that about eight months after Lawal’s sack, he is saying that investigation by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) will prove his innocence. He was quoted as saying: “I like it (EFCC probe) because the EFCC has the capacity both in equipment and personnel to get to the truth and they are expected to be impartial. They are not politicians so they will get to the truth. “Lawal continued: “The EFCC will find out whether my letters of resignation to the Corporate Affairs Commission through my lawyers is true. They will find out whether I was still a signatory to the accounts. Not like Shehu Sani who will say I was signing cheques when there was no truth in that.”

    For good measure, Lawal declared:  “For those who say I am corrupt, I see them as nincompoops, people who have no conscience when they hurt an innocent man. It is not for me to judge them. I smile and leave them because as a Christian, I leave it to God.” In December 2016, the Senate had called for the resignation and prosecution of Lawal, alleging that he was involved in the diversion of North-east humanitarian funds.  This followed an interim report presented by the Adhoc Committee on Mounting Humanitarian Crisis in the North-East. Senator Shehu Sani chaired the committee.  The committee alleged that Lawal had contravened the provisions of the Public Procurement Act and the Federal Government Financial Rules and Regulations pertaining to award of contracts.

    Sani had said that some of the contracts were awarded to companies belonging to cronies and family members of top government officials. For instance, he stated that the committee found out that a company, Rholavision Engineering Limited, with Lawal as Director, was awarded a consultancy contract. The company was supposed to have carried out the removal of invasive plant species in Yobe in March 2016.

    Sani said: “Although, Lawal resigned the directorship of the said company in September 2016, it is on record that he is a signatory to the accounts of the company.”  He added that the Presidential Initiative on North-East (PINE), which was responsible for procurement, contravened the rules. According to him, fraudulent individuals exploited the provision of emergency situation contract award in the Procurement Act to inflate figures. He also said many of the contracts had no impact on the Internally Displaced Persons who were living in wretched conditions.

    Furthermore, the Chairman, Senate Committee on Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Senator Dino Melaye, had said: “When this committee started looking at the books, SGF ran to the Corporate Affairs Commission and quickly withdrew his directorship of the company after the execution of the contract…he is still a signatory to the account of the company.”

    To get to the bottom of the allegations against Lawal, the Presidency had set up a committee headed by Vice President Osinbajo. The findings of the Osinbajo committee led to Lawal’s removal from office.

    Lawal’s recent remarks discredit the Vice President’s committee and its work. The Presidency needs to respond to Lawal’s latest comments on the matter.

    A report said: “The former SGF said despite his ordeal, he was still close to the President.” Lawal was quoted as saying: “I still see the President, I have access to him. If there is anything to discuss, we do so. He is a politician, we are politicians. I joined politics to contribute to making Buhari the President… and this will not be an issue between us.”  The report continued: “When asked whether he felt he had brought shame on the President, he added, “No, because I believe it is a lie so why should I feel I let him down.” Only an individual sure of his friendship with the President would say the things Lawal said.  Was he serious? Should the public take his words seriously?

    It is noteworthy that the EFCC said in a recent statement:  “The conviction of two prominent members of the ruling All Progressives Congress, APC, Jolly Nyame and Joshua Dariye in quick succession by a Federal Capital Territory High Court has put a lie to the often repeated charge by critics and cynics that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, is lukewarm in prosecuting chieftains of the ruling party for corruption. Nyame and Dariye, both former two-term governors of Taraba and Plateau State respectively, were convicted and sentenced to 14 years in prison on corruption charges… Both trials had been ongoing for 11 years and towards the end of the proceedings, the two convicts changed their political camps, moving from the opposition Peoples Democratic Party to the ruling APC.”  To support the argument that the EFCC is unbiased and nonselective, the antigraft agency also cited the case of a former accountant general of Kebbi State and APC member who was convicted of corruption and sentenced to 70 years in prison.

    In September last year, EFCC chief Ibrahim Magu had said there were no fewer than 125 high-profile corruption cases still “hanging in court.” It is not clear how many of these cases are still unresolved. A war without casualties cannot be a war properly so called.   The public expects convincing action by the authorities to show that the war against corruption is a war properly so called.

    Lawal’s former position in the Buhari administration makes his case a high-profile corruption-related case. The EFCC needs to clarify the matter.  This case must not be left hanging in the air, particularly because it involves a self-described friend of the President.

  • The Abiola Question

    It is not enough that the President Muhammadu Buhari administration has changed Democracy Day from May 29 to June 12, arguing that “June 12th, 1993, was far more symbolic of Democracy in the Nigerian context than May 29th or even October 1st.” Buhari stated: “June 12th, 1993 was the day when Nigerians in millions expressed their democratic will in what was undisputedly the freest, fairest and most peaceful elections since our Independence.”

    It is not enough that Buhari also declared: “Therefore, government has decided to award posthumously the highest honour of the land, GCFR, to late Chief MKO Abiola, the presumed winner of the June 12, 1993 cancelled elections.”

    With the 2019 general election approaching, and Buhari having expressed his intention to seek reelection, it is curious that he waited till now to address the Abiola Question.  Even then, he has not done enough.

