The Nation Newspaper

Category: Monday

  • Borrowed robe

    Borrowed robe

    If I were Abiodun Faleke, I would head straight to the court. Now that the APC has finally won the guber poll in Kogi State, what shall we say is the contribution of Yahaya Bello to the mere 7,000 votes cast last weekend for his party? Shall we say he contributed merely 7,000?

    The INEC says the APC attracted 6,885 votes, while the PDP garnered 5,363 votes. I am not a mathematician, but in my naivety with numbers, it is clear that INEC has shown it knows neither maths nor common sense in Kogi State. If maths mattered to the INEC, its vice chancellor resident electoral officer should have declared the election conclusive.

    Maths does not matter to the umpire here. Neither does philosophy or morality. It is either that INEC was morally compromised or mathematically naïve. Neither is excusable.

    We will get to that point. But we must lift two critical fogs. One, how do we define number of registered voters? Some have argued that INEC was right to put off the election because the number of registered voters was about 49,000. That dwarfs the about 40,000 votes with which the Audu/Faleke ticket nudges out the Wada opponent. Therefore, it was only naturally right to order a supplementary poll.

    But then we come to the question of PVC. Why has INEC not stated the number of PVC issued for this election? The argument that only the number of registered voters matters invalidates the PVCs. But if it is only with the PVCs we can determine a legal vote, then the PVC registration amounts to the authentic source of the number of registered voters.

    Elections do not soar in the abstract. They are about people. They are about election campaigners who woo. They are about the voters who absorb agendas and decide with their ballots. In this dispensation, it is folly to refer to the old registered voters’ list when the PVCs are the ones that matter. If PVCs are not the authentic registered voters, then they are illegal. But since we have elected the president, governors, senators and house reps on PVCs, they are the bona fide documents of the vote.

    If we go by that impregnable premise, then it was obvious that the PVCs were less than the 40,000 margin of the Audu/ Faleke ticket victory over Governor Wada. That makes the election conclusive and the supplementary poll superfluous. It was not only superfluous, it amounted to a big act of mischief, a disservice to the majesty of democracy and a violation of the principle of natural justice. That makes Bello a superflous candidate.

    It is a shame that a party like the APC that prides itself on the change mantra can scoop out the worms of injustice already familiar to us. The worms of impunity. The worms of highhandedness. The worms of manipulation.

    The other point refers to the constitution. If the constitution says a governor-elect will, at death, surrender to the deputy governor-elect, it implies that if the election was conclusive, Faleke automatically becomes the governor-elect.

    This is an issue because some people do not want Faleke to be governor. It is not because they love the law. It is not because they want what they call party supremacy. It is simply because the presidency has decided to play the game of the aloof tyrant. The presidency acts as though not interested, but it has poured poison in the pool.

    The party chairman, Chief John Odigie-Oyegun, has shown himself a disgrace to the concept of leadership. In the Bayelsa APC primary, he also turned the contest into a farce of insular interests. He projected his selfish motives onto the grand stage of party principle. He was defeated by the simple logic of internal democracy he railed against.

    He needs to immerse himself in the literature of political shepherds, those who turned parties into arrowheads of social transformation. He is not alone, though, in this game of putrescence. The INEC will still have to explain itself to the court.

    It has been reported that President Buhari did not want Audu as governor, and that explains why he did not go to Kogi to campaign for the ticket. So, the death of the APC candidate was a sort of morbid relief for Aso Rock. They did not want him dead. But how could they mourn whom they did not love? How could they shed tears for whom they did not want there, on the throne? So, as they would say privately, they did not kill him, providence did. That means providence had opened an avenue. It has compelled them to act now that the big elephant has fallen.

    They decided to pick a candidate, who worked against the party. Yahaya Bello suddenly is benefiting from a fight in which he did not deliver a blow.

    This is worse than even the providence of Jonathan. At least, the Otuoke man staked his powers in the election with Yar’adua. In this case, Bello was on the other side. They corralled him into favour. The presidency is rewarding the disgruntled, inspiring the rebel, saluting the ingrate, fanning the flames of the flouter of the principle of esprit de corps. With its hierarchy, it has applauded impunity.

    It is an opportunistic logic shown here. It wanted the party to stay off in the Saraki matter. Now, we want party supremacy and the presidency is suddenly interested. Faleke comes from the Okun part and he is a Christian. Some in the party hierarchy believe this to be a double jeopardy. Was that not the case with Jonathan?

    Did Nigerians not embrace him until he fell far short of his pious promise? Why is the microcosm defying the larger canvas? On Kogi, we are highlighting the politics of hubris in the worship of the idols of tribes and faith.

    Bello is, however, a true Nigerian. We love to reap where we did not sow, and later go to God and thank him for a miracle. There are many miracles celebrated in mosques and churches that the devil blames God for. Satan makes it happen, and God is given the credit. Lucifer must be very patient. Well, maybe the father of demons may even like it, and allow us the illusion of righteous reward. By attributing our dubious success to God, we continue in the path of flamboyant folly.

    The Kogi State imbroglio was created by law and it will be resolved by law. Until the courts pronounce, let us keep mum. Bello may live for now in the borrowed robe of governor.

    [news_box style=”2″ display=”category” link_target=”_blank” category=”24″ count=”10″ show_more=”on” show_more_type=”link” header_background=”#eaeaea” header_text_color=”#8e461c”]

  • Terrorism prosperity

    Certain developments in the country show that official terrorists don’t have a monopoly on terrorism. Evidently, the power of terrorism can encourage power terrorism. People in power can do things that make them no better than terrorists.

    It is unclear to what extent the extension of the anti-terror war was due to fraud-related factors. The multi-billion arms scam in the news is not exactly a revelation although it may have revelatory qualities. It was an open secret in the Goodluck Jonathan presidential era that people in power ironically fuelled the Boko Haram insurgency by fraudulent acts. The anti-terror war became a pro-terror effort because of the weakening of state-capacity by government officials expected to win the war.

    When politically powerful people help to create an enabling environment for terrorists, it is the ultimate tribute to terrorism. It is tragic that the role of former National Security Adviser Sambo Dasuki in the unfolding picture of official corruption in the country’s terror fight under Jonathan cannot be described as a war-winning effort. Dasuki was a counterproductive terror fighter whose failure has been compounded by his linkage with fraud-related factors that made nonsense of the anti-terror campaign.

