The Nation Newspaper

Category: Columnists

  • Waiting for ASUU

    I would have been surprised if leaders of the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) at the end of last Monday’s meeting in Aso Rock with federal government officials had announced an immediate call off of their over four-month old strike.

    Considering the previous reactions of the government, the indications were that notwithstanding the desperation to end the embarrassing strike, not all the requests of the union would be granted. My fear was that the negotiations that dragged into the early hours of Tuesday could be deadlocked and the hope of a quick resolution of the crisis would be dashed again.

    Thankfully the leaders did not emerge from the meeting angry and as expected they have agreed to consult their members on the government’s offer which even if they were comfortable with still need the approval of members of the union.

    With the strike having lasted for this long, it is understandable why many are eager to have it called off if possible immediately after the meeting. However not been the first time government is giving the union it’s words and failing to honour it as it is the case in the non implementation of the controversial 2009 agreement the union have to take its time to digest whatever the government is promising this time and get a firm commitment.

    It’s rather unfortunate that the crisis had to degenerate to this level and one can only hope that the government is really committed to not only in meeting ASUU’s demands but taking necessary steps to enhance the standard of education in the country at all levels.

    Apart from the Universities, other education institutions have also suffered years of neglect and unfulfilled promises. There are still many unresolved disputes with teachers in Polytechnics, Colleges of Education and others that should not be given less attention as it has been done with the ASUU strike.

    Whatever offer the federal government made last Monday could have been made before now and it didn’t need to have given the impression that it has to be fought to a standstill before doing the right thing. I would not be surprised if some other workers in future insist on presidential intervention to resolve labour issues.

    As ASUU members meet to deliberate over the government’s offer, I join other Nigerians in pleading for the call off of the strike. Once again, they have to give the government the benefit of the doubt if not for any other reason but for the sake of the students who are the ones bearing the brunt of this crisis.

    We are all witnesses to this new agreement and this time around the government cannot deny making a commitment to pay what is due to university lecturers. For lecturers to be at their best, they have to be well remunerated and be given all allowances due to them.

    A Professor in a text response to my last column said in his 25 years of being a researcher he has not got N1 as research grant. This is how bad the bad the situation is and the time to redress it is now or never.

    The lecturers have indeed fought a good fight for quality education in the country for which posterity will remember them.

  • G-7 governors, the police and Jonathan presidency

    G-7 governors, the police and Jonathan presidency

    Last Sunday, the Divisional Police Officer (DPO) of Asokoro Police Station, Abuja, CSP Nnanna Amah, disrupted a meeting of the G-7 governors holding at the Kano State Governor’s Lodge in Abuja. He claimed to be acting under instruction. The incensed governors, one of whom was so enraged he could have tackled the impudent police officer had he not been gently restrained by a fellow governor, resisted the attempt and dared the invading policemen to arrest them. The policemen backed down. The embarrassed governors described the police invasion as impunity. I do not think so; we passed the stage of impunity months ago when the public and the National Assembly failed to take firm and clear action to leash the insubordinate and rampaging policemen of Rivers State led by the obstreperous Mbu Joseph Mbu.

    Though the House of Representatives will be inviting the Inspector-General of Police (IGP), Mohammed Abubakar, to explain who instructed Mr Amah to disrupt the governors’ meeting, I doubt whether any serious effort will be made to arrest Nigeria’s slow but sure drift towards fascism. However, it will be interesting to find out who sent Mr Amah and why. Until the IGP explains himself, it is at least evident that the DPO invaded the meeting of the G-7 governors last Sunday, behaved most unpleasantly and irresponsibly, tarried at the venue for much longer than propriety demanded, and gave the impression, as Mr Mbu still does in Rivers State, that Nigeria is not under constitutional rule but is a police state.

    The Abuja invasion is a logical progression from the anomy being engendered in Rivers State by the police. If the Amah-led invasion is not made the last of its type, it will continue and even become worse. For all his insolence, Mr Mbu has either deliberately or inadvertently avoided direct contact with the Rivers State governor, Rotimi Amaechi, not to talk of giving him unlawful orders, as Mr Amah tried to give the five governors in Abuja when he ordered them to disperse. Whether the National Assembly has enough understanding and courage to put effective restraints on the police, and by implication the presidency, is hard to say. But if they don’t, the blame for whatever happens to Nigerian democracy will fall squarely at their feet. The executive couldn’t be blamed, for Nigerians are accustomed to their malfeasances and constitutional infractions, not to talk of their limited perspectives on democracy, rule of law and very poor vision of what kind of country Nigeria should be.

    The judiciary could also not be blamed, for in their limited way, and notwithstanding their sometimes curious judgements on political disagreements, sober and courageous judges now and again rise up to the challenge of dispensing justice without fear or favour. On the other hand, the legislature has indescribably tremendous powers, both at the state and national levels, that it is unimaginable they have failed to use them. Instead, and perhaps for business or other reasons, legislators at all levels prefer to ingratiate themselves with the executive. If the police have not apologised for their open indiscretion in Rivers, it is unlikely they will apologise in the case of the Abuja invasion. But, if against all expectations they do, it will be insincere and offer no guarantees that future violations of the constitution would not occur. The reasons are twofold.

    First is that, increasingly, the police are displaying less and less character than their predecessors who enforced the law in the early decades after independence, and the bond and trust that existed between the people and their police have all but been denuded by years of enthusiastic subversion of both the dignity of the people they are paid to protect and the constitution they swore to defend. Mr Mbu, for instance, could not claim to misunderstand the provisions of the constitution or the demands and application of common sense. His problem is more likely to be a damning want of character than anything else. Were he inclined to disobey unlawful orders, for which at any rate he holds no private or public affection, he knew exactly what the punishment would be. It is of course impossible that the want of character, which did not tempt him to stand up against unlawful orders, could by some miracle become strength of character enabling him to withstand the vagaries of unemployment to which he was certain to be sentenced by his superiors whose orders he had questioned.

    However, what compounds Mr Mbu’s eager insubordination and want of mental and moral fortitude is not simply the humiliation of executing unlawful orders, at least for someone who claims to be a graduate of political science from a prestigious university. His dilemma, if indeed it can be so described, is the men by whom the distasteful orders come to him. For it is abundantly clear that even though his superiors in the police force also suffer a despairing lack of character, and could not stand up to the machinations of presidency forces, Mr Mbu appears compelled to carry out orders emanating from lesser men hovering around the corridors of power anxious to please President Goodluck Jonathan. Neither the top hierarchy of the police nor minions like Mr Mbu and Mr Amah would attempt to question what direction the unlawful orders were coming from nor for what purpose they were meant.

    The second reason is the president himself, a man who has proved infinitely less circumspect about the law or the constitution than his predecessors, whether the boisterously ineffective but still somewhat sensible Olusegun Obasanjo, or the sedate but obviously more sensible and sober Umaru Yar’Adua. Dr Jonathan is a man given to much pontification on the rule of law, democracy, constitutionalism and peaceful co-existence. But no one is as adept as he is at knocking tribal heads against one another, subverting the rule of law, and propounding constitutional rule only when it glorifies and glamorises presidential office.

