The Nation Newspaper

Category: Emmanuel Oladesu

  • The quest for council autonomy

    The quest for council autonomy

    The announcement by the Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF), Senator George Akume, that President Bola Tinubu is backing the clamour for local government autonomy offers an elixir of hope for the grassroots crusaders.

    Autonomy implies that the local governments will have the liberty to independently exercise authority with the backing of the law and the constitution. It means the power and liberty to effectively and efficiently discharge constitutionally assigned responsibilities without undue interference, restraint or control by either the federal or state authorities.

    The road treaded to get to this destination has been tortuous. Efforts to review the constitution to grant autonomy to the local governments have been resisted by state authorities. Although residual powers are devolved in the councils, which underscores a degree of decentralisation in federalism, states that complain about the Federal Government’s enlarged and intimidating powers and spheres of influence object to a greater degree of autonomy that may severe the state/council cords.

    The local government system, without doubt, is in a fix. Many councils are impoverished. They can hardly perform their constitutional duties of serving the people at the grassroots, although they are the closest unit of administration to the people.

    However, opinion is divided on the agitation for autonomy. While council functionaries believe that financial independence will liberate the fledgling local governments from the jaws of power-loaded governors, the governors believe that when local governments are removed from the direct control of the states, what remains of the sub-national level is a carcass.

    Read Also: Five Northern monarchs deposed in Nigeria

    The argument of governors is that the Nigerian brand of federalism only recognises two tiers -the general, federal, national or central government, and the states, which are coordinate with the somehow distant but powerful central government.

    Today, there is duality of financial controls over the councils. While the Federal Government allocates funds to state/local government joint account, the state reserves the power on the mode of distribution. The reason given by the state is that councils are created by the House of Assembly for ease of administration at the local level. To that extent, the local units of administration are an extension of the state.

    The local governments are listed in the 1999 Constitution. But the constitution also affirms the right of the state parliament to exercise political control over the local governments. This includes the supervision and scrutiny of its financial books and discipline of elected chairmen through suspension from office.

    The local government system is beset by many challenges. There are concerns about democratisation, operational efficiency, capacity for performance, competence of administrative and technical staff, service delivery, and corruption.

    While council chairmen, councillors and workers intensify their demand for autonomy, because of the desire for improved funding and independence from state authorities, many council helmsmen have not shown capacity for prudent spending.

    Although the constitution provides that democratically elected councils are fully guaranteed, many local governments are still being run by caretaker committees appointed by governors. Even in councils where there is a semblance of an election, many chairmen and councillors are not popularly elected.

    The Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Prof. Mahmood Yakubu, put this into perspective when he said the State Independent Electoral Commission (SIEC) has become a tool for coronation of governors’ preferred candidates as chairmen and councillors.

    Indeed, governors believe that elected grassroots operators should automatically become a part of their personal political structures. The strategy is to nurture them ahead of electioneering and deploy them as agents of grassroots mobilisation. Those chairmen who fall out of favour are removed or the council is dissolved.

    A governor appoints his cronies into SIECs. Those appointed are mostly card-carrying members of the ruling party. Opposition parties become livid because the umpire is perceived as biased. Predictably, the ruling party, under the governor, who is the party’s State Leader, produces all the chairmen and councillors.

    The political bureaucracy is not supported by competent council workers in many councils. Council engineers are seen as quacks who are unknown to COREN and council accountants and treasurers lack ICAN professional certification.

    Service delivery is also at a low ebb. In some states, councils lack capacity to discharge the duties of refuse collection and environmental sanitation. The states take over the respinsibility. Unlike in the glorious days of Lagos Town Council when the local Works Department, with its heavy equipment-grader and caterpillars-constructed roads that rivaled state and federal roads, many councils across the country nowadays are shadows. Their workers are poorly trained and ill-motivated. Also, many councillors see their positions as employment, empowerment or merely as rewards for political involvement.