    With Dasuki’s December 1 arrest by the Department of State Services (DSS) and his grilling by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), the stage is set for unmasking political actors who aided terrorism by terror-friendly acts of corruption. A report quoted an EFFC source: “Our investigators have isolated these areas of probe: Were the funds budgeted for? If not, what informed extra-budgetary expenses? How much was actually voted for arms procurement? How were the funds sourced? Who or which agency awarded all the contracts? Who were the contractors? Was there any evidence of delivery of equipment?”

    Terrorism benefited from the corruption of the anti-terror war.  Corruption benefited too.  Diversion of funds for fighting terror meant a prolongation of the battle and a perpetuation of fund diversion.

    When anti-terrorism is not necessarily anti-corruption, there are consequences even outside the theatre of war.  It is now clear that organising fundraisers for the sake of the country’s Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs), who are victims of terrorism, might be easy; but it is so damn difficult for funds raised to reach the targets. This is the puzzling picture painted by no less a person than the Chairman of the Northern Traditional Rulers’ Council and Sultan of Sokoto, Alhaji Sa’ad Abubakar III.

    At the opening of the Council’s second General Assembly in Kaduna on November 23, the Sultan said: “When we go into closed session, we will discuss that thorny issue of displaced persons, mostly in the Northeast. It is a very sad situation; people are suffering. Billions and billions of naira have been collected or put aside for their welfare, but what we hear every day and what we see on the pages of newspapers is very bad. It is important that this money be disbursed immediately via the governors.”

    Sultan Abubakar continued: “The billions of naira collected must be utilised now because, when somebody dies, he does not need anything again except prayers. So, since they are still alive, let’s feel for the IDPs; they are our brothers and sisters. We must feel for them; we cannot live a luxury life when our brothers and sisters are suffering. We do not sleep very well when we see things like that.”

    He should be commended not only for speaking truth to power, but also for demonstrating that traditional rulers can play a constructive role in a democratic context. In conclusion, the Sultan said: “So, please, we want the governors to take the issue more seriously; take it up with Mr. President and ensure the release of the funds because I was part of the team when this money was collected for the IDPs during the last government. They should find out where that money is and disburse it immediately.”

    In a communiqué issued at the end of their meeting, the traditional rulers jointly highlighted Sultan Abubakar’s concern: “In view of the hardships being faced by Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) in the North East with about two million of them in Maiduguri alone, the Assembly calls on the Federal Government to disburse the Billions of Naira raised in support of IDPs and other victims of insurgency to bring succour to them with a view to resettling them back to their homes.”

    To put it as mildly as possible, it is scandalous that this is happening concerning people who are not only displaced, but also distressed, particularly considering that they may be described as innocent victims.

    It is noteworthy that recent statistics by the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) put the IDP population in the country’s Northeast at 2.2 million. According to UNHCR’s Representative to Nigeria, Ms Angele Dikongue-Atangana, who gave the figures at its yearly stakeholders’ briefing in Abuja on November 19, “the number is increasing specifically because regaining control of the territory by the military opened further access for the humanitarian officials so they can count many more IDPs, be they old IDPs or very recent ones.” To a large extent, the IDPs in question are products of acts of terrorism by the Islamist guerilla force Boko Haram, which has tormented the country since 2009.

    It is terroristic that these victims of terrorism are being denied the benefits of funds gathered for the purpose of humanitarian support.  Those responsible for this situation are no better than those who enriched their private pockets with public funds for fighting terror. Corrupt conduct that tended to prolong terrorism and probable corrupt conduct that has prolonged terrorism-driven pains are discernible minuses. From the look of things, looking for an answer to the question of the IDPs’ rehabilitation fund may necessitate a probe.

    Terrorism has exposed power terrorists. If Jonathan had achieved his reelection ambition, it would have given corrupt people in power more time to make more money from the anti-terrorism war.  Also, it would have inspired more fundraising events to make more money for exploiters from the plight of displaced persons.

    It would require suspension of disbelief to believe these narratives of terrorism in the corridor of power. Believe it or not, terrorism pays terrifically.

  • Minimum wage debacle

    The kite flown by state governors on their inability to pay the national minimum wage may soon snowball into an unprecedented labour crisis. A fortnight ago, the governors had after their meeting, announced they could no longer pay the N18, 000 minimum wage regime that has been in force since 2011. They called for a downward review or alternatively they will have to reduce their workforce.

    They contended that the poor state of the nation’s economy and the sharp drop in the price of oil from $126 to $41 per barrel had rendered the wage regime unrealistic. Expectedly, the idea attracted a barrage of negative reactions especially from the NLC which blamed the governors for mismanaging the affairs of their states only to turn round and find scapegoat in the suffering workers.

    But a lone voice came from Edo State where, Adams Oshiomhole dissociated himself from the retrogressive proposal by his colleagues. He had argued that the subsisting minimum wage regime was a product of elaborate agreement between labour and the various governments and was not imposed on the governors. In view of this, Oshiomhole said the issue was already time barred.

    Oshiomohle was living up to his bidding as a former president of the NLC. He could not understand why his colleagues should, five years after and in the face of very excruciating economic circumstances, contemplate a downward review of the minimum wage. Given this background, it would have been inconceivable for the Edo State governor not to align on the side of the workers. If his position is prompted by the desire to gain cheap popularity, so be it. Even then, he has support from the Rivers State governor, Nyesom Wike.

    No doubt, the biting living conditions and spiralling inflation have added up to take the shine off the real value of the N18, 000 pay. As the governors spoke, the naira had fallen to an all time low making it nigh impossible for the average worker to eke a living under the subsisting minimum wage regime. A further reduction would have amounted to consigning them to their early grave.

    But as the dust raised by the governors’ ill-advised position is yet to settle, the NLC has come up with a fresh position on the matter. This time, it is seeking an upward review on the grounds that the timeframe for the extant wage regime has elapsed. Its’ president, Ayuba Wabba said a new minimum wage will soon be presented to the government for approval.