    For how long will the historic date come and go before clarity is finally achieved?  June 12, 1993, was the election date that saw the emergence of Chief Moshood Kashimawo Olawale Abiola, popularly known as MKO, as the country’s apparent President before the poll was controversially annulled by military strongman General Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida (IBB). It was a critical juncture in the country’s political history.

    The sudden death of General Sani Abacha, who extended the injustice, on June 8, 1998, followed five years of ruthless oppression of the pro-democracy opposition including presidential claimant Abiola.  Abiola’s similarly abrupt passing one month later on July 7, 1998, was supremely suspicious, particularly in the context of an intense campaign for his release from detention and restoration of his ruptured electoral mandate.

    How Abiola died 20 years ago remains a riddle. On the June 12 anniversary two years ago, Abiola’s personal physician, Dr Ore Falomo, repeated what he has been saying since Abiola died in detention: “There is no argument about Abiola’s death. He died on July 7, 1998 at about 3pm at Aguda House when he was being visited by an American delegation. He died shortly after being offered a cup of tea by the leader of the delegation. On that day, Abiola was very alert. He recognised Susan Rice whom he saw last in 1982. The Americans came with a flask containing tea. The flask had three layers. Why should they come with their own tea, special tea? Is it normal for visitors to come with tea and offer a prisoner? It was abnormal…It was a conspiracy.”

    Falomo continued: “It is now left to all of us to find the cause of Abiola’s death. He died 15 minutes after the tea. My conclusion is that the tea is probably fundamental to his collapse and sudden death. Until detailed investigation is carried out, the death of Abiola will continue to generate controversy, supposition, reasonable and unjustified conclusion for a very long time to come. Abiola died in government custody. It is the duty of government to unravel the cause of Abiola’s death, after drinking a cup of tea.”

    The question is:  Who should be held responsible for Abiola’s death? Falomo’s answer: “The Federal Government under General Abdulsalami Abubakar should be held responsible.” It is crucial to pursue the truth in this case.  Until the issue is satisfactorily clarified, the government of the day at the time Abiola died stands accused of evil.

    The people remember how IBB killed their dreams by dictatorially annulling the historic June 12, 1993, presidential election won by Abiola.  Abiola didn’t survive the brutality he suffered in the course of asserting his popular mandate; his controversial death in 1998, under a different military administration that nevertheless owed its perpetuation to IBB’s original sin, still haunts the polity to this day. It will always be a question to ponder whether the country, indeed, lost a positive turning-point opportunity by IBB’s inscrutable indiscretion, considering that Abiola’s “Hope 93” campaign was full of motivational energy and the majority eagerly bought his promise of constructive change.

    Not surprisingly, the ghost of June 12 continues to haunt the land. It is a measure of the depth of the damage done by Babangida and his ilk that MKO’s convincing win remains a front-burner issue even today. It is a tribute to the late charismatic and ebullient politician that his spirit is an inspiration to pro-democracy forces battling for the soul of the country. Of course, there are opposite forces still at work, contrary spirits that must be defeated to achieve the desired flowering of democratic beauty.

    Perhaps the most fitting way to immortalise MKO is the assertion of voter sovereignty. It is an inescapable challenge waiting for the people to rise to the occasion. Remember MKO’s immortal wisdom, “Democracy is the question. Democracy is the answer.”

    Now that Abiola has been honoured with the country’s highest national award, Grand Commander of the Order of the Federal Republic (GCFR), it is a symbolic recognition of his presidential status despite having been denied the office of President.

    What will Babangida think now? It must still hurt Babangida that he left the stage broken and humiliated by the popular resistance to his display of raw power, leading to his rushed and unceremonious exit, even though he installed a puppet civilian administration in a futile face-saving terminal move. Not surprisingly, seeking the elusive perfect ending, he indicated interest in the presidency some years ago, only to learn, to his extreme chagrin, that he was generally considered a defective product that could not benefit from even the most creative promotional stunts. In a manner of speaking, he could not be made to smell like a rose.

    Ultimately, the latest development means that if Abiola was indeed killed in detention, then it amounted to assassination of a president. Who assassinated Abiola?

    It is not enough to honour Abiola without getting to the bottom of the matter by clarifying his mysterious death. Buhari must move beyond what he has done and launch a comprehensive investigation towards achieving a final closure. There is no closure yet, and there won’t be until the question of Abiola’s death is resolved.

  • Ambode: Inclusion as solution

    Lagos State Governor Akinwunmi Ambode made history when he delivered the Convocation Lecture of the University of Lagos (UNILAG) on May 8.  His words: “True, I stand before you as the first UNILAG graduate to become Governor of Lagos. I am humbled by this distinction and elated to be the first to walk this path.”  The title of his lecture was “Inclusion: Path to a new nation.”

    He told the 2017 graduands:  ”In 1984, I attended a convocation much like today’s. On that day, I sat where you, now sit. I was an eager yet apprehensive young man set to graduate at 21. Although ready to tackle the world and make my mark, I was also a bit uncertain about what that world and life would bring.”