    To a more circumspect president, the defiance of Mr Mbu in Rivers will be viewed with the considerable alarm any sensible democrat and convinced federalist would feel at so open and shocking a display of disobedience never before seen in these parts, not under the military, and not even under the iconoclast, Chief Obasanjo, who loved to humiliate his opponents. A reflective president would be worried that instigating Mr Mbu against a governor, or Mr Amah against five governors at a time, could lead to a bitter exchange between those saddled with protecting the governors and the invading policemen. Does the president not foresee this danger? And in future, could security aides of governors not be fooled by assassins dressed in police or military uniforms purporting to carry out orders from above, as indeed is already happening at checkpoints and highways?

    My suspicion is that Dr Jonathan has pretended not to appreciate the dangers involved in these matters because of two reasons. One, the wholesale subversion of his enemies favours him, and he might have been advised to use strong-arm tactics if he hoped to retain his seat in 2015; and two, simply because he sadly has no role model either in the Nigerian presidency or elsewhere in the world to look up to. Had the Nigerian presidency been occupied at one time or the other by great statesmen like say, No 10 Downing Street and the American White House were, the photographs of such illustrious predecessors adorning the walls of the exalted office would peer down on an offending president with the withering censoriousness their great acts in times of trouble would tantamount to.

    What great and noble deeds, it may be asked, was Chief Obasanjo noted for, or any of his predecessors? What inspiring vision of country or even leadership could be attributed to any of the gentlemen who ruled Nigeria? And as a country, against what standard do we judge our rulers? Is it against Gowon’s dishonoured promise to hand over the reins of power; or against Babangida’s interminable political and economic experimentations; or against Abacha’s larcenous and hedonistic rule; or against Ironsi’s indefensible naivety, among others? Dr Jonathan has no role model and no example to look up to. Unwilling to create a legacy worthy of emulation, he has both enacted and permitted series of subversive activities against democracy and the Nigerian constitution he swore to protect and defend. He has created a police state in which no one is sure who is governor anymore. And he has surreptitiously begun laying the foundations for fascism from which it would be difficult to extricate the country if a halt is not put to it now, if the stupefied National Assembly would not eschew sentiments to build a solid rampart in defence of our hard-won freedoms.

  • Mr. President, be bothered

    Mr. President, be bothered

    Not to be bothered today is to be when it is too late to make amends

    But for President Goodluck Jonathan’s antecedents, one could easily have accepted his statement to the effect that he is not bothered about criticisms as a Freudian slip. Speaking at the funeral of his mother-in-law, Late Mrs. Charity Oba, in Okrika Local Government Area of Rivers State, on November 1, the President said, “To me as a political leader and most of my friends here who are politicians, politics or holding political offices is almost like death. While you are there, you are on the stage. The day you leave, what would people remember you for? That has always been my guiding principle”. He added: “No matter the comments; whether the comments are to the left or the comments are to the right or at the centre, what challenges me everyday is what the present and future generations of Nigerians will remember me for the day I step out of the State House”.

    Ordinarily, one would have taken this to mean that all President Jonathan was saying is that he would not be deterred by negative comments people make about him, but would rather forge ahead with whatever he considers the good works he is doing. Even on this score, the President cannot be entirely right. To juxtapose this against his antecedents makes matters worse; it gives, straightaway, the impression that the President does not “give a damn”, to use his own words when justifying why he is not declaring his asset publicly. The President’s handling of the Rivers State crisis too does not portray him as one who is bothered.

    President Jonathan needs to take tutorials from former President Shehu Shagari of our Second Republic. During the Shagari era, Chief Obafemi Awolowo was leader of the opposition Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN). His newspaper, Nigerian Tribune, was therefore more or less the opposition’s voice. I remember Alhaji Shagari saying his day was never complete until he had read Tribune, a far more credible paper then than it is today. The essence of my reference to the Tribune and Alhaji Shagari’s ‘love’ for it is to make the point that sometimes, it is from the criticisms that leadership is able to learn one or two things. Before you ask what happened to that government in spite of the fact that Shagari said he read Tribune daily, let me answer that the issue is not in knowing what the criticisms are alone but to what use they are put.

    After all, what is criticism? According to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, “it is the practice of judging the merits and faults of something or someone in an intelligible (or articulate) way”. Unless President Jonathan is saying he is God, then, he cannot be right not to be bothered by criticisms because no man can ever be perfect. Only God is infallible. Even then, people criticise God, sometimes consciously, sometimes unconsciously. King Sunny Ade sang some years ago that when a poor man gets to the house of the rich, he would be cursing God even as he becomes so disrespectful to Him; indeed, he won’t even know when he would start asking God rhetorical questions. He would ask how come some people are stinking rich and others are strikingly poor; how come some are pigmies and others are giants, etc. Sunny Ade’s friend and contemporary, Chief Commander Ebenezer Obey gave an equivalent expression in Ketekete. In it, he said no matter how hard you try; no matter what you do, you can never please the world.

    Therefore, what I would have expected the President to say was that he would take constructive criticisms in good faith and even thank critics who see nothing good in what he is doing, because people must say one thing or the other about other people, especially those in leadership positions. People complain even about mad men. Sir Shina Peters prayed against what would make people stop talking about him. No matter what, there must be some message in some of the criticisms coming from even some of your worst enemies. This is why the President should not ignore criticisms; this is why he should be bothered about them now that it matters because a time would come when even if he is bothered, he won’t be in a position to do anything about them. President Jonathan should ask his predecessors; he should read the biographies and autobiographies of great men. General Ibrahim Babangida might have ignored some criticisms to his eternal peril. Maybe it was in an attempt to right some of the wrongs he did while in power that he so desperately wanted to return to the seat of power to make amends; but there is no such second chance for him.

    This is however not to say that leadership must always be led by criticisms. No, because there are some decisions leaders take today that would seem to be poor judgement but which in future will be far more appreciated. There are numerous examples of such all over the world. But this is not an excuse for the leadership to be deaf to criticism because shutting one’s ears to criticisms is like someone who says he would close his eyes because he does not want to see a bad person; such a person will not know when a good person would pass by.

    If criticisms are not useful, the two dominant types of democratic government that we have in the world today would not make room for the opposition. Opposition parties are there to keep the ruling parties on their toes by criticising them. It would seem to me that only the President and those benefiting from his government believe, like the President does, that he would live worthy legacies by the time he is leaving office at the rate he is going. Nigerians see the President and the ruling party that he belongs to as incapable of making a dent on our national challenges. And they have a point; the party has been in government at the centre for over 14 years, yet, it has not been able to tackle any of our challenges appreciably. We live more on promises than the party delivering solutions to our problems.

    All said, it is not enough for President Jonathan to be conscious of the fact that he would not be in the State House forever; it is even not enough that he is concerned about what the present and future generations of Nigerians would remember him for. What is paramount is what sense he makes of some of the senseless criticisms of today because what he does with them is part of the ingredients that would shape people’s perception of him and his government, not only today, but tomorrow. Criticisms allow for cross-fertilisation of ideas, a concept President Jonathan must have been familiar with, at least as an academic. There cannot be cross-fertilisation of ideas when all the President listens to are sycophants milling around him looking for something or even someone to devour.