    He accused the governors of floating the reduction idea as a deliberate ploy to frustrate the demand for upward review which is now due. But the governors have come out again to insist the wage regime will have to be reduced or they would trim their workforce. Chairman of their forum, Abdulaziz Yari of Zamfara State restated this after a meeting with President Buhari.  As things stand, we may be heading for a standoff with organized labour. The equation is now looking complex given the new angles introduced by the NLC and Yari.

    Both sides are tenaciously holding on to their positions with varying degrees of merit. The NLC cannot be faulted in its strident opposition to either a reduction of the minimum wage or pruning down the workforce. The challenges of survival currently faced by workers coupled with a high unemployment rate make each of those options very scary. This is even aggravated by the fact that our governors are not known to be prudent managers of public funds. Acceding to those options would amount to holding the workers responsible for the inefficiencies of their leaders.

    The governors are also not entirely out of order when they cite the parlous state of the economy following the sharp drop in federal allocations as part of the reasons for their inability to pay. Many of them owe workers arrears of salaries and pensions running into 10 months or more. Of late, the federal government had to bail them out even as the situation has not substantially altered.

    We are here confronted with a challenging decision issue that comes with three options. The first option is to have the minimum wage regime reduced or alternatively lay off workers. The second, as thrown up by the NLC, is to review the wage upwards. There is also a third possibility nay, a compromise position to maintain the status quo.

    Decision theorists are concerned with the rational option presented by the situation given the conflicting positions of the two parties. Of interest is that choice that will best protect the overall interests of workers given the above circumstance. The challenge is to situate the workers within the three game matrixes and determine how best they would fare in each of the situations.

    If salaries are reviewed downwards, they will suffer seriously given that even with the current regime they can hardly meet their basic needs. This option will not help matters. Neither will its concomitant of layoffs in the face of a high unemployment rate. The second option of an upward salary review as canvassed by the NLC also comes with serious problems. For now, the governors are unable to pay the current regime as is evident in the mounting arrears of salaries and pensions. To further increase wages under this situation will amount to adding salt to injury. This presents a remote possibility.

    That is where the third option comes into play. This option instructs that the current wage regime should remain as it is. Its corollary is to bury any idea lay off. That is the most rational thing to do. There is no point increasing salaries when the governors are unable to pay their workers. But they must find ways of not only paying the subsisting salaries but retaining the present workforce. That is the challenge before them. Those who find themselves unable to manage the current situation can as well throw in the towel.

    Given the lifestyles of some of them; their penchant for ostentation and unbridled appetite for material acquisition, there is little doubt they can do better if they exercise more discretion in the management of resources.

    They need to show by example and not precept the reality of the hard economic situation by cutting down on areas of wastage. In some of the states, the embarrassing flamboyance of the governors, the number of cars in their convoy and properties owned by them and members of the families which are of public knowledge, make a mockery of any idea of cutting down what is paid to the worker.

    Last week, Cross River State governor, Ben Ayade announced the appointment of about 28 commissioners. A perusal of the list showed obvious duplication of ministries. At a time the governors are claiming inability to pay the minimum wage, 28 commissioners for a state are rather over bloated.

    There is also the case of Imo State, where the governor has not considered it fit to constitute a cabinet. He prefers running the state through task forces. Yet workers last week grounded activities in the state protesting non-payment of salaries running into several months. These instances underscore the point that other options abound if the governors realistically seek to get out of their seeming financial predicament.

    The minimum wage debacle brings to the fore the imperative of creativity and imagination in exploring alternative revenue sources without overburdening the masses through sundry extortionist task forces. It also reinforces the inevitability of restructuring the over-centralized federal order. Maybe that restructuring will commence with the current dilemma over minimum wage payment by state governments.

  • Audu’s ghost

    Audu’s ghost

    Abubakar Audu is dead. Scratch that. Abubakar Audu is not dead. The fellow with an aristocratic bearing sits astride in Kogi. He is not buried. He is not quiet. His spirit, like that of Shakespeare’s Banquo or Hamlet, is walking the night of Kogi politics.

    Like novelist Mark Twain noted, stories of his death have been greatly exaggerated. It has roared out of the decision of INEC to call the election inconclusive. It snorts in the APC’s order to foist Yahaya Bello on the ticket. In the fulmination of Audu’s ethnic loyalists. In Abiodun Faleke’s rage at being wronged. In the fiery pros and cons of lawyers.

    “Oh dead who have always refused to die,” lamented Leopold Senghor in one of his poems on his ancestors. Audu will not sleep. He will howl and rage until justice is done in Kogi State.

    It all began when the umpire missed its step. It declared the election inconclusive based on the voter’s register of 49,000 persons. This must be an INEC without memory. In their last round of elections, did we base the process on registered voters or PVC voters? The resident electoral officer knew the PVCs were far fewer than registered voters. The difference between Audu/Faleke ticket and Governor Wada was about 40,000 votes.

    On the average across the country, the PVCs were far less than 70 per cent of the registered voters. INEC has not denied reports that the 91 remaining units account for about 25,000 PVCs. That makes the election conclusive and a victory to Audu/Faleke ticket. And on account of Audu’s death, we should have shed tears for Audu and shed the state of crisis. Faleke would be governor-elect, and we will be looking forward to Bayelsa State where the imperial, baton-wielding policeman Governor Seriake Dickson is sweating over the bulala of defeat that awaits him December 5.

    So, why did he declare the election inconclusive without disclosing the PVC facts? The returning officer was no illiterate but a professor and vice chancellor? What kind of vice chancellor would show such a lag in logic and imbecility on the public space? The whole hoopla in town now would have been averted if he just did a scintilla of research.

    The word quagmire has haunted the process. INEC did not ease tension by asking the APC to substitute Audu and fixing December 5 for a supplementary election. It has bad legal advisers, so did the APC brass. INEC wanted to quickly get out of the morass. No law tells us how to substitute when more than 80 per cent of the election has happened. If the party is to substitute, the party must conform to the law. And the law says that a 21-day notice must go to INEC before primary. But the election will hold only December 5. Even at that, it applies only to elections that have not taken place. Here, only 91 units are left. The election has been concluded. INEC has no power to cancel it because the constitution gives only two conditions to cancel an election. That is, when there is violence and over-voting. None of these conditions apply.