    Council chairmen are attacked on two fronts where they cannot resist pressures. While some of them complain about illegal deductions of council funds by their governors, they are also at the mercy of local party chieftains and godfathers who demand unearned salaries as reward for sponsorship or political support. A council chairman once told reporters that not less than 120 local politicians were on the council’s unofficial payroll. Failure to honour the imposed monthly financial obligations could be a recipe for crisis.

    In states where governors are performing, they are drawn back by inept council chairmen who cannot replicate their feats at the councils. The complaints about dubious deductions are justifiable. But, how have the council chairmen judiciously utilised the scarce resources at their disposal?

    There are 774 local governments. All of them were created by successive military regimes. Their distribution is skewed or lopsided. The criterion was not equity. As the elite won the battles for the creation of more states for the purpose enhancing development and securing more access to state resources, state creation paved the way for local government creation, not on the basis of equity but on expediency. It led to the preservation of identity in some areas. In other states, diverse people were lumped together in many councils, particularly in highly heterogeneous areas, where they have continued their acrimonious relationship.

    Some council chairmen behave as local governors who have turned their councils into a bastion of corruption through their ostentatious lifestyles and primitive accumulation. Whenever there is crisis between the chairmen and councillors who threaten them with impeachment, the bone of contention is not about the developmental agenda of the council, but misunderstanding over the formula for the distribution of the largesse.

    That is not what the local government should stand for. Local government should stand for efficient service delivery in education, health, environment, markets, and mobilisation of traditional rulers and other vital community resources for intelligence gathering for the purpose of ensuring security.

    Also, the local government exists to deepen democracy in the countryside. It is meant to democratically throw up community men who know the environment, its prospects and challenges, and who are ready to serve the people with patriotism. The council is expected to be the intermediary between the state government and the people at the grassroots. The feedback on the efficacy of state government programmes can be collated at the local government level for the purpose of refocusing and improving the quality of project implementation.

    Besides, the local government is expected to be a training ground for future leaders. The assumption is that an elected public official who begins his political and public service career is in a vantage position to acquire wide-ranging experiences about governance, political mobilisation and management of human and material resources.

    Indeed, early leaders, including Chief Obafemi Awolowo and Alhaji Ahmadu Bello, began their illustrious political careers as councillors before they moved to the parliament where they later became regional ministers and premiers.

    More importantly, local governments should be accountable to the grassroots they are meant to serve. They should be run in a transparent manner and the people should have a sense of ownership and belonging through the people-oriented projects and programmes implemented by councils.

    Historically, there was never a time that councils existed independently of regions and states. But past regional or state authorities ensured that councils were positioned to attend to peculiar and local needs of the communities within the limit of available resources.

    Many reforms have been carried out in a bid to reposition the local government system in Nigeria. In 1976, the secretary became the council’s accounting officer, following the adoption of the Etsu Nupe Committee reforms. The chairmanship was largely ceremonial. But, in 1980s, the Babangida regime introduced the presidential system and the chairmen assumed full executive powers.

    The reforms never obliterated the subordinate status of the local government in the Nigerian federation. It has never been perceived as the third tier.

    Here lies the dilemma. Councils are appendages of the states, the only sub-national units that are partners in the federation. They derive their existence and powers from the law enacted by the House of Assembly.

    There is a need for more debates and dialogues among stakeholders for the purpose of arriving at a consensus that would be critical to the envisaged constitutional review that may lead to the realisation of the latent dream for local government autonomy.

  • The challenge of coalition

    The challenge of coalition

    Barely a year into the Bola Tinubu administration, few key opposition figures are ganging up, scheming on how to draw the carpet from the fledgling government. They are threatening fire and brimstone. The pain of last year’s electoral misfortune they suffered still haunt their conscience.

    In their collective acknowledgement of personal inadequacies, they are looking for a sort of remediation. But such an adaptive political behaviour is a hard choice. History has recorded many of such failed unions. But as they are forcing themselves to politically cohabitate in their desperation to do the government in, they are exhibiting a glaring collision of ideas. They are attempting to wed known political drifters.

    The motive of a “rainbow coalition” is to take power from the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) in 2027, three years from now, and nothing more. The struggle has no ideological connotation. Public support for the move is uncertain.