    How Ambode rose to his current position illustrates the power of performance. Between 1988 and 1991, he was assistant treasurer, Badagry Local Government, Lagos State.  Ten years later, he became auditor general for Local Government in Lagos State. In 2005, Ambode was appointed permanent secretary of the Ministry of Finance.

    As accountant general for Lagos State from 2006 – 2012, Ambode was “in charge of all the financial activities of the state and directly responsible for over 1400 accountants in the state service.” It is to his credit that “under his watch, the State Treasury Office (STO) revolutionised the way Lagos State finances were raised, budgeted, managed and planned.” Also to his credit:  ”In his six years as the Lagos State accountant general, the state’s financial performance improved visibly with the budget performing at a remarkable average of 85% annually.”

    These features of Ambode’s profile demonstrate that he is probably the most experienced individual in terms of familiarity with the state civil service operations to attain the position of governor since Lagos State was created in 1967.  After a 27-year civil service career, Ambode voluntarily retired in 2012 and started a consulting career. Then politics came up.  It is interesting that he was governor when Lagos celebrated its 50th anniversary in 2017.

    In three years as the governor of Nigeria’s most developed state, Ambode has shown that the pursuit of development requires politics of development. Through his concept of “One Lagos,” Ambode has promoted inclusive governance as key to inclusive growth.  It is commendable that his administration’s inclusive governance and inclusive development efforts continue to drive development at the grassroots.

    A winning governor will attract endorsements that are justifiable.   So, it is logical and predictable that Ambode is enjoying an abundance of justifiable endorsements.  He is qualified to seek reelection and his endorsers are backing him for a second term in office. The beauty of the endorsements is that they are based on what he has to show for his time in office so far. In other words, he has attracted powerful endorsements through the power of his performance.

    The point is that Ambode represents forward-looking governance, which Lagos needs to develop.  Listed 12th among the world’s largest 35 cities in 2015 when Ambode became governor, the former federal capital is work in progress, and the development-related results of Ambode’s progressive efforts are unmistakable and applaudable.

    The range of Ambode’s vision leaves no room for underdevelopment in any area, whether it is lighting up the city, keeping the city clean, building homes, rebuilding roads, providing security, tackling transportation, building theatres and so on.

    It is noteworthy that Ambode, in his lecture, modestly acknowledged the work of specific previous governors. “First, the administration of Asiwaju Tinubu and then that of Babatunde Raji Fashola, moved the master plan from concept to concrete reality,” he noted, adding,  “My administration is both a beneficiary of their work as well as a continuance of that work. We strive to go further because we have the opportunity to build upon what they have done.” Now the state has developed to the point where the Ambode administration is talking about turning Lagos into a Smart City.

    It was appropriate that he mentioned some of his achievements as governor. He observed: “In every way, our infrastructure is improved.  Our roads are better, our mass transportation has expanded, hospitals give better care to the sick and afflicted, education is improving and more affordable housing is being constructed before our very eyes.”

    Remarkably, Ambode focused on the subject of inclusion in his convocation lecture.  He said: “Here, I offer Lagos State as an example of what is possible for all Nigeria and Nigerians when we practice the governance of inclusion instead of the old, malign ways of exclusion… You see, the inclusion I talk about is more than a pretty word to say; so that I sound like some type of enlightened politician.” He added:  ”Inclusion is a principle by which we put to constructive use the full industry and skills of the people; Rich and Poor, Old and Young, Men and Women, Boys and Girls. This results in greater individual and collective productivity…Inclusion is not only the moral thing to do, it is the smart thing as well.”

    It is testimony to Ambode’s quality governance that the country’s other states cannot resist applauding his governance model. He has shown that well-rounded governance is an expression of well-rounded thinking, and has demonstrated the possibilities of political governance in a country that needs models of creative thinking in high political office.

    Ambode’s convocation lecture also focused on the connection between inclusion and federalism. He argued:  ”It is my unyielding belief that the principle of inclusion which has served Lagos so well can be employed in other states with similar effect…However, for states to give optimal service to their citizens the principle of inclusion first needs to be applied to the division of power between the Federal and State governments.”

    His solution is based on his concept of inclusion: “There is widespread consensus that too much power sits in the centre. We can correct this imbalance by reallocating power and responsibilities between the States and Federal government by amending the list of exclusive and concurrent powers and duties of these governments to reflect current realities in the nation.” Hopefully, more political players will pay more attention to inclusion.

  • Dino’s trials

    Senator Dino Melaye (Kogi West) should be congratulated. The move to recall him ended anticlimactically.  Not only did the petitioners fail, the result of the verification of signatories to the recall petition by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) showed that the attempt was unpopular. INEC said only 18, 762 signatures were genuine, though there were 39, 285 signatories. INEC’s presiding officer for the verification, Prof. Okente Morthy of the University of Abuja, said the number of genuine signatures fell short of the number required.

    An April 30 report said: “The genuine signatories represent a dismal 5.34 per cent of the total signatories to the petition, which fell short of 51 per cent or 98,364 signatures required for the petition to sail through. It was observed that the verification failed largely due to fictitious and forged signatures and names of dead persons affixed to the recall petition by its promoters.”