    From my mailbox

    Dear Tunji, I just read your article on Page 13 of The Nation for Nov. 3, 2013 and all I can say is God bless you. I have never done this before because I always feel all you guys are doing is your job. But this article was not just that of a man doing his job, it came from a soul crying out loud for how the youths of this country have sold their conscience right from birth.

    Yet, some noble personalities in this country will condemn you just at the mention of an idea that the country may divide, all I can say is that they are blind and they need to pray for your kind of perspective. These days, youths only show displeasure to things that are not working in favour of their tribe or religion. I will stop now because I don’t want to give you another article in appreciation of another. Please you have a medium due to the nature of your job, kindly make Nigerian youth a priority.

    osagiejatto@yahoo.com

  • A poem and Awo’s words on marble

    A poem and Awo’s words on marble

    A smoke must show up announcing fire and so it is now with MOB

    Under the lead of the inimitable Dr Segun Osoba, I first came across the book, WHAT IS HISTORY, which literally became my bible for the Philosophy of History class at the University of Ife during my final year in ’71. Originating from a series of G.M Trevelyan lectures given by the English historian, E.H Carr, it is a deep study in historiography; discussing facts, science, morality, individuals and society but, most importantly, moral judgments in history. It is a book I would like to recommend to all, especially, aspiring politicians who, unfortunately, find themselves vacillating between honour, integrity and crass opportunism. But rather than wade through pages I last read 42 years ago, it will suffice to teach the same lessons I intend to impart by this recall, simply by quoting a very apt poem from the ekitipanupo web portal and gloriously cap it with the immortal words of the Avatar, Chief Obafemi Awolowo, in circumstances not totally dissimilar from what we have in Ekiti today.

    Contributing to this same subject on the web portal, Tunji Orisalade, on Thursday, 7 November, 2013, wrote :

    How low can Mortals fall

    When it’s time for real test

    A test to detect their real personality

    Hitherto boxed under borrowed clothing

    Deliberately designed to deceive all

    But that can only be ephemeral

    It can never stand the test of time

    A smoke must show up announcing fire

    And so it is now with MOB

    All that dining and wining with Progressives

    Are all, but mere smokescreen?

    Bibire must necessarily involve Omoluabi

    An Omoluabi knows when right to dance

    Not dancing without music

    Or dancing in the Market Place

    EKITI is too much for that

    Hope Somebody regains consciousness

    And retraces several, several steps

    Before the political lights are out

    A word should be enough for the Wise.

    Interestingly, however, 30 years ago in 1983, when Opeyemi was but a child, Awo had, perspicaciously, mirrored today’s events when, in the heat of the Ondo State political crises of that year, in which this writer was more than a mere onlooker, declared poignantly as follows:

    ‘People who always want to have their ways at all cost and never provide better arguments but rather want to force their petty ideas on others are anarchists and pocket despots who will ULTIMATELY FAIL’.

    Awo did not stop there.

    Hon Opeyemi Bamidele must be to Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, the equivalent of what highly regarded Chief Akin Omoboriowo, of blessed memory, was to Awo. He loved Awo just as Papa loved him, even writing a book, Awoism: Select themes on the Complex Ideology of Chief Obafemi Awolowo, which we all trooped from Akure to Lagos to launch at an impressive ceremony at the Hotel Le Meridien, Victoria Island. How history repeats itself as tragedy simply because human beings refuse to learn from its lessons. Chief Omoboriowo’s decision to join the opposition NPN, led Awo to reflect as follows, as I suspect Tinubu must be doing under his breath about Bamidele at this moment:

    ‘My affection for Akin is undiminished. That is why I am anxious that he should be helped to redeem himself before he makes the final plunge. My concern for Akin is that he has worked himself up into an illusion (some prefer delusion) of grandeur: he now suffers from a kind of psychosis. He thinks and claims that he has majority following in Ondo State. He has nothing of the sort. It pains me much that Akin could be involved in this kind of mess’.

    Substitute Tinubu for Awo and Ekiti for Ondo in the above quote and you would be talking of Bamidele.

    What surprises really is exactly on what basis he reckons that he has a following at all, in Ekiti at this point in time. We do not only have a performing governor in Dr Kayode Fayemi, Opeyemi contested a senatorial primary election which, as a member of the Election Screening Committee in the state for the 2011 elections, appointed by the National Headquarters of the party, I knew only too well he did not win as he continues to claim. The first election was cancelled mid-way through a public announcement by the A C N State Chairman, Chief Jide Awe, on both the Ekiti Radio and Television stations when series of reports of fracas came from all over the state. The rerun, for which governor Adams Oshiomhole sent us five senior party men in Edo state to assist us, never saw the light of day as all we did the whole day was to join former state governors Dele Olumilua and Otunba Niyi Adebayo, Dr Fayemi and some state party elders to resolve the issues which arose from that first day in a marathon meeting that lasted for over three hours. Bamidele approached the matter like he would vaporize if he was not named the candidate.

    He would subsequently be gifted the House of Representatives ticket which somebody else had contested and won; a wholly undeserved ‘bending over backwards’ by the party, which I believe is the cause of all we are seeing today as it got him completely swollen headed. It is a part of that giddiness, that soul-less pride, that he believes, apparently without any reflection, that his town of birth could produce three governors in a state where a whole senatorial district has not produced one in decades and why his ‘popularity’ must be erected on a skirmish, any skirmish, each time he visits the state or anything is being done by his Bibire fraternity.

    Actually, unlike other would-be Labour Party governorship candidates in the Southwest, Opeyemi Bamidele is probably the only one who had to seek out governor Mimiko who nobody can blame for wanting a larger share of influence for his party in the geo-political zone except that he chose to do so working , unmistakably, for the PDP as a member of that party recentlyconfirmed.

    Ope had permitted himself to labour under the impression that the man who carried him on his shoulders throughout his senate odyssey, former governor Niyi Adebayo, was going to contest the senate seat in the Ekiti Central senatorial district. Fearful he might lose out completely since he comes from the same town as the former governor, and rather than seek Otunba Adebayo’s confidences, he had gone shopping for succour from wherever one can be found. From what we now know, PDP, even PDP, could very well have been his platform to become governor. Today, he does not even as much as greet Adebayo, all because he just must occupy an elective post, conveniently forgetting whatever relationship ever existed between them. That precisely is the nature of a vaulting ambition which, surprisingly, a columnist of The Nation’s Olakunle Abimbola’s prodigiousness , most probably for the sake of good old times as Asiwaju’s aides, sees as nothing more than an adjective. For him too, if a man cannot actualise his dreams in a union, he must be at liberty to rupture and cripple that union but , for me, what is bad is bad, and had Bamidele reflected deeply on his young life, especially his political trajectory, he should effortlessly have come to the conclusion that a shot at the Ekiti gubernatorial seat, in an election he can never win, whatever scientific rigging/ force PDP and Labour may be planning, was not worth his alienating Asiwaju Ahmed Tinubu who took him from nowhere politically, and ensured he was in top posts for 12 straight years in Lagos state which, by the way, happens not to be his state of origin.

    Such bewildering ingratitude!

    Fundamental human/constitutional rights must be exhibited within limits of decency.

  • Let us have a good heave down, rather!

    This dialogue is a day late and a dollar short.