    If the APC makes Bello its candidate, it will fall into the hands of the PDP because Bello did not abide by the rules of 21-day notice. They will invalidate his victory. He might have been second in the primary, but he was not part of the election. The APC is overthrowing the principle of justice by bypassing Faleke. Audu chose him as deputy. The principle of the constitution allows the deputy to take over in case the governor candidate cannot continue either by reason of death or any other kind of incapacity before the election, as governor-elect and governor. The unlegislated period was about 24 to 48 hours before the declaration of result. That lapse in concentration by the law drafters precipitated the crisis.

    Otherwise, the deputy is successor. The law always asks the deputy to take over to affirm the unity of the ticket. If Audu won the primary, the law empowered him to pick a successor. And if the law asks him to pick his deputy before and after the election, it means the constitution has moved the ticket beyond the primary. Once one leaves, the next fills in. It is a simple principle of justice. That explains why the deputy campaigns with the governor candidate as a joint proprietor. But the law omitted the election time. Hence Edmund Burke quipped that “bad laws are the worst sort of tyranny.” And Henry Thoreau said, “the law never made anyone a whit more just.”

    When the law fails, we call for justice. But lawyers often forget that the law was made for justice and not for egos. Hence they play strict constructionist, when convenient, by seeking the letter of the law and not the spirit. They forget the intention of justice rather than the vanity of the written text.

    If the party ought to pick the candidate, the party must abide by law and justice. If Faleke was a part of the elections so far, some have argued that it does not matter because the law recognises not candidate but parties. The law here contradicts itself. It cannot give rights and roles for candidates and subsume them conveniently under the party banner. The law that asks deputies to succeed the leader cannot wipe out the candidate. The contradiction can only be resolved when the candidates negotiate with the party towards a resolution. While it still poses a conundrum, the constitution clearly shows that the candidate matters. The Amaechi example is sometimes interpreted out of context.

    But the matter will eventually be resolved in court. It will decide that the election was conclusive and Faleke should have been declared governor.

    Part of the problem lies in the Jonathan syndrome. Faleke comes from what they call the Okun in Kogi as against the Igala. Jonathan’s succession to Yar-adua was resisted because he was no Hausa-Fulani. The Otueke shoeless man gained nationwide sympathy and hence he became president. We have a miniature play of that politics in Kogi. Justice is the victim. But just as Bob Enyart noted, “It is not a justice system. It is just a system.”

    [news_box style=”2″ display=”category” link_target=”_blank” category=”24″ orderby=”random” count=”8″ show_more=”on” show_more_type=”link” header_background=”#ad8a00″]

  • PMB and MEGAPHONE

    PMB and MEGAPHONE

    President Muhammadu Buhari said in Teheran that some of the stolen loot have returned to our treasury. Two things were wrong with this. One, he is in the habit of playing megaphone outside the country. His lips are sealed at home.

    Abroad, he becomes announcer in chief. He is president of Nigeria, not diaspora. Does he love the outside world more than where he has legitimacy? We learnt abroad of ministers as noise makers, that he would give priority to those who voted for him, that we are broke. What shall we learn at home?

    Second, I thought we ought to know through what process the looters are returning the loot. This is a democracy, and we have the right to know the looters. Is it not the courts that should bargain with these people? How much have they paid? We have a right to know because it is our patrimony. This is not a monarchy. The rule of law is the best way to handle corruption.

    [news_box style=”3″ display=”category” link_target=”_blank” category=”24″ orderby=”popular” count=”10″ show_more=”on”]

  • Buhari’s Teheran sermon

    President Buhari’s recent visit to Iran, in more ways than one, marked a substantial departure from his previous foreign outings. Not only were the issues he raised during the trip very clearly contextualized, they were largely devoid of the usual controversy that dogged his earlier foreign trips.

    Those visits saw his media team sweating profusely to clarify ambiguities or possible sources of misinterpretation of what their principal actually said. His visit to the United States of America shortly after he was sworn in stands out very distinctly in this regard.

    During that visit, Buhari’s response to reporters’ question on how he intended to treat those who did not vote for him, in which he said those who gave him 95 per cent votes cannot in all honesty be treated on the same issues with those that gave him five per cent had generated intense misgivings. So also was his prepared speech at the United States Institute of Peace in which he said “Unwittingly and I dare say, unintentionally the application of the Leahy law amendment by the US government has aided and abetted the Boko Haram terrorist group…”

    He was severely criticized on the first for inappropriateness in admitting at such a gathering he would discriminate against the areas he got little votes. And on the second, he found himself mired in unmitigated conceptual error for stating that the Leahy law was aiding and abetting the Boko Haram insurgency.

    The fact is that the Leahy Law does not in any way aid and abet the Boko Haram insurgency. The effect of the Leahy law in the fight against Boko Haram is only in the form of the constraints it imposes through its stipulations on strict adherence to the rules of engagement. This applies to the fight against terrorism the world over, Nigeria not an exception.

    Things appear to have changed during his visit to Iran. His responses in two key areas gave him out as a leader who not only appreciates extant realities now but one prepared to place credit where it rightly belongs. The way he addressed some of the issues, cuts the image of a leader who appreciates the milieu he now operates and the larger dictates of what Charles Lindblom called incremental change in governance.

    These were evident in his speech to the Nigerian community on the fight against corruption and improvement in power supply in the country. He had said in respect of the fight against corruption that unlike in his first coming as a military head of state when he could arrest and detain alleged corrupt officials to prove their innocence, the dictates of the rule of law and due process cannot permit of such now. He said those accused of corruption would have been prosecuted before now, but for the need to investigate them and gather enough evidence to facilitate prosecution.

    Keen observers of President Buhari’s posturing in the war against corruption since he assumed office, would be quick to admit that this marks a substantial departure from his previous handle and posturing on the matter. About three months back, he had told the nation that those who looted our national treasury will be arraigned in court in a matter of weeks. There have also been further statements raising hope that those who milked the nation dry have been sufficiently identified and will soon pay dearly for it.

    Bogus figures representing monies said to have been stolen have been bandied from sundry sources. Public appetite has since been sufficiently wetted for the eventual onslaught on those who have mismanaged this economy. But not much progress has been made in that direction before Buhari’s admission of the difficulties in fighting corruption in a democratic dispensation.