    It is noteworthy that before the verification Senator Melaye had alleged that there were forged signatures in the recall petition.  Melaye had reportedly said through one of his legislative aides, Malam Abubakar Sadiq: “Let me also say authoritatively that here in Lokoja Local Government Council, several others whose names and signatures appeared on the list of the signatories to this failed exercise were identified and known to us as being dead long before now. Such people like late Abdullahi Abubakar, his immediate younger sister late Halima Lawal Abubakar and Ibrahim Adama of Unit Code 021, Adankolo Ring Road in Ward ‘A’, Lokoja Local Government Council.”

    Whether Melaye’s forgery claims were correct or incorrect, whether the petitioners were verifiable or unverifiable, there is a time to prove or disprove, and there is a lawful body in charge of verification. Now that INEC has exposed fictitious and forged signatures and names of dead persons in the recall petition, it is time to find out what happened.

    Some of Melaye’s constituents had submitted a petition to recall the senator to INEC’s headquarters in Abuja in June 2017.  A report said: “One Mr. Cornelius Olowo led the petitioners to submit the recall petition which alleged poor representation as one of the reasons for the move to recall Melaye.”

    It is interesting that Kogi State Chairman of All Progressives Congress (APC), Alhaji Haddy Ametuo, was quoted as saying that “some ghosts” initiated the recall process against Senator Melaye. So, the police should be looking for the “ghosts” in this plot, including ghost petitioners and ghost forgers.

    Talking of ghosts, Melaye acted in a drama that reminded the public of ghosts. There were no ghosts, but there could have been because of Melaye’s overdramatic performance.  What really happened? Police spokesman Jimoh Moshood, in a statement, said on April 24: “At about 1200Hrs of today Sen. Dino Melaye while in lawful custody of the Nigeria Police Force and being taken for arraignment in Federal High Court, Lokoja from Abuja, escaped from lawful custody when hoodlums and miscreants in two Toyota Hilux vehicles blocked the police vehicle conveying Senator Dino Melaye around Area 1 Roundabout, Abuja.”

    He added: “In the process, the senator jumped out of the police vehicle through the window and was rescued from the policemen by hoodlums and miscreants to an unknown destination. The Police team reinforced and trailed Senator Dino Melaye to Zankli Hospital, Abuja where he was re-arrested.”

    That is one version of what happened. Melaye’s Special Adviser Gideon Ayodele gave the public another version: “Contrary to online reports about jumping out of a moving police vehicle; Nothing could be farther from the truth as such insinuation is practically impossible for a man sandwiched between gun-wielding policemen. Today’s incident was a last resort by Senator Dino Melaye in order to foil attempt to kidnap him and kill him by agents of Kogi State governor in connivance with the police.”

    Did Melaye jump out of the police vehicle? If he did, such a move was unbecoming of a senator.    If he didn’t, what did he do?  Why did he need to get treatment at the private hospital?  After he was re-arrested at the Zankli Hospital, he was moved to the National Hospital, Abuja, where the police reportedly handcuffed him to a bed.

    Melaye had been declared wanted by the police after he allegedly ignored their invitation to answer allegations made against him by two suspected criminals, Kabiru Seidu, aka Osama, and Nuhu Salihu, aka Small.  Saidu and Salisu had allegedly confessed that they had worked as political thugs for Alhaji Mohammed Audu who allegedly invited them to Abuja, where they were introduced to Melaye in December 2017. They also allegedly confessed that Melaye had given them a bag containing one AK47 rifle, two Pump Action guns and N430, 000.

    These allegations against Melaye are weighty, and he should be trying to prove his innocence rather than allegedly trying to run away from the police.  The drama of his alleged attempt to escape from the police has not helped matters. Does he expect the public to believe his story that his life would be in danger if the police took him to Lokoja?  When will he stop being overdramatic?

    On May 5, the drama developed as a Kogi State High Court sitting in Lokoja ordered that Senator Melaye “be kept at the National Hospital, Abuja under the custody and close watch and supervision of the complainant, the Inspector General of Police.” The Chief Judge of Kogi State, Justice Nasir Ajanah, who gave the interim order, said the application for the bail, in the case, would be heard on May 7.

    It is noteworthy that Melaye had been remanded in police custody until June 11 by Mr. Sulyman Abdullah of the Lokoja Senior Magistrates’ Court before the order by Justice Ajanah.  The senator was arraigned along with Kabiru Seidu, aka Osama, and Nuhu Salihu, aka Small. They were charged with criminal conspiracy, illegal possession of firearms and illegal gun-running.

    It remains to be seen what will happen as the trial progresses. There is likely to be more drama and more stunts.

     

  • Adesanya: A time to remember

    Chief Abraham Adesanya’s 10th death anniversary is a time to remember and a time to reflect. The elder statesman and pro-democracy activist died at 85 on April 27, 2008.  It is fitting that a symposium on “Leadership and the future of Nigeria” to mark the remembrance will take place on May 2 at the MUSON Centre, Onikan, Lagos.  A statement by the chairman of the publicity committee, Prof Adebayo Williams, described Adesanya as “a great Nigerian nationalist, exemplary Yoruba patriot and leader, statesman, philosopher, moral avatar and illustrious chairman of the Afenifere and National Democratic Coalition (NADECO).”