    The joint action being mooted underscores a sluggish or haphazard regrouping of strange bedfellows who suffer from previous shallow permutations and tactics that heralded their colossal fall on poll day last year.

    Be that as it may, the import of the challenge is that the Tinubu administration cannot afford to sleep on guard. Indeed, times are changing. In some African countries, like Ghana and Kenya, opposition parties have surprisingly united to bring down the ruling parties.

    Even, the PDP, at its zenith, fell after boasting that it would remain in power for the next 60 years.

    The implication is that only good governance can enable any ruling party to retain control. But, if the challenge is trivialised by the ruling party, and concerted efforts are not made to consolidate its hold on power through improved performance and fulfillment of campaign promises, its future may be cloudy.

    Read Also: Nigerians in United States contribute $20b annually to Nigerians, says US

    That opposition leaders, like wounded lions, are trying to roar, is legitimate. They are also clearly in a vantage position to utilise any opportunity to fuel sentiments and propaganda, particularly at a time of national economic adversity. However, the current reality is that the consistent “disarticulated” and subjective criticisms of Federal Government activities by the scattered opposition leaders may portray them as disgruntled elements lacking in depth and bite.

    Taking a cue from the past, they want to emulate the pre-2015 combined styles of the defunct ACN, ANPP, CPC, APGA, and the nPDP that weakened the Goodluck Jonathan administration and heralded its fall. But, how far can the new frantic coalition forces go?

    During the week, former Labour Party (LP) presidential candidate, Peter Obi, visited his Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) counterpart and former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, in Abuja, the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), to explore another form of collaboration, ahead of the next general election. They are not fatigued. For them, hope is the elixir of a political life. There is nothing wrong in trying after each defeat. Atiku and Obi are going to the archives to retrieve the “fusion” papers of the legacy parties that culminated in the APC.

    Obi also visited former Jigawa Governor Sule Lamido and former Senate President Bukola Saraki.

    Some observers have described the parley, partly, as a meeting of strange bedfellows.

    In 2019, Obi was Atiku’s running mate during the presidential poll on the platform of the PDP. The former vice president, having picked him without wider consultation, drew the ire of Southeast governors. They were defeated by the Buhari/Osinbajo ticket. After the poll, they parted ways. Four years after, Obi sensed that the attraction was no more there and Atiku would not pick him again. He hurriedly left the PDP and began a sojourn in the LP.

    During last year’s poll, Atiku and Obi refused to work together, despite entreaties. Obidients, who are Obi’s media warrior-supporters, fired salvos at the two septuagenarians on the ballot – Asiwaju Bola Tinubu and Atiku, saying they should allow 62-year-old “youthful” Obi to take power.

    Tinubu was more focused throughout the electioneering. There was no crack in his party after the primary, unlike Atiku, who was bogged down by the onslaught of the G-5. Both Atiku and Obi were defeated by President Tinubu.

    Shortly after the post-election litigations, Obi also rejected partisan overtures by Atiku, who mooted the idea of a coalition. His supporters described the PDP as a platform that had lost steam and LP as a movement that should not be contaminated.

    It is curious. While the PDP has structures across the states, local governments and wards, the LP has remained a “structureless” organisation. Many followers or supporters of the former Anambra State governor merely identify with it during the electioneering but not as registered and loyal party members.

    Currently, both PDP and LP are contending with some internal contradictions, particularly leadership squabbles that have further polarised them. The PDP has outstanding issues. So far, it appears the leading opposition party is not keen at resolving them.

    Up to now, its affairs are being run by an interim leadership headed by an acting national chairman. Its G-5 rebellious members still have an axe to grind with the party. Some PDP members from the South still believe that if a northerner, General Muhammadu Buhari, could spend eight years in office, then, a Southerner should also spend eight years before power would shift to the North.

    The PDP, beset by a leadership crisis, has been hit by a gale of defections, making it to lose many members to the ruling party. It appears that the party is no more supreme and discipline is a tall order.

