The Nation Newspaper

Category: Columnists

  • Fascism ala Jonathan?

    There is a myth that the Nigerian president is the most powerful of his kind in the world. That could be true. But only if the president wilfully breaks the law, and hopes he can get away with it.

    That is because for every power the president has, there is a check: in the best tradition of the doctrine of separation of power, on which the presidential system of government is built.

    What has been happening, since the Olusegun Obasanjo presidency (1999-2007), is that the president would essay a constitutional infraction, but flex his presidential muscles to dare anyone to challenge him, since democratic institutions are still rather weak.

    That worked ruinously during Obasanjo’s presidential monarchy, so much so that it gave birth to that myth: the Nigerian president is all-conquering and all-powerful; that it could even challenge the law that gave it life to a wrestling bout – and prevail!

    But isn’t that constitutional harakiri tantamount to the folly of the Achebe wrestler, quoting Igbo folklore, who figured he was so powerful he could challenge his chi (personal god)?

    Indeed, presidential conceit Nigerian style, and its concomitant reckless power play, contrasts the poetic conceit of John Donne (1572-1631), the English metaphysical poet in “The Sun Rising”, one of his famous sonnets, a fragment of which is quoted, prelude to this piece.

    In “The Sun Rising”, the protagonist, one of two lovers, lampooned the early morning sun for its intrusiveness, on the lovers’ nest. The “Busy old fool, unruly sun,” the angry lover fumed, could well make the difference between night and day; between sleeping and waking hours.

    But with a mere wink, he insisted, a man could shut it and its all-mighty rays from sight!

    From the rarefied world of poetry to the brick-and-mortar plain of politics, this translates to the fact that a citizen, relying on the law, could easily damn the most menacing of governments. So long for the myth of the all-mighty powers of the Nigerian Presidency!

    That leads to the delicate mix of power, authority, legitimacy and influence. Power is the most visible but the least potent. Influence is the least visible but the most potent. Authority, in a democracy, is delegated electors’ power to the elected. Legitimacy is the electors’ retentive power to periodically choose, thus guaranteeing regular elections.

    Trouble starts in a democracy when the elected project power as if it were absolute. But every student of Politics 101 knows that once power is challenged, even by the weakest and most abject in the polity, it is defeated. That is why smart governments never rely on brute force, but on legitimacy and influence.

    That is the tragic undoing of the Goodluck Jonathan Presidency and its creeping fascism. It must be checked right now; or the democratic republic will live to rue such tardiness.

    President Jonathan put the wrong foot forward when he assumed the conceit that he, because he was president, could dictate who would or who would not become the Nigeria Governors Forum (NGF) chair.

    Rivers Governor, Chibuike Amaechi, defied the president as meddlesome interloper in NGF matters. He needed no especial courage to do so. All he needed was to insist on his right under the law, like the lover in Donne’s poem, winking to shut out the sun.

    A similar piece of power illogic caused the split in the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). Instead of sensitivity to democratic dissent in the federal ruling party, the president and his advisers reached for a fist of mail.

    Again, all the dissenting lobby, led by the G-7 Governors, needed was to stand their grounds, and take their chances against the all-mighty presidential machine. Again, that machine unravelled. But even if it had crushed the “rebels”, that they had defied the president and his awesome powers would have been enough victory – for the myth would have vanished.

    Still, instead of the Jonathan presidency taking the cue and beating a tactical retreat, it has embarked on an ill-advised, if not outright unthinking attack, which has further compromised the authority of the president and the dignity of the presidency.

    Indeed, it is from this attack that putative fascism would appear to be creeping in. An irate president appears on the offensive to politicise, if not personalise, crucial state agencies and apparatuses.

    The sheer misuse of the Police in Rivers, under the command of CP Mbu Joseph Mbu, is well and truly reprehensible. It is the unflattering paradox of an outlaw police! First, Mr. Mbu fancies himself some Abuja-anointed viceroy, contending every inch of space with Governor Amaechi. This is a constitutional infraction deserving of the harshest censure.

    Then, the police under Mbu’s command are so partisan, a bloc of governors has dubbed them the PDP armed wing – and they sound very credible! Indeed, the police ought to be so embarrassed at their own gross misconduct. They would manufacture the most absurd of reasons to push back the governor’s supporters. They would manufacture even more absurd reasons to aid presidential sympathisers, in their war against political enemies.

    Do these corps of misguided officers realise their sympathy is to the Constitution and not to any individual no matter how powerful they feel he is? But the futility of such impunity was borne out of the Amaechi march with his supporters to welcome his All Progressives Congress (APC) guests.

    The sheer dignity of the gubernatorial office reduced Mbu’s men to a contemptible rabble, lobbing tear gas canisters at a trek they could not abort! So, so disgraceful!

    But the most alarming sign of putative fascism is the crude attempt to stop the G-7 governors at all costs: now threatening to demolish buildings associated with them, then violently abridging their constitutional rights as citizens and as governors. Imagine a lowly divisional police officer (DPO) arresting governors, constitutionally immune from arrests!

    Obasanjo, during his imperial presidency, viciously manipulated state legislatures to criminalise their governors, on the suspect motive of fighting corruption, and sending the EFCC after them.

    But never in his imperial conceit did he dare to threaten governors with summary arrest – no matter how rabidly convicted they were in the media!

    But the Jonathan Presidency – or whatever “powers from above” gave that DPO of Asokoro the instruction to bound into the meeting of governors in the Kano State Governor’s Lodge and threaten them with arrest – is already crossing that Rubicon.

    All that remains, it appears, is for the threatened arrest to be effected. Fancy an almighty DPO, lobbing tear gas canisters, and sitting governors running helter-skelter to avoid arrest? It just might not be too far off!

    But then, it would be welcome, fascism!

    This polity would not triumph over vicious military rule, only to succumb to civilian fascism. But what audacity, for a common columnist to warn the almighty powers-that-be!

    Again, like Donne and his intrusive sun: it does not take any especial courage – just an insistence on the law. The rule of law is the straight and narrow path to nurture our democracy.

  • Slippery Seven

    Weighing the pros and cons of the intriguing road show by a high-profile circle of the All Progressives Congress (APC) is likely to be controversial. However, in the final analysis, it is the measurement of results that counts. Therefore, it would be interesting to see what mileage the party would eventually get out of the tour.

    It is apt to identify the fact that the adventure was informed by opportunistic calculation, which is not necessarily pejorative in the political context. Evidently, the exercise was inspired by the fractious reality of the ruling People’s Democratic Party (PDP), and would not have been a serious option in the absence of the schism. Even then, it was strategically simplistic, perhaps denying the fundamental truth that the PDP’s in-fighting is not sufficiently radical to allow penetration by external invaders.

    Basically, the party’s troubles are indicative of an internal power struggle, which in no way translates into an abandonment of the bond. To interpret the division in terms of ideological disenchantment is to tragically miss the point. They are all birds of a feather and, at the end of the day, would always flock together.

    There can be no doubt about the visceral association, a fact that was adequately projected to the would-be persuaders at every stop. Whether it was in Kano, Jigawa, Adamawa, Rivers, Kwara or Niger, there was a striking stock response to the seduction; specifically, that the seven antagonistic PDP governors, tagged G-7, were still interested in remaining in the party and optimistic about fence-mending. If there was any question about where their hearts belonged, Rivers State governor Rotimi Amaechi provided fascinating clarification when he told the visitors, rather audaciously, “I will consult the president. I will. He is from our zone. I will consult all the consultables.”