    Before now also, the envisaged battle against corruption has been canvassed in such a manner that raised eyebrows on the propriety of the adopted strategy. The twin issues of due process and rule of law were seriously canvassed by those who picked holes in the media trial and seeming conviction of people in the court of public opinion even when sufficient evidence of their alleged misdeeds was yet to be gathered.

    Ironically, these reservations were the major concerns of Buhari as he spoke to his Teheran audience. It was the same reasons that were often adduced by the Jonathan regime to defend allegations of tepid approach to the war against corruption. It would appear Buhari is gradually coming to terms with the reality of the war against corruption in a democratic setting and that mob justice or media hysteria will prove inherently deficient in dealing with official thievery. How much constraints the new reality will impose on the campaign against corruption will depend on the amount of credible evidence available to the authorities and the disposition of the judiciary to the fight.

    Only last week Buhari had lamented the level of corruption that has permeated the Nigerian judiciary. He had urged that arm of government to fight against the perception and reality of growing judiciary corruption that imposes serious constraints on efforts to hold public officers accountable to their constituents.

    When we pair both statements, the reality of the current war against corruption begins to dawn on us all. It is increasingly getting clearer that the trial of alleged corrupt public officials and recovering of whatever they might have stolen can only be achieved through the gathering of sufficient evidence that will aid prosecution and conviction in the courts. That is the reality Buhari has just admitted and it holds the prospects for whatever progress that will be recorded in the war. If our experience with such high profile trials is anything to go by, the war should be viewed with subdued optimism.

    Buhari should focus more efforts in building strong institutions so as to make the brazen looting of our collective patrimony by sundry buccaneers nigh impossible. There is a limit beyond which we cannot go when these monies have already been stolen and the tracks of the thieves cleverly covered.

    The other aspect of his speech that deserves mention for its larger heuristic value was that on improvements in power supply. Buhari was honest to admit that he was yet to give any directive on the power sector before the improvements in power supply lately. Hear him, “We have not said anything to them yet. I think they only find it sensible or appropriate for them to try and improve on power supply”

    It is obvious Buhari did not want to appropriate the credit for the improvement in power supply contrary to what some of his supporters would have desired. That is the way to go.  Before now, we have seen overzealous supporters of the regime seeking to downplay some of the achievements of the previous government. The impression often created when a new government takes over is that the previous one achieved little or nothing.

    Ostensibly, this posturing is propelled by the vaulting desire to seek legitimacy. But, it has been the bane of governments on these shores. That has also accounted for the plethora of policy discontinuities that have brought in their wake little or no progress and monumental wastage of public funds. But a government does not operate from a zero point. It operates incrementally in the sense that each policy is only an addition to an existing one.

    Incremental change recognizes that meaningful progress is better made when successive regimes improve on extant policies. That is the issue that was brought to public focus by Buhari and he should seize that momentum to ensure that epileptic power supply is consigned to the dust bin of history during his regime. But then, if he has not given any directive on the power sector and some progress is being recorded, somehow, he shares in the success. That is the lesson from Teheran which all leaders should internalize.

  • ‘Lincoln’s option’: Makinde’s food for thought

    How many people in the hall took it seriously when Prof. Moses Akinola Makinde recommended what he called “Abraham Lincoln’s option”? The retired professor of Philosophy took the matter of Nigeria’s redemption to another realm in his lecture to mark the 17th Convocation and Investiture of New Fellows of the Nigerian Academy of Letters (NAL) at the main auditorium, University of Lagos, on August 13. Makinde, a NAL Fellow, tagged himself “the Academy’s philosopher”.

    His recommendation was indeed a philosophical leap. He said: “We must first acknowledge our sins, confess, repent and then ask God for forgiveness. This is the noble path America had taken in 1861 by the proclamation of Abraham Lincoln. Nigeria must follow suit.” Makinde continued: “In a document contained in a book titled Shaping History through Prayers and Fasting, a former president of the United States of America, Abraham Lincoln, during his presidency, had “proclaimed three days of national humiliation, prayer, and fasting. His first proclamation (out of three) was requested by a joint committee of both houses and congress, and the day set apart was the last Thursday in September, 1861.”

    Here is part of “the first proclamation”: “I, ABRAHAM LINCOLN, President of the United States, do appoint the last Thursday of September next as a day of Humiliation, Prayer and Fasting, for the people of the nation. And I do earnestly recommend to all people, and especially to all ministers and teachers of religion, of all denominations, and to all heads of families, to observe and keep that day, according to their several creeds and modes of worship, in all humility, and with all religious solemnity, to the end that the united prayer of the nation may ascend to the Throne of Grace, and bring down plentiful blessings upon the country.”

    Lincoln’s proclamation is Makinde’s recommendation.  According to him: “The new government of President Muhammadu Buhari and Prof. Yemi Osinbajo of the APC must see its era as a time for atonement, deliverance, restitution and change – a real and sincere change, from the evil and ungodly regimes of past governments to a visionary, purposeful, humane and godly one.”

    In his lecture titled “Reflections on the pains of growth”, Makinde offered a useful “conceptual clarification”: “The word ‘change’ does not entail forward motion alone. It could be backward motion like turning the hands of the clock forward or backward – backward like Nigeria’s case of oil boom to oil doom. Therefore, while growth involves moving forward, change necessarily does not. It could be forward or backward change.”

    It was an expressive shift from discourse to disturbance when electricity failed in the middle of the Convocation Lecture. For significant minutes, darkness reigned and many people in the hall must have wondered about the country’s unstable power supply.

    Makinde is the DG/CEO of the Awolowo Centre for Philosophy, Ideology and Good Governance based in Osogbo, Osun State. He is an internationally recognised name, particularly in the field of African Philosophy. He taught for many years at the University of Ife and, following a name change, at the Obafemi Awolowo University (OAU), Ile-Ife, in Osun State.

    “I shall begin the events of our pains of growth from 1959 through independence in 1960 and the various changes that led to nowhere, but to a lack of positive growth in the polity, “ Makinde said, at the beginning of  an excursion that covered the “First Republic 1959/60”, “Second Republic (October 1, 1979 – December 30, 1983 and Military Rule, December 30, 1983 – June 12, 1993)”, “Third Republic (June 12 – November 17, 1993)”, “Fourth Republic (1999 to date)”.