    Also, the LP is not faring better. It is split into two camps. In the Southeast, which is its stronghold, it is ebbing away as many chieftains are leaving in droves.

    Besides, the LP is enveloped in controversy. The rift between the party and its acclaimed founder, Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC), has escalated, with the Political Commission of the union rejecting Julius Abore as the national chairman.

    Observers believe that Obi has not demonstrated the capacity to foster reconciliation in the party.

    The direction of the proposed PDP/LP coalition is not clear. The basis for fusion, coalition, accord, alliance, or cooperation may exist. But certain factors, once absent, may thwart the proposed collaboration.

    The APC formula worked because of the division in the PDP under Jonathan. Indeed, APC, then as a virile opposition, made a serious effort to profit from the internal bickering. The situation is different now. The ruling APC is united behind President Tinubu. Also, while the Jonathan administration was described as an inept government without clues, Tinubu’s government is objectively and realistically appraised as a government that would surmount the current challenges, although there is still a gap between expectation and reality.

    In the APC of 2014/’15, there was no case of senior partnership. Legacy leaders were ready to make sacrifices. Personal interest was downplayed. The defunct ACN, ANPP, nPDP, CPC, and the tiny fraction of APGA were unanimous that Buhari should be the presidential candidate. Their leaders did not project themselves as politicians seeking power for personal ends but as patriotic and credible leaders seeking a greater opportunity to serve the country. They also upheld zoning, believing that after Dr. Goodluck Jonathan from the South, power should rotate to the North.

    If Atiku and Obi come together, how would they resolve the zoning hurdle or debacle? Would Obi step down for Atiku to fly the ticket of the coalition party they are likely to form?

    APC has survived, and it is still thriving. The opposition is understandably demoralised and cannot, in the interim, adjust to life outside power. Would their new party, if they form one, see the light of the day? Or would both the national chairman and the presidential candidate still come from one geo-political zone?

    If the two gladiators – Atiku and Obi – and their parties can bury their differences and come together, Nigeria will be living to its antecedent as a potential two-party nation-state.

    But the lessons of the past are instructive. A lot of spade work has to be done to mould the interests of diverse opposition parties into a concrete structure. Opposition parties planning a coalition may differ in strengths, followership, spread or support base and ethos. The fear of domination, marginalisation and exclusion has to be allayed.

    Historically, political collaboration devoid of tact, realism and willingness to make it work has often collapsed, before and after elections. Suspicion, ego, mistrust, distrust and lack of commitment have often crippled efforts at forging a very formidable coalition.

    In 1959, Awo approached Zik for an alliance after the federal parliamentary elections. He conceded that Zik should be prime minister while he would serve as minister of finance. Unknown to him, Zik had approached Sardauna and Balewa for a coalition. Reality dawned on Awo later that he was already left in the cold.

    After the 1979 presidential poll, the ruling NPN and the number three party, the NPP, formed an accord. It collapsed barely one year after. Not all NPP ministers resigned afterwards. Some later defected to the NPN, thereby decimating their original parties.

    In 1983, UPN, NPP, PRP and GNPP mooted the idea of PPA. But after two meetings, they had to disperse. A question arose: who should be the presidential candidate between Awo and Zik? Old rivalry was reenacted. While the opposition parties were in disarray, the ruling NPN swept the votes, not only by a landslide but also by “moonlight”.

    Though history always teaches lessons for the wary to take a cue from, it is only those schooled in ethical philosophy that draw wisdom from such lessons and act thoughtfully. Whichever way the pendulum of the frantic coalition swings, Nigerians are wise enough to choose who they want to lead them and who they do not want in the saddle.

  • Awujale Adetona at 90

    Awujale Adetona at 90

    At 90, Oba Sikiru Kayode Adetona, Ogbagba Agbotemole, the Awujale of Ijebu land, is among the oldest traditional rulers, not only in Yoruba land but also in the entire country. He is also one of the longest-reigning monarchs held in high esteem beyond the chores of Nigeria.