    A perfect example of cheekiness and reductio ad absurdum, Amaechi’s remarks carried enormous significance on account of his status as chairman of the Nigeria Governors’ Forum (NGF), and against the backdrop of the crisis that characterised his re-election to that position, during which he enjoyed the principled support of progressive elements outside his party. If he would indeed need the advice of President Goodluck Jonathan, who is a major PDP leader and his supposed political adversary, among others, to make up his mind to join APC, it suggests that such departure is improbable. Also, it is a reflection of the superficiality of the division within the PDP.

    At least two other comments by G-7 members are noteworthy for their negative implications for the APC’s romance with the group. While Kwara State governor AbdulFatah Ahmed, in a manner that suggested a put-down, described the visit as “a marketing activity,” Jigawa State governor Sule Lamido declared emphatically, “It is our desire to ensure that we remain in the winning party.”

    It is relevant to ponder why the PDP has such a grip on the imagination of its members, with the effect that they refuse to think outside the party. Two notable examples of this reality will suffice. First, former vice president Atiku Abubakar left the party to join the then Action Congress (AC), only for him to unceremoniously return to the PDP to seek its presidential ticket, which he was denied. Second, former Abia State governor Orji Uzor Kalu disowned the party to start the Progressive People’s Alliance (PPA) which under his inspiration won governorship elections in two states. Then, abruptly, he dumped the party and returned to the PDP. In both cases, it is important to stress, the two returnees had to endure indignities just to achieve reabsorption.

    Perhaps inadvertently, the APC has raised the profile of these governors, who belong to the faction also called the “New PDP”, namely, Lamido, Musa Kwankwaso (Kano), Aliyu Wamakko (Sokoto), Ahmed , Amaechi, Murtala Nyako (Adamawa) and Babangida Aliyu (Niger). It is difficult to understand why the APC is courting them, suggesting that they are indispensable power brokers. Furthermore, moves to attract them significantly blurred the vital ideological distinction between their original platform known for conservative elitism and the APC’s acclaimed progressivism. Or is APC saying there is no difference?

    It is disturbing that in the sugar-coated language of a suitor, the APC’s leadership spoke superlatively of the performance of these governors. More worrying, by this undiscriminating show, the APC unwittingly undermined its own structures in the affected states. Should its overtures fail, how will the party explain to the electorate that it is a better choice for governance, rather than the characters it has praised immoderately, or those associated with them?

    It is understandable that the party is anxious to redirect Nigeria, but it certainly shouldn’t be at the expense of ideological purity. The party’s essence deserves protection always, and mingling with actors of dubious credentials cannot profit it in the long run. With the all-important 2015 general elections in sight, it is no surprise that the party is exploring possible winning formulas. However, it must avoid giving the impression of desperation.

    Rather than the direct “door to door” marketing approach adopted in this campaign, the APC brand would most likely benefit from a more subtle but effective PR style. In other words, the party, which is a creation of the merger of the Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN), the Congress for Progressive Change (CPC), the All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP) and a faction of the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA), would need to define its orientation more concretely and establish a reputation through measurable positive performance of its members in political offices.

    Going into the coming elections as a first-timer, the party, no doubt, would be interested in putting up a strong showing, which would count in its favour in the long term. In this connection, it is hoped that the party will be driven by long-term vision, rather than narrow immediacies. Central to the beauty of a stable democracy is the possibility of change based on the informed preference of the electorate. Despite the rumpus over the country’s structure, Nigeria might yet survive.

    Gradualism has its advantages, especially when the opposite comes with the implication of sacrificing the party’s distinguishing values. Whatever the downsides of the tour, there were indeed redeeming features. In particular, the APC achieved a publicity intensity that has helped to widen its identification. In addition, its consistent message of constructive change boldly projected on the road provided reassuring evidence of its commitment to a better Nigeria. Above all, the ambassadors communicated an aura of integrity and exemplary passion, perhaps the very attributes missing in those at the helm.

  • Jega’s delimitation agenda

    For some time now, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has been in public show of its zeal to delineate constituencies in the country before the 2015 elections. Basking on provisions of the 1999 constitution and the Electoral Act which require that such exercise be conducted after 10 years or after a national census, Jega has told whoever cares to hear that he is irredeemably committed to the exercise.

    The commission is partnering relevant agencies and has already signed Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the National Space Research and Development Agency (NASRDA) the office of the Surveyor General of the Federation with two committees set up to give effect to the exercise. Through these MOU’s, INEC hopes to tap into the high satellite imagery resolution capacities of these agencies to cover the entire country. It has also sought assistance from the National Population Commission (NPC) among others.

    Given the foregoing, it is certain that INEC is not leaving anyone in any doubt that it is pursuing the delimitation agenda with vigour. According to its chairman Prof Attahiru Jega, the overall aim is to ensure that every federal constituency should be as nearly equal in size as possible. What this immediately throws up is the equalization theory of his predecessor and the fact that population is going to be the major factor for this exercise. His immediate past predecessor, Prof Maurice Iwu had proposed the equalization of the constituencies such that population differences above 300,000 between senatorial districts were considered very substantial and were to be adjusted. Similarly population differences of 150,000 in the case of federal districts were also to be adjusted. But the proposal was trailed by controversy with that administration unable to carry it out before Iwu left office.

    Ironically, when the Jega-led INEC visited the NPC to seek certified data on the various enumeration areas, he was pointedly told by its then chairman, Festus Odimegwu that there are no certified data for the various enumeration areas. Odimegwu had then said that politicians bought enumeration areas in the same fashion they buy voters’ cards during elections to gain advantage. He also disclosed that it was on account of the unreliability of the 2006 census that the commission decided not to publish it.

    Jega seemed to have come to terms with this encumbrance when he said in a recent communiqué that “even though the aspects of the 2006 census have been countered, it remains the most credible source of data to carry out the exercise”. He had also in the same communiqué which he personally signed, stated that the delimitation was meant to engender equality in electoral constituencies and not to create additional sets at the national level.

    INEC is within its powers to seek the delimitation of constituencies. This is more so as it is in keeping with its powers as conferred by extant laws. Thus, it is not so much the issue of its right as the wisdom and timeliness in embarking on the exercise now.

    First and as rightly admitted by Jega, there is no credible census for the country; that of 2006 inclusive. The 2006 census has been challenged at the census tribunal by sections of the country on account of the manipulation of its figures. Lagos state was so dissatisfied with the outcome that it had to conduct its own version of the census which came out with 18million people as against nine million allotted to it by the 2006 census. There are also other parts of the country where the figures credited to them are at variance with established demographic traits. The South-east is among them. As a matter of fact, an independent preliminary satellite imaging around the Imo area was said to have produced results that would render the outcome of previous censuses a huge joke. Just recently, the figures posted for the 20 local government areas of Lagos State were overturned by the tribunal as they bore no semblance with the actual population on the ground. The point being raised here is very clear. And it is that it will amount to double jeopardy if INEC goes ahead to rely on these flawed census figures to alter the boundaries of the constituencies or set up new ones.