    National discourses are always very interesting to listen to. First, you are dumbstruck when you realise that, indeed, there are very many intelligent brains idling around the nation with little or nothing to do. Then you begin to ask yourself, why are these brains not in government changing things? Secondly, you are surprised at the vehemence with which people oppose each other, both sides presenting infallible proof that convinces you that the subject of discourse must either have come from the very bottom of Druid Socrates’ pot of wisdom or Satan’s brewing pot of infernal matters. Then you ask yourself, how can something be both wrong and right? Thirdly, you are struck dumb by the many ways people use public matters to serve their own varied interests. It just makes you want to go, how is it possible for so many colours to hide themselves in black and white?

    Take the matter of the current national discourse as an instance. When the calls began a long time ago, people asked pointedly for a Sovereign National Conference and the presidency ignored them, even completely turning its back on the vociferous ones bent on destabilising the state. Then suddenly, the presidency slept, woke up and declared it had had a rethink. Rather than grant a sovereign national conference though, it would remove the words ‘sovereign’ and ‘conference’, and grant a ‘national dialogue’. I’m quite sure it did not remove the word ‘national’ too for reasons of exigency. And I ask, what, pray, are we to do with that? It is a day late and a dollar short – too little too late.

    Calls for a sovereign national conference have been strident for as long as I can remember, and this elephant has a long memory, but this is no time to start boring into it. There are too many things I really want to forget. Let it suffice to say that past heads of state, including Obj., shied away from it. Indeed, Obj. went as far as watering it down and conducting his own conference where he and the members all mumbled together. I sort of guess that they all thought that somehow, with sufficient mumbling, the problems would go away.

    I think the major problem has been that these past heads had been reluctant to press on with a full-fledged conference for fear of what might have come from it, such as the breakup of the country. None of them had wanted the country to heave down for a cleaning under their watch: supposing the boat heaves down and cannot heave right up again?

    In response to such guarded responses, the problems have multiplied. Not only have the problems multiplied, they have developed many heads. Where there was one problem before, there are now two or three. When these calls began to be made, there was no boko haram insurgency; there was no Al-Qaeda terrorism; there was no real problem with religion; there was no uncontained militancy; and kidnapping was restricted to playful youths who were not allowed to marry the beauties their hearts throbbed after. Now, in addition to state-instituted problems of ethnic, political and linguistic bigotry, terrorism, insurgency, militancy, kidnapping, etc., have joined the fray to muddle the already nervous water flowing beneath Nigeria. The result of course has been more nervousness, hence the louder shrieks for a sovereign national conference.

    Yet again, the nation’s rulers have responded with more nervousness of their own. Still afraid the delicately balanced nation may break altogether under their watch, they have looked intently at that three-word call, spotted the real trouble makers among them, and have sent those ones to jail. In short, the two most important words ‘sovereign’ and ‘national’ are now in jail. The presidency is now calling for a national dialogue and I call it ‘not fair’! This amounts to sweeping the problems under the carpet yet again.

    Egad! Me thinks I can hear the president intoning, baso-profondo, that the results of his dialogue will surprise many. Indeed, I am willing to be surprised. Don’t call me a pessimist though if the reports, all one hundred tomes of them, do disappear into thin air as they are meant to. Oh yes, I can see that far into the future. Just a minute; let me clean my crystal ball properly again. Let’s see now. Oh dear, this is bad! I foresee that the presidency will swear that it sent them to the Assembly. And the Assembly will do a nice dissembling: poker-faced, it will swear it never received them! People, we need to be on guard, no, not en guarde! You see, thin air can be powerful; it eats up stuff that concerns the people, so we need to watch out, not draw swords! Phew, that was harder than I thought!

    Right, now where were we? Ok. This watered down version of a national conference is nothing but a mockery of what this country really needs. All the voices that have spoken on this thing agree that things are bad, very bad. People agree that the very structure of the country is a problem in itself: too few people feel any sense of patriotism, of belonging to the country, rather than to a section; and only direct confrontation can help us. Yep, I agree, confrontation can be on two levels: problems and people. The problems need to be confronted and the people need to confront each other. For example, there’s a great deal of anger in the land that needs to be managed, not petted. It’s a little like a disease that must be tackled to restore health; no one in his/her right senses will placate malaria by giving sugar to the sufferer instead of the required quinine. When a disease strikes, pain is the only way to good health. If the sympathy is too much, even the sufferer will be quick to declare: no thanks, I like my pain.

    Fear of giving the country pain has led many past heads of state to run away from declaring the conference a sovereign one. I have pored over, ruminated, reflected on, looked at and thought long and hard about the matter and have failed to understand why on earth we are having a dialogue and why the national assembly will have to vet what will be purported to be the people’s will. Truth is, people are not exactly besotted with today’s national assembly, what with the excessive emoluments of those assembly members which are not in tune with the realities of the people’s situations; and the fact that the assembly has really not impacted the people’s lives to any appreciable level. Now, the people that the people do not trust are the very people to decide on what the people have decided. Get my drift?

    Anyway, this conference thing is a simple matter. It should really be an opportunity to address and change so many things we are doing wrong as a nation, not cover them with concrete. It should address things like inequality, religious divides, adoption of wrong ideologies, the why, how and what of our co-existence, low interest in nation building even among leaders, etc. Seriously though, I think the first thing that should be addressed is why 18,000 Naira cannot be paid as minimum wage in some states and a leader in senate is purportedly earning 100,000,000 Naira a month. If we were to have a real conference that is the first question I would ask. But then, that is why we are not having one, and I am not taking part.

    Anyway, let the presidency think again. We need a sovereign (where the people have the rule) national (where everyone is carried along) conference (where we all speak frankly and seriously to each other). That is the only way to ensure that perfidious manipulations of the people’s will no longer rules, ok.

  • Nigeria Police: Pulling down an institution

    Nigeria Police: Pulling down an institution

    It is now obvious that the most important ‘crime-fighting’ assignment confronting the Nigerian Police is frustrating everything associated with the so-called ‘New Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).’ Running a close second is hounding opponents of President Goodluck Jonathan and his administration.

    The force has devoted itself to these tasks with uncommon efficiency. They have perfect intelligence about where heady G-7 governors would pop up next, and would storm the venue in Armoured Personnel Carriers ready to crush those ‘heating up the polity.’

    When they are not chasing rebellious PDP governors through the states our fearless police tear-gas elements of the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU), to prevent them from taking to the streets.

    Being true defenders of the people’s right to express themselves, the police gladly look the other way when a rival group of protesters denouncing ASUU walks down the same street.

    In the latest display of their commitment to enforce orderliness, the Inspector-General of Police, Mohammed Abubakar, has banned all gatherings, receptions and carnivals at airports nationwide. This, of course, is the force’s response to the dramatic four-kilometer march to Port Harcourt airport by Governor Rotimi Amaechi and his supporters. The facility had earlier been shut to prevent them from gathering to receive the national leadership of the All Peoples Congress (APC) during the week.

    Frankly, if the police could deploy their new-found zeal for cracking down on government’s political foes to tackling armed robbers and kidnappers the crime rate would crash to near zero.

    Recently, the opposition Progressive Governors Forum (PGF) described them as “the armed wing of the PDP.” You may dismiss this as the vituperations of partisans, but it also succinctly describes what the force is turning into.