    The selection of the 26-year-old prince in 1960 as successor to the deceased Oba Adesanya Gbelegbuwa II, who passed on in the preceding year, was a turning point. Charming, sociable, charismatic, educated, cultured, enterprising, and forward looking, Oba Adetona was a product of township consent in the people’s search for a more enlightened ruler for a modern era.

    Sixty-four years after, Ijebu-Ode is better for it. The people made the finest choice and they have continued to reap the fruits of development, progress and prosperity. His reign has been devoid of scandal; there has been no embarrassing controversy.

    While the tenure of his predecessor was full of tension – with two assassination attempts on him – Oba Adetona has largely presided over a peaceful era with neither adversary nor misfortune.

    Read Also; Don’t leave host community in ruins, Tinubu warns lithium investors

    The Awujale has continuously deployed the weapons of incisive wit, courage and principle. A very accommodating paramount ruler, he has promoted inclusion as the personification of Ijebu unity by rallying sons and daughters from all Ijebu towns and villages to see themselves as one. This is evident in the display of oneness and cohesion by the regberegbe during the yearly Ojude-Oba, which always attracts tourists to his domain.

    Ace Apala musician, the late Haruna Ishola, captured the unique installation and presentation of the staff of office to Oba Adetona in Ijebu-Ode by the Premier of Western Region, the late Chief Samuel Ladoke Akintola, in the epic record he waxed after the ceremony. Tall and dignified, Kabiyesi exuded happiness over the fulfilment of destiny. The town was aglow with festivities. Eminent Yoruba leaders, including Akintola’s predecessor, the late Chief Obafemi Awolowo, Leader of Federal Opposition, witnessed the historic moment. The attention of the whole country was on Ijebu, the land of enterprise.

    It was a story of sacrifices. Oba Adetola’s father, Prince Rufai Adeleke, who nursed a legitimate ambition for the throne, sacrificed his aspiration to boost the chance of his beloved son.

    The obedient son, after the admonition of the elders who craved a better tomorrow for Ijebu land, answered the call with patriotism and sacrificed his pursuit of education and golden fleece in the United Kingdom to serve his people.

    Three Ijebu-Ode community leaders – Ogbeni-Oja Timothy Odutola, Chief Emmanuel Okunnowo and Chief Samuel Sonibare – stood behind the young monarch like the Rock of Gibraltar. They were prominent Action Group (AG) stalwarts. served as a member of the Regional House of Assembly. Okunnowo, also a businessman, was a federal parliamentarian, and Sonibare was an investor and media owner who kept the purse of the party. Lamentably, the latter passed on in 1964, barely four years after that patriotic community service.

    Nobody could fault the judgment of the three Ijebu musketeers at that moment of cardinal decision making. They acted in community interest. They never led Ijebu astray. They also brokered genuine reconciliation between the new Awujale and other contestants. The young monarch also submitted himself to their gerontocratic guidance.

    Following his ascension to the prestigious stool, Oba Adetona automatically joined the tiny elite club of Yoruba obas whose members included the Ooni of Ife, Oba Adesoji Aderemi; the Eleko of Lagos, Oba Musendiku Adeniji-Adele; the Olowo of Owo, Oba Olateru Olagbegi; the Ewi of Ado-Ekiti, Oba Anirare Aladesanmi; the Olubadan of Ibadan, Oba Isaac Akinyele; the Zaki of Arigidi-Akoko, Alhaji Olanipekun; the Aholu Menu Toyi of Agbadarigi (Badagry), Oba Cladius Akran; the Deji of Akure, Oba Ademuwagun Adesida; the Odemo of Isara, Oba Samuel Akinsanya; and the Timi of Ede, Oba Adetoyese Laoye.

    Remarkably, these monarchs were also active leaders of AG. When the party split in 1962 during the Jos convention, some of the traditional rulers, who were ministers and House of Chiefs members, took sides in the divisive and hot regional politics, queuing either behind Akintola or Awolowo. Politically, Yoruba land became divided.