    In tracing Nigeria’s trajectory, Makinde highlighted two specific military administrations, which he blamed for aggravating the country’s pains: “From Abacha’s era, it appeared that the pains of Nigeria’s growth were getting worse after two possible eras that would probably have alleviated its pains: Buhari’s and MKO’s eras. One was cut short, the other never allowed to be. In all circumstances, Babangida’s and Abacha’s military rules were a setback to Nigeria’s democratic experiment, development and economic growth.”

    However, Makinde also noted objectively: “We sometimes blame the military interventions for our woes and lack of systematic growth in social, moral, political and economic activities and behaviours. Unfortunately, the restorations of civilian rule in 1979 to 1983 and later 1999 till date have constituted severe pains of growth to the nation at large.”

    Against the gloomy background, Makinde argued that Man is the instrument of change and growth in the society. He supported his position with references to Japan, Malaysia and Singapore, and played up the role of scientific and technological revolution in advancing human societies.

    Makinde said in conclusion: “Now that change has come, the expectations of Nigerians are that this change must be for the better and no longer motion without movement.” He added: “It must also lead to growth in a genuine democracy with strong institutions, employment opportunities, fight against corruption and impunity of various descriptions, enshrine transparency and accountability in governments, parastatals and agencies, social responsibility and social justice, fiscal discipline, morality and rule of law.”

    In his remarks on behalf of the three new Fellows decorated at the event, US-based Professor Jacob Kehinde Olupona made reference to the power cut. He sympathised with home-based Nigerians, who experienced blackouts with frustrating regularity. It was a fitting end to the event because it helped to shed light on the burning need for change.

    In my interaction with Makinde after his lecture, he remarkably insisted on his recommendation. He told me: “Abraham Lincoln’s option obviously was one of the most important messages in my lecture to the presidency and Nigerians. I still believe that the inherent problems of Nigeria would remain (just in case Nigeria was cursed) until we do what Abraham Lincoln did for America as reported in my lecture.”  This is food for thought.

  • The saboteurs

    The saboteurs

    All over the country, fuel queues. The lines loop out of fuel stations through roads and streets like broken necklaces. In the morning, the car drips with dew. The sun licks it up later but a furtive city wind drapes it with a film of dust. Hours later, it enjoys the wry reward of a balmy night. But the fuel tank, still empty, tempts you for another 24 hours of longsuffering.

    It no longer makes sense to speak of the irony of our nation, that we have scarcity of fuel when the bowels of our earth churn with lots of crude. It is like what the Russian poet Nikolai Nekrasov said of his country, “wretched and abundant.” Or, that we have refineries but we refine crude oil outside the country. To ship home the oil has forced the President to write the National Assembly for permission to pay N413 billion (about two billion dollars) subsidy to marketers.

    But what is more wretched is the economics of the story. They say we have to pay subsidies because the cost of shipping the oil is so high we should not allow the market to take its course. Or else the common man’s purse will squeak into debt and destitution. So, we have to show mercy to the poor and downtrodden, and the government has decided to pay the kind and missionary marketers for bringing us oil.

    But who are these marketers? They are the men in briefcases. They sign deals with government-owned Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation to bring refined oil. We thank them because they have done so well to travel first-class to the United States, Europe and Asia to broker deals with refiners. Those good old foreigners do good jobs. They refine our crude while our refineries lie limp like impotent monsters. The men in briefcases ship home the fuel.

    Innocent enough. Really? But that’s where it gets messy. In the Nigerian way, we have become servile to their mathematical manipulations. Many agree it is all fraud. They hike up the landing costs. That is why we have to pay N413 billion.

    The marketers’ due is our doom. The tragedy is that we have to pay them. It is like a rapist with a right. The more murky the story is, the more alluring. We are told that between the refiner abroad and our ports, lots of things happen.

    One ship of oil can enter the account books up to three times. This is how it happens. The ship skirts Nigeria’s territorial waters, lands after a queue – not cars alone queue – and it is on the record. But it goes to a neighbouring land, and returns and goes on record but it has no fuel. On record, we are owing the marketer lots of money. Many ships do this and those in the industry call it round-tripping, an elegant phrase.

    Recently, a wave of fear overtook the marketers that the Buhari administration planned to remove subsidy. But we were surprised that the President instead wrote to lawmakers for permission to pay them such a whopping sum.

    Many thought the President’s gesture would soothe the fuel life of the commuter. But no. The marketers have decided to hoard fuel in their depots and stations. In many parts of the country, the prices have soared.

    So why do they tell us that the whole exercise is to benefit the poor? The low-slung Nigerians already are paying what they should if the fuel subsidy is removed. Again, it seems the marketers are eating their cakes and having it. First they give us a big and bogus bill to pay for subsidy. While we are preparing to pay, they don’t believe us. So, they punish everyone by withdrawing the same thing. They own the products and subject us to their faith.

    We are left at their beck and call. Obviously, they have committed two crimes. One is murky, the other in the open. The murky one is in figures that have been computed as N413 billion. The other one is hoarding. Yet, no eruption of lawyers and prosecutors. They are saboteurs but the law officers are quiet while we squirm. If we arrest any of them, maybe others will free the fuel from their tanks. One scapegoat, no saboteurs.

    But the matter, some say, is a little simple. Why not remove the subsidy by cutting off the marketers and arranging with the refiners abroad, so our government and NNPC can control the cost of subsidy? That seems easy. But I don’t think so. If we allow the briefcase men to get away with lies, what guarantees that our representatives in government will not take a cue from their free market predecessors?

    It is not a problem of the marketers alone. It is Nigerian business. We do business for crooked profits. We lie, make profit and swagger.

    To succeed, the briefcase men conform, like Babbit in Sinclair Lewis’ Nobel Prize-winning novel. They do business the right way, don the happening suit, flourish their wrists with the latest Breitling, soar in private jets and cruise in private boats and throw weddings in Dubai and birthday parties in New York. They pop up in society pages of the newspapers, do no charity except for the vanity of their image. They put upside down Thorsten Veblen’s Theory of The Leisure Class. They have excess money but splurge it in clubs, but do nothing to expand the frontiers of luxury for society. They are sick of self-love like Shakespeare’s Malvolio.