    It is about seven years since the last census was conducted. After seven years, significant demographic changes would have occurred such that the 2006 census can no longer be reasonably relied upon. The situation is not helped by the imperfections of that census and our rising population growth rate.

    When you add observed distortions in that census to the changes that would have occurred in population dynamics over this time frame, its reliability for the exercise is further whittled down.

    For another, the NPC has also been on top gear to give the nation a credible census in 2016. That date is just barely three years away. Does it really make any sense embarking on the delimitation exercise on the eve of a census that is being looked upon to redress glaring inequities of the past? And what is the value in expending taxpayers’ money in the project when it will not fundamentally address observed disparities and can conveniently cue in after the 2016 census?

    Matters were not helped by Jega when he said his commission does not intend to create new constituencies but to adjust existing ones. The purport of this is that even where the commission discovers that additional constituencies needed to be created to redress observed imbalances, nothing of sort will happen. This is as curious as it is confounding. It might be interesting to hear from him why he cannot abort the exercise if he is not prepared to undertake the rigour the creation of additional constituencies entails.

    Even before he volunteers information on this, suffice it to say that those reasons that make the creation of new constituencies inappropriate now are the same reasons why the delineation in the manner Jega proposes it has to wait. My guess is that Jega wants to run away from envisaged controversy which the creation of additional constituencies will engender especially now people have been sensitized on the inadequacies of our previous headcounts. He sees the balancing of the population among constituencies as less contentious. That could also be. But it comes with its problems.

    Again, we are at the threshold of another national conference to redress the imperfections of our federal order. Some of the issues that will feature in that conference include the conduct of a credible census, state and local government creation as well as the unit of representation within the federal arrangement. The way these issues are handled is bound to have very serious impact on the structure and size of our current constituencies.

    Since INEC is not prepared to go the whole length in this exercise, it makes little sense approaching it very grudgingly. There is nothing practically urgent in the exercise that it cannot wait after a credible headcount in 2016. The commission should discard the idea of constituency delimitation and concentrate its energies on the challenges posed by the 2015 elections. Delimitation should wait until we have a credible basis for it. Only then will its outcome meet the wishes and aspirations of the peoples of this country.

  • Is Clara Chime a victim of love?

    Is Clara Chime a victim of love?

    The news came to everyone rather surreptitiously. The governor of Enugu State, Sullivan Chime, reportedly detained the first lady. The image was unsavoury: a governor, in his hectoring majesty, ordering the security aides to corral Clara. The image takes on more dramatic hue as we imagine the screaming first lady pinned down, her hands wrapped around her back, forced either to sit down or lie down, her clothes out of joint, before the doors are locked against her.

    This contradicts the temperament and powers of first ladies. First ladies often pin down their men, extract special favours and sometimes ride more glorious convoys than their husbands. Quite often, aides fear them more than their husbands. A person can be fired but a soft word from the first lady can redeem the job. Even when the governor confesses a special softness for an aide, the first lady who shares a contrary standpoint could reverse the affection. She could make life so difficult for that aide and the governor that her triumph is a foregone conclusion.

    She is the prop, whisper and, sometimes, bully behind the throne, the pillow-talk queen. That made it quite difficult for many to digest the narrative of a humiliated power dame. But some who had followed the story of Governor Chime had observed some traits counterintuitive to this picture of governor-first lady relationship.

    We remember Chime ushering in the New Year with stories of his failure to let anyone know if he was sick and why he would not convey, in simple language, why he could not communicate with the people of the state. The people who voted him into power knew nothing about the person they voted for, whether he was alive or dead. Consequently, the rumour mills buzzed, and depending on who you asked, they said Governor Chime suffered from one illness or another. Imagination overthrew reality.

    He never loved the media, and saw any reporter or editor as a predator in his holy of holies. In his recent press briefing, he said he did not hate the media but he had issues with them because when he was ill, some newspapers reported his death. No excuse for newspapers that soared on fiction. It was irresponsible, especially on a delicate matter like death. But Governor Chime fertilised errant imagination by not providing facts as the first information officer of the state. He never saw his own shortcomings. He only saw others’.

    Chime only recently knocked down the building of the Mountain of Fire and Miracles Ministries in his state against court orders. Is that not impunity? Does the law matter to the man who defies a court order? Again, he tried to resolve issues he had with university lecturers by unleashing dogs after them.

    Against these news reports, some members of the public had judged the governor as Clara’s predator. But then, he organised a press briefing, and the governor said that his wife was afflicted by mental illness, and he had to restrain her to keep her from ridicule. She was present at the occasion, as well as her present doctor, Aham Agumoh, as well as Clara’s brother.

    Governor Chime tried to paint himself as the husband and protector. And not a few people were impressed. But humans rights lawyer Femi Falana (SAN) has been pushing a different narrative. He said the woman had hired him as her attorney. But the woman had said that she did not hire Falana in the open interview. Yet, a letter leaked to the media that she had contacted a certain chief whom she wanted to contact Falana on her behalf. She admitted in the interview that her letter leaked. That corroborates Falana’s position that she wanted his help. The reporters did not ask Clara Chime why she wrote the letter and whether she insisted on the contents. I contacted Falana and he said Clara’s mother told him to help free her daughter from the grasp of the governor. He also said the woman asked him if she sounded like somebody who was mentally disturbed.

    Two important developments bear investigation. One, why did she ask for a different doctor, and why did she have to scream for the matter to be brought to the fore? The same doctor appeared in the press briefing. Was he supposed to appear there, according to his professional oath, even if the governor wanted to clear his image as a wife bully? Yet, she accepted in the open press briefing that Dr. Agumoh was her doctor, the same doctor she wanted replaced.

    The other question is, did Clara act under duress in the press briefing? What did they discuss with her when they took her away from the media for several minutes?

    What are the details of the doctor’s treatment that have riled even members of her family? Tony Igwe, Clara’s brother, may not have represented other members of the family given the fact that the members object to the present treatment of their daughter. This was clear in the intervention of the National Human Rights Commission. Both Chime’s and Clara’s families did not agree on how her matter was being handled. Could it be that her so-called mental condition is exaggerated? She described her state as nervous breakdown.

    If her situation is not as bad, then is Chime along with Dr. Agumoh not acting like Dr. Bero in Soyinka’s play, Madness and Specialists, where the specialist becomes in a sense guilty of what the patient allegedly suffers? German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche wrote: “There is always some madness in love. There is also always some reason in madness.” Is it a case of too much love, which itself can injure, or violated love? Shakespeare calls it “cold fire,” “wolvish-ravening lamb,” or “fiend angelical.” Is Clara a victim of love?

    It is always a delicate matter in psychiatry not to over-treat a case or it may itself pass as madness. That was the case in Achebe’s short story, The Madman, when a sane man of high nobility, with no clothes on, pursues a madman, who stole the sane man’s clothes, into the market place. We cannot just forget that the Soviet Union established asylums for dissidents.

    Even the NHRC contradicted itself when it said it was established that she suffered from depression and hallucination. In the five-hour session it had with her, it did not see any such evidence. It is a human rights body, what was its business making judgment about her mental condition, especially when it knew the two families did not agree on the treatment? If they did not agree on the treatment, it means they did not agree on the diagnosis.