    Interestingly, the remembrance will be spiced with a book of tributes    ”from the public as well as friends, associates, acquaintances, admirers, well-wishers and fellow travellers of Senator Abraham Adesanya.” These tributes to Adesanya are like pictures that capture not only his life and times but also significant parts of Nigeria’s political history in which he played historic roles.  When democratic rule was restored in 1999 after a 16-year period of military domination, there was no doubt that Adesanya was qualified to be named among the heroes of democracy.  He was a giant who made a gigantic contribution to the efforts that won the battle for democracy.

    Former Governor of Ogun State, Chief Olusegun Osoba, underlined the value of the book of tributes, saying, “The story of his life and the colour and fragrance of his politics are worth memorialising.” Osoba said in his tribute: “I am sure there are records of Chief Adesanya’s many speeches and writings on the subject of restructuring that can guide the honest scholar and politician on the way forward… I have lamented the dearth of published works on the political philosophies and experiences of our political leaders. I would have been happy to read first-hand while Chief Adesanya was alive some of his experiences in politics especially in the days of resistance to military rule when he led NADECO.” He added:  “It would have been thrilling to hear from him how he escaped the assassin’s bullets when his car was shot at in broad daylight in the dark days of Abacha dictatorship on January 14, 1997. What was his experience like in detention at Divisional Police Headquarters, Club Road, Ikoyi, and at the Police Medical Centre Bourdillon Road, Ikoyi? It would have been great to hear from him his encounters with Chief Olusegun Obasanjo whilst in office in the early days of the Fourth Republic.”

    Talking of how Adesanya survived a gun attack that defined his importance as a progressive combatant, Yinka Odumakin, National Publicity Secretary, Afenifere, told an interesting story in his tribute:  ”I once heard from him the story of native doctor in Ijebu-Igbo who used to call people to death. His modus operandi was pouring water in a calabash, placing a stick in the hands of a virgin girl. Once he calls the name of his victim and the head appears in the calabash, the girl will hit with the stick. The person died instantly.  But he got more than what he bargained for the day he was to practice his act on Abraham Adesanya .The girl was ready with his stick as the man called “Abraham Adesanya.” The virgin told him she could see two heads in the calabash, including the Babalawo’s, and asked which one to hit. He told her not to touch any! His escape from Abacha bullets earned him the sobriquet Apamaku (The one you kill that doesn’t die).”

     High-profile political player Asiwaju Bola Tinubu, in his tribute, gave an insight into one of his political battles that involved Adesanya: “Of course, we did not always agree on all issues. For instance, in the run-up to the 2003 election, Afenifere wanted the two dominant groups in the AD in Lagos State to share all elective positions on a 60:40 basis. The vast majority of rank and file party members, however, insisted on every interested party member testing their strength in free and fair party primaries. I had no choice but to go along with the decision of the majority in the interest of intra-party democracy and fairness. That decision, I believe, was one of the reasons why Lagos was the only state in the South West that the PDP was unable to capture in 2003. Even though, we did not go along with the position of Afenifere in that instance, Pa Adesanya did not hold it personally against me or the Lagos State leadership of the AD. He understood that it was a matter of principle.”

     Chief Emeka Anyaoku, Commonwealth Secretary-General (1990- 2000), said in his tribute: “Here, I would recall a personal anecdote of his powerful statement in defence of me in the Senate in 1983 when some members of the Senate Screening Committee, for questionable reasons, tried to mess me up during the Ministerial confirmation hearing that preceded my appointment by President Shagari as Nigeria’s Foreign Minister. Significantly, Senator Adesanya’s stout defence of me occurred even before he met me in person.”

    It is thought-provoking that this celebration of Adesanya, his ideas and ideals, is coming at a time when the meaning of progressivism has been corrupted and the definition of a progressive has been degraded.  What would Adesanya have thought of today’s self-defined progressives who pay lip service to the noble pursuit of progress?

    Adesanya played exemplary leadership roles in Afenifere and NADECO that should inspire the leaders of today. But the times have changed and things have changed. Afenifere, the Yoruba organisation that was known for its progressive essence, is essentially now a shadow of its former self. NADECO, the patriotic pro-democracy movement that was known for its punching power, was ironically a casualty of democracy and has failed to rise from the ashes.

    Ten years after Adesanya’s death, Nigeria is still grappling with the national question and structural issues.  Recollections of his life and times should inspire reflections on the nexus between progressive leadership and the progress of Nigeria. The ultimate tribute to the giant from Ijebu-Igbo is that his legacy is still relevant.

     

  • A game of money

    There is no doubt that Senate President Bukola Saraki is a rich political player. He further demonstrated his richness by playing a paymaster’s role in a recent case. With the 2019 general election approaching, the public should expect to see more of the things rich politicians do with their riches because they want power or because they want to remain in powerful positions.