    Few days after he was crowned, Oba Adetona took his seat in the House of Chiefs. He witnessed the surge in political pull and pressure, the sudden collapse of a united Western Region, the friction between Awo and SLA, as Akintola was fondly called by admirers; the bitter contest for power and lack of tolerance, the Wet E! episode in the “Wild, Wild West,”the trial and imprisonment of the Federal Opposition Leader, the assassination of the Premier and the collapse of the legitimate authorities in Nigeria.

    Thirteen years after, the politicians never learnt any lesson. The mess of the First Republic was carried over to the Second Republic. Tension between the republican order and traditional institution was reenacted. The palace of the scion of Anikilaya royal family in Ijebu-Ode was threatened. Former Ogun State Governor Bisi Onabanjo, a subject of the Awujale, announced the deposition of the king. The battle shifted to the court. The late Adama Constance Yesufu, lawyer and politician, who once reminisced on the Awujale’s ordeal to reporters in Lagos, insisted that it was all political. His Royal Majesty, nevertheless, survived. Later, another coup swept the Second Republic. The rest, as it is often said, is history.

    Oba Adetona’s permanent tenure has spanned the period of military rule and the four republics. Under him, Ijebu has continued to produce citizens who have continued to add value to the country. The people’s pastime is trading, which is consistent with the economic pursuits of their forebears.

    Indeed, Ijebu paramount kingship has been linked with commerce. To profit from the trade along the coast, ancient king(s) of the land erected tolls for traders en route Ejinrin (in Lagos State) in the days of yore. It made them and their aristocratic companions very rich.

    Oba Adetona has continued to build on the legacy of prosperity through clean and legitimate trade in a modern era. He is leading by example as an investor of note. He has also guaranteed ease of doing business by offering accommodation to indigenes and residents.

    Ijebu-Ode has grown in leaps and bounds under his reign. Its population has increased geometrically. Today’s picture of urbanisation in the town contrasts with the sixties when big amenities and huge government presence were not there. The town is now proud of more industries and other commercial ventures, tertiary institutions, hospitals, five-star hotels, and numerous housing estates.

    The monarch has also contributed to the development of scholarship by instituting an academic chair in politics and good governance at the Olabisi Onabanjo University (OOU) at Ago-Iwoye in Ogun State. Last week, Governor Dapo Abiodun said it would gladden the hearts of the people whenever Oba Adetona’s School of Post-Graduate and Research Studies in Governance is affiliated to the Nigerian Institute of Policy and Strategic Studies (NIPSS) at Kuru, near Jos, the Plateau State capital.

    Oba Adetona has been an advocate of justice. He sees all Ijebu sons and daughters as his children. In moments of adversity, he has never turned his eyes away. On a number of occasions, he has tried to reconcile politicians in deep conflicts without taking sides.

    Also, it is noteworthy that he has always come to the rescue of his people whenever the hand of government is heavy on them. A case in point was the plight of an Ijebu business icon and big employer of labour. The royal father continued to press button until the siege was over.

    Oba Adetona did the same thing for the late Lt.-Gen. Oladipo Diya, former Chief of General Staff, whose life hung in the balance when his boss, the late military Head of State, General Sani Abacha, said he had uncovered a coup. When Abacha tried to dwell on the extent of Diya’s alleged involvement, the royal father reportedly said: “But remember, Diya is my son.”

    Like many progressive blue blood in the Southwest, Oba Adetona was thankful to God that a Yoruba son, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu, became President in his lifetime. What remains is the continuous implementation of the ‘Renewed Hope Agenda.’

    Oba Adetona’s unfulfilled dream may be the actualisation of the Ijebu State.

  • Bowing for BAO

    Bowing for BAO

    Six criteria can be employed for assessing the performance of Ekiti State governors. In an atmosphere devoid of subjectivity, the six conditions are non-negotiable. Their combination would almost set a pattern in leadership recruitment.

    The first is that an Ekiti governor is expected to be an ‘Omoluabi.’ Although a Yoruba axiom acknowledges that nobody can walk without swaying the head (a kii moo rin k’ori ma fi), it is a minimum criterion that the leader should be substantially morally upright. This, in part, is the foundation of patriotism.