    Over the years different administrations have abused the police – using them as tools for pushing their petty agendas. But the manipulation of this national institution by the current administration is lowering the force to a despicable new low.

    Mouthing clichés about “global best practices” in the use of airports doesn’t hide the fact that the police have chosen to insert themselves deeper into the mud-fight between the political elite – hiding under law enforcement.

    The remit announced by Abubakar is broad enough for any mischief-maker to abuse. Will a group of associates coming together to receive a VIP qualify for the mandatory volley of tear gas? You would have expected the Federal Airports Authority of Nigeria (FAAN) to take the lead in giving this sort of directive. But no the overzealous police have to lunge in with all the elegance of an elephant.

    It was not too long ago that dance troops and flag-waving supporters were swarming all over Nnamdi Azikiwe International Airport, Abuja to welcome First Lady, Patience Jonathan, from her overseas medical trip. On numerous occasions tumultuous crowds have received our victorious football teams at airports. Those raucous receptions were not hazardous to national security back then.

    But in today’s Nigeria any gathering of the “wrong set of persons” – whether at airports or in the recesses of governors’ lodges – becomes a conspiracy.

    Those in command positions who have made themselves agents for shrinking our freedoms should remember that come the day of accounting the argument that they were merely obeying orders wouldn’t hold water. Their unconstitutional actions will be their legacy as they have nothing significant to report on the crime-fighting front.

    In their desperation to please the current occupants of Aso Villa, they forget that their real loyalty should be to the constitution – not to individuals who can vacate those powerful positions tomorrow.

    Being pliant tools in the hands of those controlling the levers of state might seem like the way things are done around here, but people should note that what they are actually doing is destroying an institution that should serve all – whether you are in power and or opposition.

    This deliberate act of attrition by those who ought to build up the organisation is a crime. It is one of the reasons the growth of our democracy will remain stunted. With the force reeking of the sordid smell of partisanship, it is difficult to see how political parties other than the one in power will accept the police as impartial arbiters as we draw closer to the 2015 electoral battles.

    But more than anything, the sorry state of our police speaks to the pedestrian quality of our political leadership. It comes down to whether you are a civilian with despotic traits or a visionary statesman.

    Those who are not small-minded understand that the police should be used to uphold freedoms and the constitution. The parochial would see the force as another tool for entrenching themselves in power and brutalising those who disagree with their ambitions.

    That is what separates the likes of Nelson Mandela, Thabo Mbeki, John Kuffour from the Robert Mugabes and Paul Biyas of this content. A country’s police force cannot be more elevated than those who control it. The way we’re abusing ours shows the leadership column into which our current masters fall.

    Lastly, the never-ending misuse of the force by successive rulers is the best argument for its reform. The only way to salvage anything from this ruin of an institution is to decentralise it and bury the Frankenstein monster that the national police have become.

  • Changing cultures, transparency and development

    Edward  Snowden , the  American  whistle  blower on spying was like a traitor when the news broke on the internet that he had exposed intelligence on the US government spying on its allies. Last week however there was serious talk that he was being considered for the Nobel prize for transparency. In  Europe , the EU  court ruled  this week, that Africans asking for asylum in Europe on grounds of persecution in nations where gay  marriages and homosexuality are banned,  can be considered for asylum in Europe. In  Nigeria, at long last , the president of the Republic finally met with University teachers who have been on strike for four months , asking that funds be provided to make infrastructure available to teach in the  nation’s university environment for which the Coordinating Minister of Finance had  earlier  said  the  striking lecturers were asking for the moon.  In  Italy  the Catholic Pope Francis called  a conference on what he called modern slavery including child labor and prostitution to save the world’s poor and fight global poverty. In similar mood  the World Bank and the EU  pledged $8bn in aid to develop the Sahel from where Al Qada  and Boko  Haram  have sprung to threaten  the political stability of not only Nigeria but the entire  ECOWAS  sub region and indeed Africa as a continent.

    The  news items  and issues I have highlighted today look  interesting and  innocuous enough,  but they  are deceptively so, as they concern  matters  that I have labeled as ‘changing cultures’ but which  are in reality  – culture shocks  – that are highly polemical as my analysis will show. Let  us first dwell  on the amazing and unbelievable situations  that these news items have thrown up  at least  this week alone  . In Britain , the security chiefs  of Britain’s spy industry  were summoned to open questioning by Parliament and these were the bosses  of M5 , MI6  and  GHCQ, powerful  institutions which  have  been the stuff  of James Bond and other spy films that one once thought that such institutions were the stuff  of fiction  and do not really exist.  Again,  who  could have thought that the same EU providing money for African nations to fight a security threat  in the Sahel  they don’t see yet, let alone appreciate,  is also giving asylum to  African  gays and lesbians who are  just  aberrants against the way of life  and culture of the people amongst which they live? Also  who  could have thought that a president –  whose wife went to S Korea to receive an honorary degree whilst  the  universities in her husband’s  nation were closed on strike by lecturers-could have compunction and decide to talk directly to the striking lecturers  that the nations funds  minister had earlier  branded as unreasonable? Similarly, one had  been used to  Catholic Popes living in Palaces  in the Vatican and being chosen  as, ’the best dressed’  men in the world, but now we have the pleasant and humane surprise of a Pope planning how to stop children  and prostitutes drifting into a life of crime, drugs and terrorism. Really  it is a new day  and dawn  in terms of the changing cultures of our times and  the  expectations and  import  of that for  world peace,  security  and economic development. Yet  as we will  soon see,  it is not all that glitters  that is gold.

    Let  us start  our journey  again by looking at the cold facts of the issues raised today and  see the lessons to learn to  improve our world  and  ease  the tensions of  international relations  and diplomacy .First  the downside  of the Snowden revelations is that it has endangered international relations  and introduced conflict and suspicion amongst friends and allies spying on each others citizens and institutions not to talk of incumbent leaders. But as one of the spy bosses told British parliamentarians,  spying involves getting information from other nations that they may not want to give and protecting information that are vital to national interests  and security.

    The  comforting side is  that Snowden or not,  both the British and American legislatures  were impressed with  the response of their spy bosses to the questions prompted by the Snowden revelations  and that was apparent in the hushed reverence with which the spy bosses were  treated, in spite of the hullaballoo that accompanied their summons to the two legislatures. Which  shows again that where security is concerned,  transparency has a limited flight of fancy  and accountability, and that is  a lesson indeed for developing nations adopting democracy hook, line and sinker as the panacea  or solution to every    problem  of  governance,  economic management and environmental equilibrium in the real  world.

    In effect then,  the Snowden revelations have blown the cover of Western intelligence and spy bosses but the governments are adopting a response strategy of crisis management that  I  have called ‘dog does not eat dog’ – which is another way of allowing sleeping dogs to lie in the overall  security  interest  of all  friends, stakeholders and parties  concerned. That  to me is a sensible  response to an embarrassing intelligence  quagmire  that  Snowden willfully created to bring the  security  roof  down  albeit  unsuccessfully  in  the western hemisphere.