    In one breath, the NHRC agreed with a diagnosis and, in another, set up a committee to examine her true state of health. The NHRC said Clara had access to her son and keys to the apartments, but it had no knowledge whether or not that is a recent development prompted by her outcry. The NHRC’s retraction was an afterthought. It has compromised its integrity as a body.

    This has been happening for all of four months, and Governor Chime’s desperate press conference was not actuated by any chivalry but a necessity to save his name. It is not so much that he is interested in transparency.

    When he was flown out of the country, he did not believe in transparency then. He owes Enugu State citizens as well as Nigerians explanations for keeping the matter under wraps while he was abroad. His illness was more important to Nigerians and Enugu State citizens than that of his wife. The health of a whole state hung on him as the carrier of their mandate. No one voted in Clara Chime.

    It was wrong, and even wrong-headed to present himself as a latter-day convert to the doctrine of transparency. May be he is not a convert. He was just pushed to the corner by the cries of the media and the fulminations of Falana. So he acted not out of conscience but necessity. So, he is not Clara’s hero.

  • What’s ‘night vigil’?

    National Mirror headline blunder of November 7 welcomes us this week: “INEC to synchronise voters’ card into national identity scheme” You synchronise something with (not into) something.

    From National Mirror Views Page first sentence of the above edition come this treble: “The crisis of unemployment (why not just Unemployment…?) especially among the youths (among the youth or among youths) has become a global phenomenal (phenomenon).”

    “Sickle cell anaemia: A governor’s wife (wife’s) intervention”

    DAILY Sun Front Page Headline of November 6 goofed: “Osun shrine operator arraigned in court” Where else would he have been arraigned?

    THE GUARDIAN of November 5 was also in the infamy hall: “Kenya charges four over (with) Westgate mall attack”

    Next is ‘The Flagship’ Editorial: “It is an affront on (to) the government and people of Nigeria.”

    “The fire was finally contained at abbout (sic) 11.00am….” Precision in timing is non-negotiable: at 11 a.m. If uncertain, about 11 a.m. ‘At about’ cannot co-function in the same environment.

    “…in this interview with The Guardian alerted on (to)….”

    Still on THE GUARDIAN: “He, however, proffered solutions on (to)….”

    Vanguard OPINION column of November 5 written by one fictitious Simeon Nwabundu of no verifiable identity committed juvenile errors in an unprofessional, kindergarten and dubious response to my dispassionate article entitled Charlatanism of Igbo political elite published in my column in Wednesday Daily Sun a fortnight ago: “It beats my imagination when journalists whom people are look up to (what’s the meaning of this?)….”

    “This was even when it is (was) clear to all Nigerians that….”

    “How can an indigene (sic) of the zone and renowned (a renowned) journalist canvassed (sic!)….”

    “This was something Wabara’s principal and publisher of the newspaper that has continued to be used to attack Orji’s government never wish (wished) him and the people of the state before now.” Let the imbecilic writer of this extracted feedback know that I do not work for Dr. Orji Uzor Kalu or indeed any person. I run my own perceptive company and two shopping malls, among other economic engagements. I am my own paymaster.

    Lastly from Vanguard OPINION: “They talk when there is need for such, dialogue when necessary without paying lips service (lip-service).”

    The next invaluable contribution is from Mr. Kola Danisa (07068074257): ‘Our media will soon start to write about pilgrims missing their ‘luggages’. For the avoidance of doubt, rhetorics, luggages, baggages, clothings, attires, children’s wears or men’s wears, foot-wears, counsels (lawyers), aircrafts, beddings, equipments, machineries, remunerations, contrabands and  legislations do not take an ‘s’ even if they are in the plural form.’ More profound contributions needed.

    THE NATION ON SUNDAY of November 3 comes next with its own gaffes: “Black Saturday: 28 feared dead at Anambra night vigil” ‘Vigils’ are held mostly during the night. In our sociolinguistic environment here, we are not used to afternoon vigils. Once you mention ‘vigil’, everyone knows it is usually a night affair. So, ‘night vigil’, within that headline context, is verbose. Particularly, too, daylight processions/prayers/watch-outs for solemn/spiritual sessions or danger are not common occurrences in our country. Do you disagree?

    “Dangote to invest 36m euros on (in) food processing (food-processing facility”

    “FG’s ‘non-challant attitude’ will worsen ASUU strike—Don” Spell-check: nonchalant (no hyphen)

    “The recent setbacks…has (have)….”

    Now the last entry by THE NATION ON SUNDAY: “…nobody is making any fresh demand of (on) government.”

    THISDAY of November 2 dimmed the structural light right from its front page: “…with the hand over (handover) of operations of the privatized generation and distribution companies to their new owners.”

    “Mimiko to commission (inaugurate) emergency medical centre”

    “The owner of life demanded for it….” The Saturday Newspaper: yank off ‘for’!

    DAILY SUN of October 30 takes over the baton with errors right from its front page: “…shortly after the commissioning (inauguration/launch…) ceremony of the newly constructed (newly-constructed) Sokoto State University, yesterday.”

    “ASUU strike: Sambo, minister, VCs in closed door (closed-door) meeting”

    “FG urged to provide N35bn take off (take-off) grant for NIPOST”

    “Benue govt plans cattle ranches in 8 LGs” For headline purposes and even structural precision, yank off ‘cattle’.

    “Falomo (Falomo’s) perverted logic on Abacha” (Opinion Page)

    “One very outrageous and dehumanizing claim of Ore Falomo is that Gen. Abacha was a puppet who only did the biddings of Gen. Diya.” Just like ‘potential’, ‘bidding’, a noun, is non-count.

    “NFF is 80 today…but does (do) the officials know?”

    Still on DAILY SUN under review: “”Journalist-turned pastor (what of the second hyphen?) launches book”

    “Lagos govt teams up with firm on tree planting campaign” Battle against climate change: tree-planting campaign

    “The people of Ngwo also received the deputy senate president same day.” CITYSUN: the same day

    “2 Nigerians bagged (bag) German-Africa award”

    “EFCC to prosecute alleged fake custom (customs) agent” (THE GUARDIAN Headline, October 29)

    “…birds of the same feather flocking together?” (THE NATION ON SUNDAY Comment & Analysis Page, August 18) My comment: birds of a (not ‘the same’) feather….

    “With its entrant (entrance), prices of telephone services plummeted making the services available and affordable to move Nigerians.” (Nigeria Political Economist, August 2013)

    “He…restored public confidence in (to) an industry which was fast losing its public appeal and goodwill.”

    “All Nigerian Editors Conference” (Source: NGE Asaba 2013) A rewrite: All-Nigeria Editors’ Conference. Even thou esteemed editors!

    National Mirror of August 22 failed a simple grammatical test: “…architects say govt postponing evil days” This way: the evil hour/day…

  • On Sovereignty

    On Sovereignty

    Modern sovereignty derives its power and authority from the withdrawal and substitution of the “divine” and absolute right of kings and monarchs to preside over the affairs of humankind for the legal right of the people to choose who will rule them. In effect, although sovereignty belongs to the people, they are deemed not “sovereign” enough to preside over their own affairs. As it has been famously noted, if men were angels, there would be no need for government. Nowhere in the modern history of mankind have the people actually come to power. Power is often held in permanent trusteeship for them: either delegated by them or collected on their behalf by those with the will to power.