    When Saraki reportedly paid 20 months’ unpaid salaries of 220 traditional rulers in his constituency, Kwara Central senatorial district, he showed that he had no qualms about using what he had to get what he wanted. The chiefs were mainly district heads from Ilorin East, Ilorin South and Asa Local Government Areas. A report said: “The affected local government councils could not meet their financial obligations to the traditional rulers because of the drastic shortfall in their allocation from the federation account.”

    Then Saraki provided N49.4m, which the affected traditional rulers received at a ceremony at the ABS Constituency Office in Ilorin, the Kwara State capital, on April 16. The Director- General, ABS Constituency Office, Alhaji Musa Abdullahi, said Saraki had set up a committee to resolve the non-payment of the salaries, and had acted on the committee’s recommendation ?to pay the unpaid salaries.

    Abdullahi was said to have advised the district heads “to continue to support the senate president to enable him attract more dividends of democracy to the state.”  This is the meat of the matter. Saraki wants to be seen as a good politician who wants to serve his constituents and make them happy. Of course, in return for what he does to make them happy, he expects them to continue to support him. Saraki’s gesture was not simple generosity. It was a move, a political manoeuvre. It was designed to achieve a design.

    Obviously, there are questions Saraki needs to answer: Where did the money come from? Was it money from his pockets?  The answers to these important questions cannot be left to speculation. Saraki’s answers will lead to further questions, no doubt. This is because a question may be answered and an answer may be questioned. In the end, there may be more questions than answers.

    Now that Saraki has become a paymaster of sorts, it is a sign that he may take on other opportunistic roles towards realising his political ambition in 2019. For politicians looking for ways to manipulate their constituents, Saraki’s latest game is something to consider and perhaps emulate. It all adds to the pre-election entertainment.

    But Saraki’s entertainment is not entertaining. It is a grave matter when a rich politician takes over the responsibility of local government councils. The point is that a politician is a politician and a local government council is a local government council.  How long will Saraki pay the traditional rulers on behalf of the local government councils?

    It is noteworthy that two years ago, Saraki’s riches were a subject of public interest as he faced trial for alleged false assets declaration before the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT), Abjua.  Saraki’s lawyer at the time, Paul Erokoro (SAN), had reportedly described him as “extremely rich,” and had argued that Saraki didn’t need to become Kwara State governor in 2003 to make mega money. He was already rolling in money by the time he became a governor, his lawyer had stressed.

    It is thought-provoking that Erokoro, based on the asset declaration form Saraki submitted to the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) in 2003, reportedly “said he needed to point out that his client was very rich before he became Kwara State governor to erase the wrong impression created by the prosecution that, he could not have acquired the property he claimed to have, without obtaining loans from banks.”

    The lawyer reportedly said that Saraki “had $22 million US dollars, about 12 million pounds, 2.6m Euro and about N4 billion in cash in his various accounts.” Apart from “the liquid asset,” it was stated: “Saraki said he also possessed landed property estimated at N2 billion and 15 vehicles valued at about N263.4m.”

    The report continued: “He gave details of the vehicles he acquired as at 2003 to include: Mercedes X320, valued at N16m; Mercedes X500 worth N20m; Mercedes G500, valued at N6m; Mercedes V220 worth 2m and Ferrari456GT, valued at N25m.”

    Others are: “Navigator, N15m; MN240 worth N8.5m; Peugeot 406, valued at N2.9m; Mercedes CLK 320 worth N9m; Mercedes E320 valued at N11m; Mercedes G500 bullet proof, worth N45m; Mercedes X500; Lexus jeep bullet proof, valued at N30m and Lincoln Navigator bullet proof worth N25m.”

    The report added: “The lawyer was however silent on the source of his client’s wealth and how he came about all the property and cash he claimed to have possessed before he became governor in 2003.”

    Silence will not answer loud questions. Saraki’s N49.4m payment to traditional rulers has made the question louder: How did Saraki become so rich?

    According to a biographical source, Saraki, 55, “attended King’s College, Lagos from 1973 to 1978, and Cheltenham College, Cheltenham, London, from 1979 to 1981 for his Higher School Certificate. He then studied at the London Hospital Medical College of the University of London, from 1982 to 1987, where he obtained his M.B.B.S (London). He worked as a medical officer at Rush Green Hospital, Essex, from 1988 to 1989. He was a director of Societe Generale Bank (Nig) Ltd   from 1990 to 2000.”

    Further information: “In 2000, President Olusegun Obasanjo appointed Saraki as Special Assistant to the President on Budget…In 2003, he ran for the office of governor of Kwara State on the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), and won… He ran again for re-election in 2007 and won. He was first elected to the Senate in April 2011, representing the Kwara Central senatorial district, and re-elected in the March 2015 elections… After his re-election in the 2015, Saraki was on June 9, 2015 elected unopposed as President of the Senate by an alliance across party lines involving PDP and APC Senators.”

    The question is: At what point did Saraki make the kind of money that made him rich enough to pay unpaid N49.4m salaries to traditional rulers in his constituency?