    I  shall  take the three  issues  of asylum for gays fleeing homosexuality ban  in Africa,  the EU  and World  Bank  fund to develop the Sahel  and the Pope’s devotion to help children and prostitutes escape modern slavery as he put it, together. Again the issues that bind the three developments together  are cultural  and humanitarian with a tinge of ethnocentrism  and  urgent security need.  I see ethnocentrism in the European court ruling in a case brought from Holland on Africans alleging persecution on account of being gays. Though the European Court has ruled that such Africans can be considered for asylum which is binding on all EU nations, the court also asserted that the existence of a ban is not sufficient ground for granting asylum as evidence of persecution has to be shown. Which is what brings in the issue  of ethnocentrism. The EU Court has deemed European culture superior to those of nations like Nigeria  and Uganda where homosexuality is banned, and that is a sociological blunder as no culture is really superior  to the other. Indeed the implementation of the ban in the nations concerned is not a problem as that is the African way of life. The implication of the EU ruling is to provide cheap  opportunities for those Africans  fleeing from other problems to cash in on the persecution proviso  when indeed they cannot really stand up to be counted on their sexual disposition in such societies.

    On the massive $8bn  aid  to the Sahel , I see the hand of the World Bank boss Jim Yong Kim  at play . This new Group MD  of the World Bank  has committed himself  and the global bank to poverty alleviation by 2030  and is pursuing that goal. He deserves commendation for bringing  the EU  on board. The EU  is contributing $ 6.75 bn – 5bn euros  and the World Bank, $1.5bn . But, again, the EU  is  investing in its security as it knows that the Sahel  has been the new home of militant terrorism especially Al Qada that fled Afghanistan  only  to show up in Islamic Maghreb  and North Africa and has resurrected in Boko  Haram in Nigeria’s North East  and  lately the Syrian  crisis.

    That  was why France had to intervene militarily in Mali to stop the invasion of that nation  when ECOWAS was getting too slow to act. The rationale for the World Bank  and EU aid is to provide infrastructure, jobs and security for the nations bordering the north of west Africa which is called  the Sahel  in the hope that that would reduce ready recruits for Al Qada from the jobless, roaming and idle millions of Africans youths looking for ways to make ends meet and make a future  for themselves. By  strengthening the Sahel economically  and sustaining its growth the EU hopes to reduce terrorism targeted at the European mainland by Al Qada and militant groups recruiting African youths effortlessly by giving them  training and  ammunition to  disrupt the stability of African nations in the Sahel  on religious grounds  and excuses. That  really  is a promising venture  and one expects the EU  and World Bank  to have enough monitoring skills to ensure that the funds are used for the desired purposes  and not high jacked for selfish ends by politicians and thieving bureaucrats very active in the Sahel environment.

    It  is in such light that I look  at the never too late intervention of the Nigerian president in the ASUU  strike  and pray that it  is concluded positively and the students return to their schools.

    Inevitably  such idle students  have drifted to prostitution, drugs, terrorism  and crime  from  which the EU, World Bank, and the Pope are trying    to help  out. One  expects this president not to yield to pressure from the owners of the private universities who think they cannot prosper except they kill the public universities by making sure that they encourage government to starve them of funds. It  is not in the interest of such private universities as the environment will be so charged that sooner than later they too  will not function on security grounds. That  is the stark truth to face on the  urgent need to resuscitate  university education in Nigeria  in the best interest  of the future  and  security  of our nation. What  is good for the goose should  surely be sauce for the gander.

  • Jonathan’s best legacy

    Jonathan’s best legacy

    Everyone will like to be remembered for something. For Dr Goodluck Jonathan, that may well be the president who was no Nebuchadnezzar, no Pharaoh, no lion, and no tiger. In fact, he would like to be remembered as the one who changed Nigeria.

    Back in September, 2011, he inspired one of the most memorable headlines in the print media when he declared that he was neither like the maximum rulers of biblical times nor the king of the jungle nor its striped rival, the tiger, who commands considerable respect in the wild. The president had gone into an Abuja church not only prepared to discharge his duties there but also to reply some of his critics, some of whom dismissed his approach to the nation’s challenges. They questioned Jonathan’s handling of the Boko Haram insurgency. They queried his response to corruption, Nigeria’s enduring and crippling headache. Most of the president’s critics concluded that he was too circumspect, too indecisive and unable to whip errant government officials into line.

    When he replied, he chose his words carefully, his analogies even more advisedly. Distancing himself from despots who ruled with fists of fury and spoke through clenched teeth, Jonathan conjured up the dreaded memory of Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon and the Pharaohs of Egypt, all of whom left their subjects cowering and whimpering, and the rest of the world in utter disgust even to this day. Who loves Pharaoh? Who will name their child after the Babylonian king? Turning to the terrors of the jungle, Jonathan said he was no lion, the carnivore king dreaded more than admired by preys. The president duly explained that he had no desire to be likened to such rulers or beasts because he had no such traits. He would prefer to be seen and remembered as the president with a human face and heart. In fact, recently, the matter came up again when Jonathan shocked his Aso Rock audience when he said he also would not like to be addressed as the commander-in-chief, another term that conveys the image of force of arm. Rather than be a powerful president ruling with the force of arm, Jonathan said he was content to create institutions.

    I respect the president’s preferences, in fact, even applaud them. Maximum rulers like Gen Sani Abacha and swashbuckling presidents like Chief Olusegun Obasanjo, in my reckoning, did us little good. While their regimes lasted, many Nigerians largely wished their reign would end quickly, although some still seemed to favour Obasanjo’s sometimes quick-draw approach. But there are lots of fundamental errors, which need to be corrected. A few weeks ago, reports said one of Jonathan’s powerful female ministers was wasting hard-earned cash in hired jets on which she shuttled round the world with almost as many hangers-on as she pleased. I wrote in this space, saying that the error may not simply lie in her travel interests but in what the law allowed. In other words, I favoured things being spelt out so that a minister, for instance, will know when not to take their preferences beyond the line drawn by the laws of the land.

    Right now, two unflattering developments have imposed themselves on the print media’s front pages: the ASUU strike and what has been styled the Oduahgate. The university teachers say they want an old agreement with federal government to be implemented so they can fix the dilapidated infrastructure on the campuses and bring back the lost glory of the ivory towers. Some say, though, that the lecturers want nothing more than what will swell their bank accounts. After months of fighting, the university teachers have held talks with the president, and some are hopeful that the five-month industrial action which has crippled the university system will soon come to an end. It is not clear, though, what sort of settlement both parties are reaching or have reached. Is the government paying up the outstanding billions ASUU seeks or is it meeting the lecturers only half way just to see academic business resume on the campuses? Are the lecturers settling for partial payment in order not to be seen as sponsored enemies of the Jonathan administration? Whatever the case, one thing is clear: the universities as well all other tertiary institutions need comprehensive revamping. And you cannot turn the collapsed university system around simply by paying money to the teachers, much as that is necessary. We need to evaluate the system, ascertain what has gone wrong and determine how to correct it. This is as much about money as it is about admitting that things are no longer what they used to be in the ivory tower and working hard to correct the imbalance. It is about standards. It is about institutions. Teachers and students have been fleeing abroad. This must stop. It is only standards that can stop it.

    Oduahgate brings no sweetness to either Jonathan or the country. Again, we also need standards to shut this gate. We need standards to curb the unhealthy tastes of government officials, and we need a transparently anti-corruption government as much as we need strong agencies with a mind of their own to deter corruption. We need to redefine the word ‘scandal’. We need to rediscover our sense of shame.