    This contradiction between the legal power of the people to determine the sovereignty of their rulers and its political limitations in the face of rulers ready to assert their sovereignty and authority often leads to a democratic conundrum: the pious myth of liberal democracy as peoples’ power in motion, or as government of the people by the people and for the people collides with the harsh reality that this is nothing but a gigantic swindle. It is the government of the organized few by the organized few and for the organized few in most cases.

    The battle for the soul of Nigeria has shifted in focus in the past month since the advent of President Jonathan’s advisory committee for the convocation of a National Conference. Sovereignty itself has become a site of fierce intellectual struggle. There are those who insist that in order to pass muster, and since it is a gathering  the Nigerian people, the sovereignty of the proposed confab is non-negotiable and should be guaranteed ab initio by Jonathan. There are also those who insist that since sovereignty has already been ceded by the Nigerian people, there can be no two sovereign authorities co-existing in the same polity except as an anarchic anomaly. For Jonathan to surrender his authority without a formal seizure of such in organized elections amounts to sovereign suicide.

    If everybody sticks to their guns on this sticky matter, particularly organised labour and the influential South West, it can be assumed that the conference is dead on arrival. The widespread clamour for the sovereignty of the conference is a direct indictment of past efforts and a reflection of grave concerns about the viability of Nigeria in its current incarnation. If Nigeria were to be running well, there would have been no need for such a historic dialogue. In fact never in the history of Nigeria has there been so much contempt among the educated classes for both the sovereign and the notion of sovereignty itself within the backdrop of a politically and economically traumatized citizenry. When then and where then lies the sovereignty of a state that has virtually unraveled?

    It must not be forgotten that no ruler in post-colonial Africa has willingly surrendered his sovereignty.  Not even with imminent death and the dissolution of empire. African rulers can be a hardy and recalcitrant lot. In 1996, and in a cruel twist of ironic fate, snooper  watched Mobutu, his body already ravaged by cancer, being helped to his feet by a frail Nelson Mandela on a frigate moored off the coast of Angola. Kabila’s forces were already closing in on the capital. But Mobutu was too far gone in his delusions to have any truck with reality. A few days later, Mobutu was chased away from his country to die in ignominious exile. Even as he fled, his official griot was singing on the radio that the president reigns but does not rule.

    It must be conceded that that was a situation of war and anarchy. But it was war and anarchy arising from a political stalemate engineered by Mobutu and arising from a deliberately deadlocked National Conference in which a dithering France paid with the life of its ambassador to Zaire. Jonathan still has some residual good luck.  The widespread loss of authority and legitimacy as we are witnessing in Nigeria does not equate to a loss of the power of coercion and forcible compliance. Based on that alone, the Nigerian state still has substantial sovereignty. Whether that balance of force can be maintained or sustained in the coming months particularly if anarchy spreads and anomie deepens will determine how much sovereignty is left for the Jonathan administration.

    This morning, in continuation of our policy of letting a thousand flowers bloom, we publish an article that offers a fresh and interesting  perspective on the issue of confab and leadership.

  • Confab versus Leadership

    The issue of Confab is not new to Nigeria or Nigerians. Over time, we have been inundated with echoes, agitations and clarion calls for the convocation of a national discourse. Such an envisioned discourse has been tagged various names or given different nomenclatures – depending on the side of the aisle you position or find yourself. With the growing clamour, it has dawned on men and women of thought that the agitations have been on the pedestal of selfishness, parochial interest or ethnic egocentrism. Thus, it is becoming increasingly obvious that some people believe the Confab could provide an opportunity to settle some latent scores especially for some sections of the country or those Nigerians who have always felt cheated and therefore aggrieved in the leadership debacle and general distribution of the largesse that has accrued to the country especially, since the advent of the first oil-production at OLOBIRI, decades ago. This is however, without prejudice or discredit to the gains of competitiveness, self-help or independence, growth and regional development, of old. All told, the Confab euphoria is not about nationalism or development per se, rather, it is a rivalry or tussle on who “rules” next or whose turn should it be thereafter – based on some political intricacy or ethnic calculus.

    By extension, the objective of such a Confab is the evolution of a brand new Constitution that would potentially accommodate most of the yearnings of the people since the current 1999 Constitution as amended, is supposedly, a relic of military interventions in the polity. Paradoxically, a good number of the drafters then, have now joined hands in condemning the Constitution and currently in search of a brand new one. Rather than blame the operators of the rule book or barometer for governance, every Confab apologist seems to exploit the omissions or “commissions” in the Constitution, as if there is a perfect Constitution anywhere in the world.

    I am told, Sovereignty has a dual hue or composition – Popular and Legal.  The popular one resides in the people, who however, go to the polls to express themselves by electing their leaders or representatives who there from is given the Legal Sovereignty in trust. Meanwhile, the Constitution expressly states and insists that any act of irreverence by the holders of the Legal Sovereignty in the course of its exercise, is tractable and therefore the Legal Sovereignty is redeemable by the power of recall by the people lest, they have to wait for the next general elections for appropriate redress through the sanctity of the ballot. It is little wonder why there is a yawning divide amongst people regarding a Confab report – those who want the Confab document to be subjected to the whims and caprices of the National Assembly, in contradistinction to those who want a referendum to decide the way forward based on the same Confab document.

    To all intents and purposes, the National Assembly, being a beneficiary of the extant polity, would hardly succumb to the dictates of a Confab document since the legislators are after all, deemed to have been given the Legal Sovereignty by the people, at the instance of the most recent polls. The proponents of referendum, who are apparently averse to the status quo ante, are not pragmatic enough to observe that the two sovereigns are to a large extent mutually exclusive of each other, since they cannot operate concurrently in real time. However, they are collectively exhaustive in the end. Thus, any extant political administration has the constitutional power to initiate, arrange, convoke a Confab and examine the attendant document from which a referendum could be called for, if adjudged expedient or desirous.

    Whilst the National Assembly cannot make or write a Constitution, she could alter or amend a subsisting one to a large extent beyond which she is empowered to call for a referendum that could lead to the making of a new Constitution – presumably agreeable to a good majority of the populace. However, our antecedent regarding Confab issues as in many other development areas is “res ipsa loquitur” – the matter speaks for itself. Our various governments understandably, have been flagrantly insincere to the bidding of a Confab – including other existential areas and this lacuna has elicited an epoch of incredulity – leaving a cumulus of suspicion, distrust, skepticism, unreliability and deception at the doorsteps of Aso Rock. And since government is a continuum, the current administration is therefore not exempted from the morass of insensitivity and impunity, over time. Indeed, the current administration, through all manner of unrepentant raisons d’état, has had and still having her fair share of the revolving and unremitting irreverence to the sensibilities of those who willingly obliged or surrendered Legal Sovereignty in trust.

    A glimpse or cursory look at existing records – regarding committee approach to national issues, indicates flagrant disrespect to the honorable and revered committee appointees whose erstwhile reports and honest recommendations have been resigned to the heap of dysfunctional statistics. Swept under the “impregnable carpet” at ASO Rock are reports of UWAIS, DANJUMA, RIBADU and ORASANYE – depicting a tiny few in the pile. Thus, those crying foul of deception or distraction in respect of this current attempt at resuming the Confab recurrent decimal, are not without their justification.