     

  • Ambode: Power of performance

    A winning governor will attract endorsements that are justifiable.   So, it is logical and predictable that Lagos State Governor Akinwunmi Ambode is enjoying an abundance of justifiable endorsements.  He is qualified to seek reelection and his endorsers are backing him for a second term in office. The beauty of the endorsements is that they are based on what he has to show for his time in office so far. In other words, he has attracted powerful endorsements through the power of his performance.

    The three lawmakers representing Lagos State in the Senate – Gbenga Ashafa (Lagos East), Oluremi Tinubu (Lagos Central) and Solomon Olamilekan (Lagos West) – said in a letter of endorsement: “We particularly are proud of the infrastructure development that you have brought to the entire state in general and to our districts in particular. Your smart solutions in tackling the traffic and security challenges that initially faced your administration have become template for other states to copy. Also, your strategic partnerships with Kebbi and Kano States have thrown more light to the capacity of Lagos State and the creative manager of man and resources which you are. We must also mention that through the course of the period which our country battled with an economic recession, you made sure that Lagos State remained well above the curve.”

    Similarly, members of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in the House of Representatives from Lagos State endorsed Ambode for a second term in office. They also presented a letter to him, asking him to seek reelection. The Majority Leader, Femi Gbajabiamila, who led the caucus, was quoted as saying:  “Because of the giant strides of our amiable Governor, Mr. Akinwunmi Ambode in the last two and a half years in governing the State; because of the things he has done across the board, across all the Local Government Areas, across different sectors, we sat together and we decided without a dissenting voice to seek his audience and endorse him for re-election in 2019 as the Governor of Lagos State.”

    Also, the chairmen of the 20 Local Government Areas and 37 Local Council Development Areas (LCDAs) of Lagos State endorsed Ambode for a second term in office. The Chairman of Conference of LGs and LCDAs in the state, Omolola Essien, who is also the Chairman of Lagos Mainland Local Government, said: “Our decision to support him for another term in office is based on the fact that he has performed extremely well; we can all see that everything that he has done in Lagos State, no other state has been able to do that. He has done very well.”

    It is noteworthy that Ambode’s endorsers are not only APC members who want their party man to continue in office. Various other groups and individuals want Ambode to seek reelection.  For example, on April 11, the National Union of Lagos State Students (NULASS) held a rally to support Ambode for a second term in office. Another example: Traditional rulers in Lagos State of Ijebu extraction have unanimously endorsed him. The traditional rulers are from Epe, Eredo, Agbowa-Ikosin, Ikorodu and Ibeju-Lekki.

    The point is that Ambode represents forward-looking governance, which Lagos needs to develop.  Listed 12th among the world’s largest 35 cities in 2015 when Ambode became governor, the former federal capital is work in progress, and the development-related results of Ambode’s progressive efforts are unmistakable and applaudable.

    The range of Ambode’s vision leaves no room for underdevelopment in any area, whether it is lighting up the city, keeping the city clean, building homes, rebuilding roads, providing security, tackling transportation, building theatres and so on.

    Interestingly, last year, Ambode published his “random thoughts” in a thought-provoking newspaper article in which he said:  “I am sharing my thoughts in this article, not necessarily as the Governor of Lagos State but as a Nigerian; a Nigerian who wants to see progress and sustainable growth in our country. I have been lucky to be administering over a state that has been put on the right track by my two predecessors, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu and Babatunde Raji Fashola (SAN). I do not think I have done anything special except to bring my own style of leadership, my own experience and my vision. Lagos, as it is, has not reached its peak but we can see signs of progress and positive transition to the Lagos of our dreams. What bothers me personally is that I do not see the same level of progress elsewhere in the country. I am not happy that most states in our country are not advancing like Lagos.”

    Through his concept of “One Lagos,” Ambode has promoted inclusive governance as key to inclusive growth.  It is commendable that his administration’s inclusive governance and inclusive development efforts continue to drive development at the grassroots.

    He continues to work for good governance, but recognises that development takes time. “It will take time but I believe in the philosophy of Think It, Plan It and then Act It…We must and are expected to think through all our policies properly and to the end before planning and executing. The difference between the thinking time, planning time, the execution time and the action time demanded by the populace is what makes people cry out,” he reasoned in his article.

    Ambode is impressively focused on remodelling Lagos and making it a model megalopolis. It is a tribute to Ambode’s quality governance that the country’s other states cannot resist applauding his governance model. He has shown that well-rounded governance is an expression of well-rounded thinking, and has demonstrated the possibilities of political governance in a country that needs models of creative thinking in high political office.

    As the 2019 elections approach, it is foreseeable that Ambode will enjoy more endorsements. Any objective measurement of his first-term performance cannot deny that his administration has had a significant impact on the development of Lagos State. There is no doubt that Ambode has done enough to earn a second term in office.