    An Ekiti governor should be highly principled. This is more than the value of valour. His watchwords are honesty, integrity, and honour.

    The second is that an Ekiti helmsman should be highly educated. This is because as it was said in those days, education was the major industry in the Fountain of Knowledge. It, therefore, also implies that he should always be eager to defend the education sector and the pursuit of knowledge and learning by the younger ones who are projected as future leaders.

    The third is that no dictator can survive in Ekiti, where the founding fathers, having evolved the Pelupelu principle, subscribed to confederal democracy.

    It is instructive to note that through the “cooperative, joint effort” of the pathfinders, Ekiti sacked Ibadan colonial masters from its territory. The architects, motivators, and patrons of the Ekiti Parapo Army of Liberation were the traditional rulers, nobles, and traditional warriors. Their descendants fought for and achieved state creation in 1996.

    The corollary or elements of that confederal democracy of yore were independence and liberty. Thus, there is no single or dominant paramount ruler whose territory covers the whole of Ekiti. But group survival made mutual cooperation, inclusion, and democratic representativeness more compelling, based on equity, justice, and fair play. No appointed, selected, or elected leader can lord it over the state. There is no room for any lord of manor in the state.

    Read Also: Five famous persons who died on birthdays

    The fourth is that in whatever circumstance, an Ekiti State governor should be a rallying force. The reason is that Ekiti, a unique sub-Yoruba ethnic group, is fundamentally one zone, its division into three senatorial districts for expediency notwithstanding. An Efon man does not see himself as an alien in Ado or Ikere. A man from Ikole sees the people of Ijero as his kinsmen. There is no discrimination. The import of this is that the governor should oversee the affairs of the state, including the distribution of amenities without partiality or preferential treatment.

    The fifth is that an Ekiti State governor should never be a personification of corruption. Where would he say he inherited the vice from? There is a linkage between the first and fifth criteria. Graft and theft are antithetical to the Omoluabi spirit.

    Ekiti is struggling financially. There should be nothing to steal there. If the governor of Ekiti becomes richer than when he assumed the reins, it will be at the expense of the state. The sleaze will take its toll on public welfare.

    The sixth is that because the state is lagging in infrastructural provision, the governor that Ekiti needs – as a leader who wants to be remembered for a long time – is the one who focuses on infrastructural development. The corridor of power is not for the visionless and the indolent. Governance cannot be a tea party in Ekiti State.

    If the scorecard of ‘Biodun Abayomi Oyebanji, incumbent governor of Ekiti, is assessed, based on these parameters, opinion is not likely to be divided. He will achieve a high rating and earn applause from the people of over 120 towns and villages who savour good governance under his dynamic leadership.

    The onus is on Ekiti indigenes at home and in the Diaspora to support the current administration to reposition the state for greater heights. To succeed in his transformational agenda, the governor also needs the support of the Federal Government and the private sector.

    Ekiti, which never got a take-off grant when it was created, needs special economic assistance from the Federal Government. Due to the facilities being put in place by the governor to enhance the ease of doing business, the private sector should also perceive the state as an investment destination.

    BAO, as fondly called by admirers from far and near, has succeeded in presiding over a peaceful state in the last one and a half years. There is no acrimony among the three organs of government as they cooperatively discharge their constitutional duties as partners in progress and under the mutual understanding of separation of powers.

    Also, Oyebanji’s style of governance has endeared him to leading opposition figures in the state, especially those who have joined forces with the leaders of the ruling party to appraise the administration and endorse him for a second term. The founding fathers who fought for state creation have nodded affirmatively in acknowledgment that the governor is fulfilling their vision for the state.

    It is a rare feat, and indeed an endorsement on its own, that Governors Niyi Adebayo, Ayodele Fayose, and Kayode Fayemi are building a wall around their beloved successor. Even, Governor Segun Oni is said to have no objection. Oyebanji is not destroying anybody’s legacies.

    Highly accessible, the governor has steered the affairs of the state with humility, decorum, and piety. He consults well and widely and he prioritises the distribution of developmental projects based on need analysis. The projects, and even the appointments, are evenly distributed among the local governments. There is a judicious allocation of resources, setting the pace in transparency, accountability, and credibility.