    Truly, it is virtually sacrosanct save a revolution, to do away with or underrate the powers of an existing National Assembly or government based on a convoked Confab or its attendant document. Meanwhile, evidence abound that the casualty of any revolution (presumably bloody) goes beyond the instant immeasurable carnage and egregious destruction or deprivation of the very resources the revolution was meant to protect, in the first place. Each revolution invariably mortgages the life and times of a nation including those of unborn generations, as a revolution culminates in utter confusion and instability, whilst growth and sustainable development become a mirage, if the country survives.

    Any in-depth search for the main cause of a clamour for a Confab or new Constitution or the most authentic resource and catalyst for ethnic disturbances or even religious upheavals, would throw up “FAILURE of LEADERSHIP” as the root, trunk and branch for such agitations. Whilst it is true that human beings are invariably forward looking with the view to expanding their horizon and bringing about self-progress using all forms of methods, it is equally incontrovertible that they also relish the opportunity of easy paths or reassuring roadmaps to fortune, comfort and freedom. Thus, the Nigerian citizenry would prefer the path of least resistance towards achieving their goals as opposed to confrontational or revolutionary means or ways that could be tortuous, devious, antisocial, irreverent and sometimes illegal. Incidentally, the popular and well-acknowledged sanctuary that is most available to provide such paths of least resistance is the government of the people by the people for the people – the government of the day.

    Political pundits relish and extol democracy as the best form of government currently known to man, the world over – regardless of the concomitant gerrymandering or filibustering, it obliges. It is therefore no gainsaying the fact that good governance as epitomized by benevolent, visionary, insightful and purposeful leadership is the sine qua non of growth and sustainable development in a developing nation as Nigeria. After all, the 1999 Constitution as amended, unambiguously states and insists that the primary purpose of government is to provide security and welfare for her teeming population – enshrined in Chapter 2, Section 14, subsection 2(b): Fundamentals Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy. Thus, if government provides and also seen or adjudged as providing the enabling environment through the provisioning and enhancement of infrastructure (power, water, transportation), health and education, it would be easier for the citizenry to benefit wholesomely and irretrievably from learning, commerce, business and general welfare.

    The sprawling effects of such a sincere and committed disposition of government to her nationals would improve the general wellbeing, stimulate wealth creation, sensitize economic emancipation and enhance growth and sustainable development. As the workforce would continually and numerically soar based on general growth – while keeping all major economic indices in check, idleness, truancy, crime and criminology would be at controllable low ebbs – with the cooperation of a disciplined and savvy judiciary. Thus, poverty, misemployment, underemployment and unemployment – adjudged as the raison d’etre for breaches of law and order, civil disobedience and all manner of unremitting but avoidable agitations would subside, as more people would be happy, gainfully employed, committed, and focused on self-development at the very least. At that point, issues of ethnic demagoguery or religious bigotry would be reduced, as a growing number of people would be genuinely engaged in creating wealth for themselves and summarily for the country. A resounding byproduct of such a commitment by the government is a gradual increase in patriotism with obeisance to rule of law by the people – invariably guided by the much or less each individual or group derives or benefits from government’s benevolence.

    So, the case for the convocation of any Confab albeit, not irrelevant, is definitely not a front-burner issue that would quickly transform or launch Nigeria into limelight or levitate to her rightful place in the comity of nations. Rather, the quest for diligent, forthright, dogged, committed, knowledgeable and visionary leadership is primus-inter-pares and it is crucial to our survival now and forever. And the leadership odyssey is NOW as time is running out.

    Dr Bello, a former MD of NITEL, lives in Abuja.

  • Why I endorse Ngige for Anambra governorship

    Why I endorse Ngige for Anambra governorship

    If all the politicians in the Southeast, including the very interesting and amusing but often hyperbolic Rochas Okorocha of Imo State, Chris Ngige seems to me to be the most colourful. On Saturday, he hopes to defeat 29 other candidates in the Anambra State governorship election. Analysts think the election will be a four-way race between Dr Ngige of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Willie Obiano of the All Progressive Grand Alliance (APGA), Tony Nwoye of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), and Ifeanyi Ubah of the Labour Party (LP). I had hoped the race would be a titanic two-way race between Dr Ngige and former Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) governor, Charles Soludo. With the manipulation of Professor Soludo out of the race in APGA and the official sanction of Mr Obiano as candidate by the state governor, the only credible, independent person of substance remaining in the race is Dr Ngige, irrespective of what his chances are.

    Mr Obiano is clearly Governor Peter Obi’s favourite, and the governor has undisguisedly tried to advance his candidature. But if the APGA candidate has any fine attributes, and it is likely he has many, not least his banking background and his District Officer looks, they are, however, buried beneath the controversies that accompanied his enthronement as the ruling party’s candidate. He speaks well, and has a fair understanding of financial issues. But he is a dour and incomparably unexciting politician, and he lacks the charisma, rigour, excitement and independence that make both Dr Ngige and Professor Soludo tower head and shoulders above virtually all politicians in the Southeast. Mr Obi himself is not a colourful politician, nor is he anything more than merely pragmatic and somewhat businesslike. He probably sees much of Mr Obiano in himself, much more than the fact that the candidate who comes from Anambra North satisfies the party’s zoning ambition.

    Comrade Nwoye is a latecomer to the race, having only last week secured the Supreme Court nod to be fielded as the PDP candidate. He has a union background and is a dyed-in-the-wool PDP politician. But in a race as tight as Anambra’s, and with a surfeit of eminently qualified candidates, anchoring a divided house on him and entering the race barely 10 days to the election are hardly the kind of credentials that dispose to victory. And like Obiano, he will rely on his party to create an artificial whirlwind to procure victory for him. Should he win, he will bring no experience and no special talent to the office. Mr Ubah is a businessman who is willing to put his enormous money where his mouth is. But beyond that, and his zestful face and longing eyes, the state will be as undeserving of him as it is undeserving of both Mr Nwoye and Mr Obiano.

    That leaves the irrepressible Dr Ngige. I have been a longstanding fan of this witty, colourful and politically passionate senator form Anambra Central. He was governor between 2003 and 2006, after the scheming Chris Uba, an unscrupulous businessman, procured a misbegotten governorship victory for him. But two months after being sworn in, Dr Ngige simply dismantled his godfather, denigrated him openly, and created such a din as no governor had ever done before him, nor is ever likely to do after him. The manner of his fight with Mr Uba, not to say the panache with which he secured victory in that deathly struggle, was as entertaining as the manner his enemies, led by the avaricious Mr Uba, tried in 2003 to unhorse him using a maudlin policeman, Assistant Inspector General of Police (AIG) Raphael Ige. I of course do not crave entertainment from an Ngige governorship. The plain fact, however, is that though there is no dull moment with Dr Ngige, he is always careful not to subordinate brilliant governance to entertainment.