    Fuel queues are not new on our shores, it is like going back to the beginning. If we suffer anything today, we are bound to suffer it again. In a recycle of shame, Nigeria’s crises have no finales. It is because we have not built institutions and nurtured a breed of leaders who can distinguish between public wealth and private rights. The lines are blur.

    The more simple solution is to build our refineries. During the Jonathan era, subsidy was partly removed with the promise to build green-field refineries. We were shown the green fields, if they lied about the colours. We did not speak of even a spoke of promise till that era ended.

    The fact that our government-owned refineries are not working is not only a testament to corruption, but proves that if government takes over shipping the oil from the brief case men, the story might not change.

    Some are pointing to the example of the break-up of the power company, NEPA, to baby NEPAs. But we are still doomed with power outages.

    Is it government intervention or free market that will solve it? Is it Hayek or Galbraith? Even Adam Smith from whom all economists come was wary of both tendencies. The advocate of the invisible hand also suspected a market without rules. It is simple matter that other countries may handle without much ado. But ours reminds me of Professor Sam Aluko’s definition of economics as “common sense made difficult.”

    To have a free market, we must first market core values. We are not there yet. That is why the briefcase men can keep our cars in long lines, frustrate commerce and still manage to party.

    [news_list display=”category” format=”video” category=”3099″ count=”8″ show_more=”on”]

  • Biafra’s shallow grave

    Agitations for the sovereign state of Biafra took a new dimension across the country with the arrest of Nnamdi Kanu, the director of Biafra Radio. Kanu was arrested in October, in connection with his pirate radio that has been championing the Biafra dream.

    At the last count, there have been demonstrations in many South-east and South-south states calling on the authorities to have him released. The agitators said they want to exit from the Nigerian state citing ill treatment, alienation and marginalization. For them, the attraction of Biafra lies in its envisaged capacity to offer them limitless opportunities to realize their potentials to the fullest.

    The development has raised concerns given that Nigeria fought a civil war for three years to quell similar agitations between 1967 and 1970. In that war, an estimated six million people lost their lives. Renewed agitations of the magnitude witnessed in the last couple of weeks are bound to raise serious discomfort especially among those privy to the circumstances of that war.

    Equally of concern is the fact that most of those protesting were born after that war and may not have known much about all the events of that historical episode. But this reality also raises its own puzzle given that the same issues that gave rise to that war are at the root of the current agitations. That the youths, 45 years after, are raising the same grievances that gave rise to the war is something that should give our leaders a food for thought. It is a serious development that calls for new approaches; new thinking and proactive measures rather than the stereotype of yesteryears. It should task our creative energies on what we did wrong within this timeframe with a view to remedying the situation. That is the path of great leaders and great nations.

    For Yakubu Gowon who prosecuted that war as military head of state, “with Biafra, it is finished”. He said it was to sooth frayed nerves and erase bitter feelings that his regime at the end of the war came out with the policy of “No victor, No vanquished”. There was also the reconciliation, reconstruction and rehabilitation slogan of the time aimed at integrating the defeated into the mainstream of the nation’s affairs. We shall return to this shortly.

    On its part, Arewa Consultative Forum ACF also declared that Biafra was settled in 1970. For this northern elite group, the issue of Biafra is as dead as dodo. Yet, some others have sought to find causal explanation for the rising agitations. Here, political motive is being alleged.

    Yes, Biafra may have been finished with in 1970. It may have also died at that time. Forty-five years thereon, it is doubtful whether the issue was very well finished with. It is also not certain whether it was properly buried through the satisfaction of all the rites of passage to enable it rest in perfect peace.

    It is either Biafra did not die properly because its undertakers refused to obey the rules for its final interment or it was buried in a very shallow grave. For any of these possibilities, what we are witnessing today is the rising ghost of a Biafra that was not allowed to rest in peace due to actions or inactions of those who presided over its final funeral rites.

    That was the contradiction thrown up by Gowon when he said with Biafra, it is finished. Those protesting are saying contrary to the promises of no victor and no vanquished, those who fought on the side of Biafra have remained the vanquished. They are saying that the Nigerian state instead of providing equal opportunities for them to realize their full potentials, treats them as second class citizens. They are not alone in this.

    They are increasingly coming to terms with the fallacies of the reconciliation, reconstruction and rehabilitation mantra of the post civil war era. They can see these in the state of infrastructure in their zone; it is palpable from the selective attacks on their lives and property on the guise of religion, it is no less evident in the appointments made since Buhari took over. Of about 39 initial key appointments by Buhari, no south-easterner was deemed fit for any. Yet, people came out to justify them on the spurious and feeble ground that he needed to appoint those he can work with. There is something inherently untidy that a vibrant segment of this population could neither qualify nor trusted to occupy any of such positions.

    Some even rationalized the appointments on the inverted logic that the Igbo had a disproportionate share of such offices during the Jonathan regime and therefore should not complain. But those who canvass this jaundiced and self-serving viewpoint fail to adduce evidence of any geo-political zone that was so excluded during that period. That is not to say that the failure to carry that zone along in those appointments is the mono causal explanation for the agitations.

    The activities MASSOB have been there since our return to democracy. A couple of years back, MASSOB called for a sit-at-home protest to press home its demands. The outcome shocked many as the order was obeyed not only in the south-east but beyond.

    Agitations for restructuring which are seen as the only path to the nation’s stability and development have been a recurring decimal. So also are separatist tendencies among groups in the federation. What is now required are new approaches to those dysfunctions that induce competition for the loyalty of the citizens between the government and the primordial units. Not long ago, two former heads of state Olusegun Obasanjo and Ibrahim Babangida issued a joint press statement lamenting that even known patriots are now beginning to question the basis of Nigerian unity.

    But for one or two zones, there is a wide gamut of consensus that restructuring holds the ace to the numerous problems of this country. Despite its allure, some people have sworn not to allow it see the light of the day for some inexplicable reasons. The 2014 National Conference which had copious recommendations on how to build a nation unfettered by sectional prejudices has been trapped in the vortex of high wire politics.