    We do not need a Pharaoh or Nebuchadnezzar to do that. All that is required is standards or, if you like, institutions. If Jonathan can deliver that, he will leave the best legacy Nigerians have seen.

  • A case of political schizophrenia

    A case of political schizophrenia

    These are truly most interesting times in Nigeria. This is a season when most of us are born again yet remain firmly rooted in our sins. We are all elated at being members of the kingdom of God but continue to hold tenaciously to and enjoy the bounties of the kingdom of Satan – a veritable spiritual dual citizenship. Janus faced, we exhibit the uncanny capacity to look simultaneously in two fundamentally opposite directions; to bask self-righteously in the radiance of light while at the same insisting on savouring, surreptitiously, the destructive pleasures of darkness. Ours appears to be the political equivalent of the medical condition known as schizophrenia – the coexistence within the same entity of essentially contradictory and incompatible impulses.

    Shortly before the country’s 53rd independence anniversary on October 1, our beloved President Goodluck Jonathan apparently experienced an epiphany. The light shone brilliantly around him and dispelled all forms of presidential darkness. Spurred by what must have been a divine revelation, our President suddenly became a born again federalist – or something of the sort. In a most moving exhibition both of humility and courage, the Commander-In-Chief ate his previous words, confessed his past constitutional obduracy, repented of his former Unitarian doctrine and affirmed his new faith in a national conference as the inevitable path to the country’s redemption.

    Please do not mind the cynics. They claim that it is all an elaborate exercise in trickery. For them, the timing of the President’s purported constitutional rebirth is quite suspicious. A fierce civil war rages within his party. Even if Dr Jonathan clinches the party’s ticket for his barely disguised second term bid, the PDP has suffered considerable damage as a formidable vote harvesting machine. And this is happening at a time when, against all odds, the opposition is gradually forging and consolidating a cohesive front. To worsen matters, it is argued, there is precious little to show for the President’s much trumpeted transformation agenda more than half way through his tenure.

    Well, if the emergency preoccupation with a national conference or dialogue or conversation – sovereign or otherwise – is an effort at political distraction, you must applaud the President’s handlers for the sheer brilliance of their strategy. For, the manoeuvre is certainly succeeding well beyond their wildest imagination. Just look at it. The prospect of a national conference is such a juicy bone that there is a frenzied scramble to partake of the delicacy. Hardy pro-democratic activists, doughty ex-Generals, wizened Awoists, seasoned senior advocates, trenchant ethnic entrepreneurs, cerebral academics and much more have all been charmed. For them, it is a national conference or nothing.

    It does not matter to the pro-national conference enthusiasts that President Jonathan has signalled his intention to forward the proposals of any such concourse for the consideration and approval of the National Assembly. Not even the President’s thunderous silence on their vehement protestations that the outcome of the conference be subject only to a popular referendum has dampened the ardour of pro-national conference elements.

    President Jonathan must find it difficult believing the sheer scale of his good luck. Just think of the implications of this manoeuvre. The 2015 elections suddenly do not matter anymore. There will unlikely be any need to account for unfulfilled electoral promises. Neither will there be the inconvenience of having to answer awkward questions on a transformation agenda that promised so much but has so far delivered so little and shows no indication of making any dramatic impact. Whoever dreamt up this idea most certainly deserves an armoured BMW luxury car or two as compensation.

    If the pro-national conference elements have their way, then the opposition both at the centre and the states will surely be in a quandary. For, the opportunity to constitutionally contest for political power will be put on hold until the expiration of the dialogue, which may be an indefinite, open-ended affair. Meanwhile, the incumbent occupants of public office at all levels will remain securely in power superintending the emergence of a new order. Beneficiaries of a supposedly iniquitous status quo will thus be expected to usher in a new era of fundamental change that erodes the foundation of their political advantage. This can be nothing but sheer illusion. Pray, can there be any more subtle yet exceedingly effective tenure elongation agenda?

    But in what way does this amount to what we have described as the political equivalent of schizophrenia? Now, President Goodluck Jonathan poses as a born again advocate of a constitutional conference. To the extent that he hitherto was vehemently opposed to the idea, his claim of repentance and change is valid. However, the President from all indications remains fiercely determined to actualise his constitutional right to seek a second term in office. But that constitutional right emanates from the discredited 1999 constitution, which advocates of a sovereign national conference want discarded!

    If the President has seen the light and now supports fundamental constitutional change through a national conference, it means that he agrees that the 1999 constitution on which his political legitimacy rests is incurably defective. What then should be the logical outcome of the President’s professed new political orientation? It is simply that his purported political and ideological rebirth cannot be a half way affair. Rather, he must be thoroughly and completely born again by renouncing his second term ambition and getting other elective office holders at all levels to do the same. That way, a level playing ground will be created for the institutionalisation of the genuine constitutional change he now claims to believe in.

    But then, what do we have? Diverse elements in civil society are taking the brand new Jonathan at his word and working hard towards actualising his proposed constitutional conference. Yet, the old President Jonathan is alive, well and actively using all the power at his disposal to ruthlessly pursue his second term ambition and indirectly entrench the discredited status quo. Thus, the agents of the state have intensified the unconstitutional harassment and intimidation of Jonathan’s opponents within the PDP. The centralized police continues to be used in a most brazen, flagrant and partisan manner to undermine legitimate governance in Rivers state.

    A minority of six legislators continues to prevent the Rivers State House of Assembly from functioning with the active support of Abuja. In the same vein, the Jonathan presidency continues to lend its considerable weight to the immoral antics of a minority of governors who petulantly refuse to accept the outcome of a democratic election within the Nigerian Governors Forum. A born again presidency claims to be committed to a new, equitable and just political order. Simultaneously, an unreformed presidency is working towards the entrenchment of the current political order beyond 2015. This is a case of political schizophrenia.

    The self -styled Southern Nigeria people’s Assembly (SNPA) offers another example. At the end of its last meeting in Abuja, the group of eminent Nigerians gave undiluted support to the proposed national conference. They want the conference to draw up a new constitution between now and May 31st, next year and are silent on whether this exercise can be undertaken concurrently with the 2015 election. If elections do not hold before May 2015 as scheduled, where would any incumbent administration derive its authority from? To give legitimacy to the conference, which they presume will have sovereign powers they curiously called on the President to “invoke section 14 of the 1999 constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria”. This column submits that the President has no powers to carry out a coup against the constitution.

    Yet, the same SNPA believes that the National Assembly has no legitimacy to review the outcome of the conference. They want a referendum to perform that function. But is it not the same election that produced both the President and the National Assembly? What confers legitimacy on one and not the other – the arbitrary whims of the SNPA? This kind of confusion is a function of political schizophrenia.

  • More cash for Sports or…

    Nigeria, I dare say is a huge joke. Shameful things keep repeating themselves, yet we offer the same failed measures, simply because we enjoy copying others without studying how they do such things.

    The concept of signing contracts with coaches arose from what obtains in other climes. But in those countries, such projects are funded on existing structures, making the task of fulfilling obligations less cumbersome.

    Here, our coaches are, sadly, in a hurry to sign deals without recourse to the need to have a lawyer to witness such a contractual arrangement. Our coaches, having lobbied in high places to get their jobs, can’t be worried about the details of their deals. Most times, they get the jobs after a long absence from their previous assignments. The allure of the new deal blinds them to such an extent that they accept indebtedness as a norm than a misnomer.