    While Dr Ngige can be foresighted and diligent, as indeed he seems configured to be all his life, his years in office showed he is also a very practical politician, where practicality can sometimes be defined as not being averse to heroics that borders on outright mendacity. (Imagine if he had not led Uba on before the 2003 poll, and then undid him so spectacularly and dramatically to the relief of all Anambrarians and the mirth of every Nigerian!). I have no trouble whatsoever in endorsing Dr Ngige as governor of Anambra, notwithstanding his anonymity in the Senate where he sat in lugubrious and painless solemnity. He will come to the office of governor with plenty of useful experience and exuberance, uncommon vision, a great deal of joie de vivre far surpassing those of his three main rivals, and certain to put the state in salutary spotlight. Should Dr Ngige lose…no, no, perish the thought.

  • Abysmal statistics, facts and realities that define and yet do not define us (1)

    Abysmal statistics, facts and realities that define and yet do not define us (1)

    Statistics should be used the way a drunk uses a lamppost, not for illumination but for support.

    Anonymous, credited to British humorists

    When a dead fish starts to rot, the process begins at the head from which it spreads to the rest of the body.

    A Greek adage

    With some embarrassment, perhaps with even a little bit of shame, let me admit it: a few days ago when I went to check where our country’s stand in the Human Development Report (HDR) of 2013, I was greatly relieved, indeed almost joyous, to discover that at 153 out of 187 countries, Nigeria was not at rock bottom level among the countries of the world. The HDR is an annual report issued by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) that gives details of each country’s Human Development Index (HDI) for the preceding year. The HDI itself is a term that was devised to give a far more expansive and accurate measurement than the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of the total well-being of the populations of the countries of the world. Being ranked at HDI 153 out of 187 is of course a pretty bad, perhaps even scandalously poor ranking for an oil-rich country, but when your country is nearly always at the bottom of the global totem pole of meritocracy, you may be excused for feeling gratified when your country shows up 34 places above the lowest of the low.

    For those who read the piece on the Nigerian Premier League and professional soccer in our country that was published in this column last week, it will come as no surprise why this week I went searching for Nigeria’s location in the HDR of 2013. For in the light of that piece, our NPL has the great but dubious distinction of being the world’s worst national soccer league, not in terms of the quality of the players but with regard to the absurdity of data and statistics displayed in the league table for the 2012-2013 season. Individually and collectively, we have some of the best players on the African continent; and we export players to virtually all the other regions of the world where they generally tend to give good accounts of themselves as gifted, talented players. By contrast, the league table reflects a completely different profile; it reflects matches regularly won and lost due to factors that have barely anything to do with merit, talent, skill and effort; it reflects a moral universe in which referees, fans and players themselves seem totally resigned to winning and losing through corruption, violence, intimidation and fear.

    This gap between, on the one hand, what might well be the real quality of players in the Nigerian soccer league and, on the other hand, the data and figures displayed in the league table for the whole world to see and mock provides the point of departure for the series that begins in this column with this essay. Can we generalise from this case of the NPL and its absurd league table? As a people are we defined, are we constituted by the myriad of other statistics and realities that indicate that for the great majority of its citizens Nigeria is one of the worst countries in the world in which to live? Or as with the players of the NPL, are Nigerians not really defined or constituted by these super-negative statistics and figures? As we shall see, these are not easy questions or issues to resolve; all the same, they are urgent and pressing matters that require our undivided and unceasing attention.

    Now, besides the organisation of professional soccer, there are of course other major areas of our collective national existence like politics, economy, society and education in which Nigeria is a low achiever, a two-bit player in the theatre of the most meritocratic societies of the planet. As a matter of fact, some of the statistics and figures in these particular aspects of Nigeria’s identity at home and abroad are nothing short of the continent’s or the world’s very worst. At one time or another, some of these have been discussed in this column. In the interest of a cogent and focused discourse, I will cite only a few that I consider the most salient and portentous.

    In one year (2009), only 1.8% of students taking the NECO high school leaving examination passed; in the last decade, the passing rate in this particular examination has never risen above 35%. Similarly, our universities and other tertiary institutions are very poorly ranked in Africa; in the world, the ranking dips so far below the ground level that it is enveloped by invisibility. This pattern also applies to what I personally regard as unquestionably the most unconscionable of these relentless statistics and data of gloom and doom: an absolute poverty rate which stands at seven out of 10 or 70%, again one of the worst in Africa and the world. Closely related to this are the staggering figures, data and anecdotes on corruption in Nigeria that are bandied around the world. Almost a decade ago, Paul Wolfowitz, former President of the World Bank, estimated that since crude oil began to be exported from Nigeria, about $300 billion dollars had been looted by the country’s military and civilian rulers and their cronies. This brazen official brigandage continues to this day, just as it continues to be one of the worst and the most talked about in the world. For instance, as I have observed again and again in this column, in the oil subsidy mega-scam of the year 2011, the sum of N2.58 trillion naira that is the equivalent of $16 billion U.S. dollars was looted from our nation’s savings account, the Excess Crude Account (ECA), more or less in broad daylight.

    Most of these data, figures and realities are well known and much talked about, in Nigeria itself and in many other parts of the world. I think it is safe, if also extremely disturbing, to say that most Nigerians think that we are defined by these data and figures, that we are what the figures and data say we are. On the surface, most Nigerians feel or think that the politicians, the rulers bear full responsibility for this troubled and troubling convergence between what these statistics say and what we are as a people. But I think that deep down; most Nigerians also think that the people themselves, in their scores of millions and in virtually every part of the country, bear some responsibility for the corruption, the rot, the abysmal state of things. Now, this is bad enough when we are thinking of things like corruption and dishonesty, but what of the abysmally low figures for education? What of the infinitely low ranking of our universities and other tertiary institutions? Are Nigerians some of the world’s dumbest people as the statistics seem to imply?

    In case any reader of this piece is inclined to think that these are mere abstract or speculative questions, please think of the following realities. For close to two decades now, employers of labour in our country have been complaining that the majority of students graduating from our universities, often with excellent results, are so bad, so inferior in quality that they are “unemployable”. Think also of the fact that our newspapers are often filled with badly written, sometimes blatantly ungrammatical writing, the likes of which you could never have seen two or three decades ago. Think also of the fact that whether it is corruption or the failure rates of students at the public school leaving examination, Nigerians seem remarkably resigned, seem unperturbed and carry on as if, well, that is how things are and what can one do about? Indeed, this particular factor of resignation, complacency or perhaps even widespread opportunistic collusion in the rot that seems to define us as a people requires careful consideration.

    When I first came across the 1.8% passing rate in the NECO exams of November-December 2009, as shocked as I was about that statistic, I was even more shocked that the Minister of Education showed little or no outrage. In any country in the world that is not benighted with rot and mediocrity in high places, that Minister of Education would have lost his or her job on the basis of that distressing result alone. It was therefore doubly astounding that our Minister of Education did not on that occasion get fired and did not even get queried when he showed no outrage, no concern at all. And in the course of the last one decade when the passing rate has not exceeded 35%, if any Federal Minister of Education has shown any alarm at this calamitous state of things, I have not seen it as I have been on a year after year lookout for it. What this means, what this can only mean, is that as far as the powers that be are concerned, Nigeria is a low achiever in education, period. If this seems a thoughtless or gratuitous remark to make, please think of the notorious “4% annunciation” of the Minster of Finance, Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, when she infamously declared that because the scope of corruption, waste and squandermania in Nigeria was so vast and so endemic, she could only hope to have reduced the scale by not more than 4% by the time she leaves office in 2015.