    Situations as this cannot but give rise to frustrations within and among sections whose future are deliberately stunted on account of their membership of the Nigerian state. These are the subsisting realities. Yes, the Igbo may be better with a wider political and geographical space to play with. They may be better playing in the big league which Nigeria provides. But this can only stand when the state provides equal opportunities for all. The Igbo have made enormous sacrifice for this country. They have demonstrated this with their huge investments in parts of the country which will suffer serious reverses if they are confined to the boundaries of their ethnic group.

    They are not unaware but for the informal sector, they may have remained hewers of wood and drawers of water in a land supposedly flowing with milk and honey. They are not oblivious of the mounting constraints and organized conspiracy they face in ascending the commanding heights of the military, bureaucracy and the highest political office in the land-the presidency.

    The rise in Biafra agitations may be a desperate move out of a desperate situation. Those who protest wear the shoes and should know where it pinches most. But the Nigerian state will neither let go nor do the needful to allay their fears and guarantee their future.

    The impression that our leaders attach higher premium to continuously holding this country together through coercive state apparatus than building a consensual order that will imbue patriotism and selfless services in all, is a patently misplaced one. That is the missing link. And in it can be located the reasons for the rising spate of systemic schism.

  • Another chapter of post-Awoism

    When Chief Hannah Idowu Dideolu Awolowo, popularly recognised by her initials, HID, is buried on November 25, the closure will open another chapter of post-Awoism after the death of her husband, Chief Obafemi Awolowo, the legendary Nigerian political titan and progressive leader who died in 1987.

    She lived to a ripe old age; her death on September 19 put a dampener on plans for the celebration of her 100th birthday on November 25. Hers was a long and eventful life, often of interest to the public because of its socio-political dimensions.

    Famously described as “a jewel of inestimable value” by her husband, HID’s image glittered on account of the glowing commendation by the man she married in 1937 and stuck with until death separated them. In a moving and revealing testimonial, HID’s husband said of her: “She has been of immeasurable  assistance to me in the duties attached to my career as a public man…I do not hesitate to confess that I owed my success in life to three factors; the grace of God, a Spartan self-discipline and a good wife. Our home is to all of us a true haven; a place of happiness, of imperturbable seclusion from the buffetings of life.”

    But HID was also significant in her own right, beyond the glory of matrimony. Apart from her entrepreneurial spirit and success in business, she demonstrated a remarkable capacity for administration as the head of the African Newspapers Nigeria (ANN) Plc, Publisher of Tribune titles. The Nigerian Tribune, founded in 1949 by Chief Awolowo, is Nigeria’s oldest surviving private newspaper. Until she died, HID kept the company’s flag flying, but not without some cost to her husband’s principles and the newspaper’s image.

    It is a reflection of not only her husband’s legacy but also her own personal worth that when she was alive her family home in Ikenne, Ogun State, was a mecca for various shades of political players who desired her support in pursuance of their political ambitions. She was politically accommodating, and the variegated complexion of the sympathisers drawn to her home by the news of her death spoke volumes about her politics of inclusiveness.

    It is noteworthy that President Muhammadu Buhari said in a tribute: “Chief (Mrs.) Awolowo will always be honoured too for the indelible legacy of very significant, behind-the-scenes contributions to communal, state, regional and national development.” This aspect of her life was also highlighted in a tribute by a former executive director of AAN Plc, Mr. Folu Olamiti, who said: “A good number of position papers meant to strengthen the southwest geo-political zone and the need to promote the unity of Nigeria were formulated in Ikenne, her home.”

    Her many-sided life had a notable cultural angle. The matriarch was a well-respected traditional title holder; and her major title, Yeye Oodua, suggesting that she was regarded as a mother figure by the Yoruba people, reflected her wide cultural significance in her native Yoruba environment. In this connection, HID was co-chairman of the Yoruba Unity Forum formed to protect and advance Yoruba interests within the country’s framework.

    In the context of impermanence, it is food for thought that the socio-political philosophy of Chief Obafemi Awolowo, on account of which he earned die-hard loyalists as well as unrepentant adversaries, may be further revised after HID. While she was alive, the calculating redefinition of progressivism implied by the cohabitation of varied political impulses under the banner of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) marked a revision.   It is indisputable that a major constituent of the party, the defunct Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN), to a large extent associated with Awoism, a tendency that the other parties involved in the merger that produced the APC did not necessarily embrace.

    Awolowo, practising his doctrine of “mental magnitude”, truly demonstrated uncommon concentration on the improvement of the mind as an invaluable training for leadership, particularly by his deep writings on his socio-political thoughts intended as illuminating guides on the subject of good governance in a pluralistic society. He was popularly and rightly regarded as a “philosopher king” and “sage”, which underscored his towering intellect employed in the context of political administration. It is an intriguing measure of the Awolowo mystique and influence that in certain quarters the belief in Awoism, or the branding as an Awoist, is regarded as a qualification for political leadership.

    Tragically, the important connection between cerebral acuity and forward-looking people-oriented governmental policies, particularly in the areas of education, health and infrastructure, which Awolowo reflected, is today generally less appreciated among the political players, especially with the reign of “negative emotions” that inspire basic personal aggrandisement.

    Additionally, in character and lifestyle, his sometimes impolitic directness, informed by well- meaning sincerity, as well as his Spartan existence, despite his means, placed him in an inimitable class. The doublespeak associated with characters in politics did not have an accommodation with him, and the people knew where he stood on issues, even when this worked against him. Fascinatingly, he lived above fleshly indulgence, and was not a materialistic exhibitionist, contrary to the ways of many who govern today.

    Another central point of departure has to do with Awolowo’s stature as the soul of the political parties he originated, namely, the Action Group (AG) and the Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN), in which he commanded overwhelming authority. Current realities, specifically in connection with the APC, suggest that the kind of vice-like grip he had on party affairs probably belongs to a bygone age.

    Perhaps the greatest charge against him, even among his followers, was his principled inflexibility and customary conviction about his correctness, which his political foes often interpreted as haughtiness. Perhaps his supreme moment came at his death with the outpouring of flattering tributes from friendly and hostile quarters, especially the one which eloquently described him as “the best president Nigeria never had.”

    The burden of continuity must rest upon the two institutions established to promote his ideals, the Obafemi Awolowo Institute of Government and Public Policy, Lagos, and the Awolowo Centre for Philosophy, Ideology and Good Governance, Osogbo.