    Contract duly scripted by lawyers have extant clauses that take care of breaches and what the defaulter in the deal should pay as surcharge. As for our coaches, they want to have their cake and eat it. They are not prepared to spare few Naira from bumper deals to secure the services of lawyers. If duly signed contracts are struck by our coaches where their employers have hefty N50million sums for defaults, there would be a compelling need for them to look for the cash at all costs.

    In Europe, coaches and players use agents and lawyers. They are the ones who deal directly with suitors and only tell their clients (the coaches) what they have done. Once a good deal is struck, the coaches are presented at a formal ceremony where dictates of the deal are either revealed or kept secret. What both parties want the public to hear is disseminated.

    One can’t understand why our coaches cannot toe this path and let us see if our administrators will default. I feel pains for Stephen Keshi over his unpaid salaries, but he should have known that this arrangement didn’t start now. In negotiating his package, he should have gone for the Berti Vogts’ option of upfront payment. Keshi didn’t have the balls to do so for fear of losing the Super Eagles job or, possibly, be tagged unpatriotic.

    But, why is funding difficult for our football even when we are African champions? It is simple. We don’t run the game as a business here. Government officials are unwilling to surrender the governance of the game to the private sector because of what they get.

    Perhaps, if government officials had pushed for the repeal of Decree 101, like Sports Minister Bolaji Abdullahi is doing, the issue of adequate funding of the game would have been fixed. The way our football is governed, no company will touch it, as it cannot control how its cash is spent.

    This disturbing trend will stop when the coaches’ salaries are tied to the government’s recurrent accounts. It would be foolhardy to expect the NFF to pay the coaches when the aggregate of what they earn across all the national teams is bigger than what the government allocates to it for a year. And to think that such subventions come in four quarters explains why what is happening to Keshi et al would persist.

    It is sad that nine months after top businessmen doled out millions to the Eagles and their coaches, payment of the technical crew is still an issue. Our businessmen are in the habit of grandstanding, especially when the President is at the functions they attend.

    Elsewhere, sport is funded with lotteries sourced from the public and the private sectors. This setting makes it impossible for any group of people to grandstand or do ambush marketing with their presence. On such occasions, firms that supported the system are celebrated and urged to do more.

    Ceremonies such as that held at the Presidential Villa on February 11are conducted by the firms that bankroll the trip in conjunction with the federation. We saw how the federation chiefs stood by while the players and officials celebrated on February 11 at the Aso Villa. Such demeaning settings make the

    federation chiefs look like upstarts before the corporate world.
    Funding sports, not just football, has been a big problem, largely because most governments consider the industry as the platform to fix their friends and political cronies into government parastatals, having lost out on the “juicy” ones.
    Overseas sponsorship is hinged on the carrot-and-stick approach in which sports friendly firms get tax rebates from the government for their contributions.
    These structures are enduring because governance in those countries is a continuum, unlike here where every new government strives to destroy what it meets on the ground, no matter how credible, hiding under the cloak of change. Policy somersault is the biggest problem with our sport.
    In Nigeria, there is absence of not just a template, but outright architectural base to anchor any policy, whether fleeting or enduring, as far as our sports are concerned. Given this obvious lacuna, what we have is usually “anything goes”. And it is progressively destroying every facet of our sports, ditto football.
    It is this cumulative effect of the lack of a framework – or where it exists, no continuity that has been responsible for the albatross in our sports. Or how else do we explain a scenario where we have the same swan song running through our sports as regards funding and administration?
    Elsewhere, there exist sports calendars anchored on four-year term or eight-year or even ten-year development plan; here we rely on cash from budgetary allocations that are never ready at the appointed time.
    The sports calendar helps countries to plan. It also gives them the impetus to make projections meant to capture the lessons of the past. Besides, it is easier for the blue-chip firms to sponsor sports because the four-year term helps them to make a case for such an enterprise to their shareholders.
    Indeed, most sports competitions are anchored on the four-yearly format. And wholesale cash projections are made, hence the seamless transmission from one sport event to the other.
    Our history of poor preparations for sporting event is legendary. Our athletes don’t get the required support from government when others do. We believe in the last-minute rush. This gives room for profligacy from those in the system.
    What the sports calendar does for European countries is that it gives them enough time to plan. Besides, lump sum cash instills confidence in the athletes just as it challenges them to excel to justify the huge investment from the government.
    The lump sum from the government encourages the blue-chip firms to contribute their quota, knowing the importance that the government attaches to sports. This government intervention gives sports federations the impetus to source for funds and this will include getting the interested firms to build infrastructure, which could be named after their firms.
    Government alone cannot fund sports. People and the firms must be involved. But how can people and firms support sports when, for political reasons, performing federation chieftains are removed as in the case of the Golf Federation where its president, Olagunsoye Oyinlola, lost his seat because of his squabble with the ruling party? How do we expect those who supported Oyinlola during his reign to back the sport, given the way he was stopped from contesting the federation’s election? This is the way sports die in this country. What a shame.
    To think that governments at all levels have remained the biggest beneficiaries each time our national teams, be it the Eaglets, Flying Eagles or the Super Eagles, win trophies, makes it even the much sadder that despite this obvious reality, scant attention in terms of funding is accorded the sector.
    In what area of our national life are we ranked positively high in the world if not football? Recall that immediately after the 1994 World Cup hosted by the US, Nigeria emerged from that outing to be ranked 5th in the world.
    This explains why there was so much anticipation in the run-up to yesterday’s epic final between Nigeria and Mexico. The cost of PR from our victory against Mexico is unquantifiable. It cannot be measured in monetary terms.
    Obviously, from tomorrow, governments at the federal, state and local council level will queue up to leverage on this victory, which none cared to invest in, except a few states like Cross River. From tomorrow also, both PDP and the embattled New PDP will put aside their slugfest to celebrate the Eaglets’ victory.
    For two weeks, the country will literally set aside its challenges just because of the Eaglets’ victory.We expected the same passion during preparations but it never came.

    Eagles should stop Ethiopia
    A week from today in Calabar, the challenge will be for the Super Eagles to clinch the qualification ticket for the Brazil 2014 World Cup. And I’m excited given the showing of our players in their European clubs this past week.
    Most of the players that Keshi picked did well and I expect them to sustain that tempo this weekend in the club matches. When our players do well in their clubs a week before crucial games, they run over their opponents. One only hopes that the key players don’t get injured. Those recuperating should not succumb to pressure from their managers to risk their injury for the club. The World Cup is any player’s dream. Now is the time for anyone to stamp his authority on the team by playing all Eagles’ games.
    The prospect of Nigeria playing against Italy at the Cottage Stadium in England on November 18 is the real deal. Such games help raise the profile of the team and its players.

    Even though one doesn’t expect a victory over the Italians, it would be a bonus if we do beat them. Yet the challenge on the coaches should be to have all those dressed for the game to have a feel of such top class opposition.
    We need to have a squad wherein substitutions during matches help to galvanise the team than weaken it. And this can only happen when everyone is given a fair chance to play against any opposition in friendly games.
    See you next week, dear readers.