  • Adesanya: Celebrating a giant

    Eleven years before his departure, Abraham Adesanya survived a gun attack that defined his importance as a progressive combatant. He was nearly 75 at the time.  Here, a picture of what happened: “On 14 January 1997, his uncompromising stance to the military misrule led to an attempt on his life at the behest of the then head of state, General Sanni Abacha. Adesanya had just left his law chambers on the fateful day sitting at the back of his car when an unknown team of assailants (later unveiled to be General Sanni Abacha’s killer squad) struck. The front and back screens of his Mercedes Benz car were shattered and the car seats perforated by bullets from the assailants’ guns but he escaped unhurt with his driver. The car was later transferred to a Lagos museum.”

    It was a dangerous time to be a pro-democracy fighter. Many of those who resisted the incumbent military dictator fled overseas and fought from there. Adesanya stayed in the country and weathered the storm. It was testimony to his courage and conviction. When democratic rule was restored in 1999 after a 16-year period of military domination, there was no doubt that Adesanya was qualified to be named among the heroes of democracy.

    It is good news that this year, a decade after his death in April 2008 at the age of 85, Adesanya will be celebrated as a giant who made a gigantic contribution to the efforts that won the battle for democracy.   The Publicity Committee promoting the Abraham Adesanya 10th Anniversary has announced that there will be “a series of events to mark the 10th anniversary of the translation to higher glory of the great Nigerian nationalist, exemplary Yoruba patriot and leader, statesman, philosopher, moral avatar and illustrious chairman of the Afenifere and National Democratic Coalition (NADECO), Senator Abraham Adesanya.”  The chairman of the committee, Prof Adebayo Williams, was quoted as saying that the celebration in May will feature a lecture on the state of the nation, the launching of a book of tributes and a memorial service.

    A statement said:”The publicity committee wishes to seize this opportunity to invite contributions to the book of tributes from the public as well as friends, associates, acquaintances, admirers, well-wishers and fellow travellers of Senator Abraham Adesanya. The contributions are to include but are not limited to the following: scholarly expositions, reminiscences, tributes, eulogies, poetry, memorabilia and rare pictures and other exotica. The contributions, which should not be less than 500 words but not more than 1,000 words, are expected to reach the committee not later than February 15.”

    It is thought-provoking that this celebration of Adesanya, his ideas and ideals, is coming at a time when the meaning of progressivism has been corrupted and the definition of a progressive has been degraded.  What would Adesanya have thought of today’s self-defined progressives who pay lip service to the noble pursuit of progress?

    Williams recalled:  “During his lifetime, the late Abraham Adesanya bestrode the Nigerian political scene like a colossus. He was a giant among giants…He was as principled as he was fanatically devoted to the fundamental tenets of progressive politics, often putting his life on the line in defence of these sacred ideals. For him, the unprincipled and amoral political life is not a life worth living, no matter the wealth and fame accruing…Fearless and unrelenting as a leader, forthright and uncompromising as a follower, you always knew where you stood with the late titan. Adesanya was a man totally without cant or seedy equivocations.”

    Adesanya played exemplary leadership roles in Afenifere and NADECO that should inspire the leaders of today. But the times have changed and things have changed. Afenifere, the Yoruba organisation that was known for its progressive essence, is essentially now a shadow of its former self. NADECO, the patriotic pro-democracy movement that was known for its punching power, was ironically a casualty of democracy and has failed to rise from the ashes.

    Adesanya studied Law in the UK at Holborn College of Law. On his return to Nigeria in 1959, he joined the Action Group led by Chief Obafemi Awolowo, the progressive star who continues to shine decades after his death in 1987. Adesanya’s choice of a progressive political circle showed where he stood on the question of political progress.  It is a reflection of his capacity that “The same year, he was nominated and eventually elected to the defunct Western House of Assembly to represent Ijebu Igbo constituency in the 12 December 1959 House of Representatives Election.” He later became a senator in the Second Republic as a member of the Unity Party of Nigeria, which was an evolutionary extension of the Action Group.

    It is noteworthy that he showed a commendable consistency in his political trajectory, which is sadly missing in many political careers today with fair-weather politicians switching parties without a sense of consistency and a sense of what is honourable.

    When he achieved recognition as “Asiwaju of Yorubaland,” following the exits of Awolowo and Chief Adekunle Ajasin,  Adesanya’ s political voice became louder, more influential and deserving of greater attention. This information gives an insight into Adesanya’s performance on the big stage:    “Later, Adesanya under the auspices of Afenifere and the Yoruba Council of Elders, alongside others led a congress of Yoruba elder statesmen through a congress that rose to pronounce that the convocation of a constitutional conference, where new confederating terms would be determined for the country, was inevitable for the good of Nigerians.”

    Ten years after his death, Nigeria is still grappling with the national question and structural issues. The celebration of his life and times at this period should further promote the need to reimagine the country. It is expected that important political players will use the occasion of this anniversary to say positive things about Adesanya because he was indeed a positive factor in the country’s political progression. He has been immortalised in various ways, particularly in the Southwest, but the lessons of his life are of national significance.

    It is a tribute to the giant from Ijebu-Igbo that he is still remembered and respected for the progressive path he trod.

     

    • This piece was first published on January 8, 2018. It is reproduced to highlight the 10th anniversary of Chief Abraham Adesanya’s death on April 27, 2008.