    But what of teachers, parents, guardians, and local communities themselves? What outrage have they shown about 35% as the highest passing rate that their children and wards can reach, as revealed in published NECO results year after year? Again, in many countries in the world, with 35% as the upper passing rate, parents and guardians would be up in arms against teachers, against educators, against the government. But this has not happened in our country. Indeed, if widespread anecdotes are to be believed, instead of outrage, something that is almost exactly its opposite has been observed in many communities across the length and breadth of the country. In one anecdote that was narrated recently by a former member of the National Assembly at a public lecture at Harvard University, his offer in his home constituency to pay for extra hours of lessons and more dedicated teaching for secondary school students so that their NECO results could be improved was rebuffed by the chosen leaders of the community. No, they told the shocked Ex-Honourable Member, our children do not need extra hours of teaching, they do not need better paid and more dedicated teachers, what they need is failsafe access to examination papers since, as they have been told by neighbouring communities that that is the only real passport to good NECO results!

    This, of course, is not the end of the story. As a people, we are not defined, we are not constituted only by these sorts of anecdotes, together with the range of statistics and data of negation that I have discussed in this essay. We must use statistics and data carefully, astutely. And when everything is said and done, it all boils down to how the lives of the people are organised by the political leadership. As the second epigraph to this essay puts it, “when a dead fish starts to rot, the process begins from the head”. This will be our starting point in next week’s continuation of the series.

  • Federalism and taxation 2

    Federalism and taxation 2

    Payment of tax by citizens has over the centuries cemented the social contract between government and the citizenry.

    There are options for the reform of the tax system which could both finance increases in benefits and leave the tax system itself more progressive and more logical in structure. Furthermore, the transition to such a system could be one from which the overwhelming majority of the population would gain-John Halls in Changing Tax: how the system works and how to change it.

    Just as we observed last week, the idea of the federal minister of finance on reforming the system of multiple taxation in the country is still more atmospheric than specific. But as we move closer to a position paper from her, it is necessary for the states to prepare themselves philosophically and strategically to address the issue of taxation in a federation, more so that taxation all over the world is a central political issue for citizens and their governments.

    Among political conservatives who believe that the government should have little or no role in solving the problems of individual citizens, taxation is looked at with disdain. Similarly, in polities like Nigeria that thrive on the mentality of manna from nature as the source of public finance, tax may be considered a burden that the government should not be saddled with while it spends its energy to allocate funds from non-renewable resources that appear infinite to myopic individuals in charge of government. Correspondingly, many citizens in such societies with access to funds from non-renewable resource are generally opposed to tax, more so to progressive tax that they consider to diminish their savings. But among social democrats who think that the role of government is to facilitate the transformation of the government into a caring agency with concern for the welfare of citizens, taxation is crucial to the creation of a welfare state.

    If there is any human creation that has helped to fuel development of democratic states in the last three centuries, it is the fact that citizens pay tax to fund government projects that improve the life of citizens: road, education, healthcare, and even social security for the needy. Payment of tax by citizens has over the centuries cemented the social contract between government and the citizenry. More than vote, tax makes it possible for citizens to own their governments, assist them to create socially beneficial benefits, and even provide funds to fight enemies, if and when they exist.

    Given the claim that Nigeria is a federal republic and the recent announcement by President Jonathan that there is a need to have a national conference at which citizens dialogue on how to improve their federal system, it is important for those leading the debate on reforming the country’s system of multiple taxation to recognize that multiple tax systems is a sine qua non of federalism, be it territorial as in the case of the United States and the United Arab Emirates, or ethnic as in the case of Belgium and Ethiopia.

    The first area to mark down for reform is Nigeria’s Indirect tax system. This area includes all forms of consumption tax: Sales Tax, Value Added Tax, Rates, Excise Duties, Car Tax, Stamp Duties, Driver’s License Tax, etc. At present, the federal government collects most of these taxes. The result of federalization of what should be a subnational tax is that states and local governments in which citizens consume such services and in the process add to the responsibility of the government of such states is that such states induce and collect consumption tax for other states to benefit from.

    For example, when I was growing up in colonial Nigeria and even up to pre-military era, it was the subnational government that collected tax on car registration, issuance of driver’s license, and all rates. Even up till the time of General Sani Abacha, collection of sales tax in Lagos was a state responsibility. Replacing sales tax with VAT, the proceeds of which states send to the federal government for allocation to states in the fashion of revenue from petroleum should be the first area to reform in favour of states and local governments. There is no federal system in the world in which sales tax is collected by central governments, the way federal agencies now collect funds for driver’s license and vehicle registration.

    It is fiscal federalist thinking that encourages true federations around the world to leave indirect taxes to subnational governments. It is subnational governments that provide infrastructure, education, and healthcare to most citizens in federal systems of government. Such governments need funds to provide such services to citizens making such contributions to governance. By paying tax, such citizens are also empowered, thus strengthening their voice in the way they are governed. At present, there are a few states that provide some form of social security for senior citizens while most of the country’s states do not consider such a policy important for their citizens. For example, Osun and Ekiti States provide monthly social security allowances for citizens over 65 years of age. Such states have services they need to fund from indirect taxes. If Lagos State had been allowed to exercise its rights in a federal system to collect Port charges, there would have been no basis for the state to be looking longingly for a special status for the state from the federal government.

    By having a tax system that requires states to send revenue collected from indirect tax to the central government, the federal government carries to a ridiculous extent the weird philosophy of government imposed on the country by military autocracies in the name of national unity and even development. In order to mask the exploitation of petroleum producing states under military rule after changing the principle of derivation from 50% of revenue to zero and later to 13%, military dictators created the policy and decrees to centralize all forms of revenue, which they also created agencies to mobilize and allocate or distribute to states.

    With respect to Direct Taxes, there is nothing in the books that prevents a system in which states collect all forms of direct taxes and send to the federal government whatever percentage is agreed upon for funding projects of central governments. Just as John Halls once said: “The argument that a local income tax would be ‘administratively impossible’ is hard to sustain when Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Norway, Sweden and the United States of America already have one,” the central government will not lose anything but its unnecessary power to subordinate states that should have been coordinate with it, should all forms of income tax be collected by states with the option of sending some percentage of collected revenue to fund central government’s programmes. Taking this option will remove what the minister of finance refers to as multiple taxation. Until a few years ago, I worked at Lincoln University in Pennsylvania and lived in the State of Maryland. I paid federal income tax, income tax to Oxford, the city that houses Lincoln University, and to the State of Maryland where I lived. This is a good illustration of diversity in a federal system. If this is what is called multiple taxation, it is the only way for different states to offer different levels of social services to its citizens in a federal system.

    The issue that matters most to citizens is not the number of states to which a citizen pays taxes but the use to which such tax revenue is put by those in power, for as long as such tax is progressive. If Lagos State, for example, had not been able to tax individuals and citizens within the state in the last sixteen years, the state would have been uninhabitable by now, given the meagre funds allocated to it by the central government and the exodus of citizens that move to Lagos State from other parts of the country on a daily basis. What must not be missed in the debate about reform of our tax system is the need to insist on progressive taxation, to ensure equity and fair distribution of income. What must be avoided is any reform that takes the power to tax away from states that provide services to their citizens.

    Concluded