    Ekiti is not insulated from the effects of the economic downturn. Being a homeboy, Oyebanji feels the pulse of his people. He, therefore, rolled out genuine palliatives. The distribution was effectively and efficiently decentralised. The main targets were the rural poor. Civil servants and local government workers receive their salaries promptly. Retirees are not denied their pensions and gratuities. It is gratifying that Owo Arugbo, a novel social security, has been reintroduced for the aged. The governor paid N117 million to 1,950 people under the Ekiti State Social Transfer Programme.

    Also, loans, grants, and training have been given to artisans and peasants in various trades. The goal is to develop small and medium-scale enterprises.

    Agriculture is not neglected. There is the subsidy on improved seedlings, including cocoa, cashew, rice, maize and cassava. No fewer than 2,279 farmers have got farm inputs from the state government.

    There is the revatalisation of local government administration. Structures of participation and responsibility are expanded and strengthened. Improved funding for local governments imposes a duty on the chairmen and their councillors to justify their mandates. There is proper coordination and monitoring of council activities to ensure that the governor’s feats are replicated at the grassroots.

    The governor, the son of a retired teacher, is fortifying the education sector with improved funding. Parents and students showered praises on him recently, following the payment of N546.9 million WAEC/SSCE fees for 16,269 secondary school students. Oyebanji also approved bursaries for 167 indigenes studying at the Nigerian Law School.

    Infrastructural development is key. The state has experienced a deficit in this sector over the years. Federal roads are in a sorry state. The governor is implementing many intra and inter-township roads, thereby earning the applause of many traditional rulers and other community leaders. His decision to construct five kilometres of roads in each government is apt. But Oyebanji should sustain the pleas and pressure on the Federal Government, particularly the Works Minister, to come to the aid of Ekiti.

    Security of lives and property from harm’s way is essential. But, like his colleagues in other states, Oyebanji is a decorative chief security officer of Ekiti State and he does not directly control any security agency.

    However, he has decided to collaborate with the security agencies to secure the state. The crime rate has been reduced in Ekiti. Part of the collaboration is the donation of patrol vehicles, Armoured Personnel Carriers, helmets, bulletproof vests, tactical boots, batons, and other equipment to security agencies. The regional security outfit, Amotekun, is well-funded and its activities have generally contributed to a safer environment.

    Ekiti sons and daughters at home and in the Diaspora are proud of their state under the current administration. They repose a lot of trust and confidence in the governor. The people should pay their taxes and rates regularly. They should also take ownership of projects in their communities and team up with the government on their maintenance.

    Since 1999, no other Ekiti governor has been praised like Oyebanji by all and sundry. The governor is, therefore, in an enviable position. The onus is on him to sustain the tempo of his laudable performance and avoid pitfalls that can diminish his administration’s high rating.

    The governor looks poised to perform even better, if the people continue to support him in repositioning Ekiti to become a modern state of excellence.

  • Aiyedatiwa and challenges of reconciliation

    Aiyedatiwa and challenges of reconciliation

    There was no prediction about a free and fair direct governorship primary in the Ondo State chapter of the All Progressives Congress (APC). The outcome of the exercise, therefore, was not that surprising. Without prejudice to the report of the Governorship Primary Appeal Committee, the shadow poll has been won and lost.

    But that may not be the end of the matter.

    The Primary Committee, headed by Usman Ododo, governor of Kogi State, declared Governor Lucky Aiyedatiwa winner of last weekend’s intra-party contest, to the consternation of his divided and scattered rivals who now contest the outcome. Petitions were submitted to the appeal panel and other contenders have also taken their protests to the media.

    There are spirited calls for outright rejection of the result, cancellation of the primary, and conduct of a fresh poll by another panel. The aggrieved aspirants and chieftains hinged their calls on what they described as obvious irregularities.

    The complaints revolve around the non-distribution of election materials transparently, lack of result forms or sheets, and isolated violence in some wards and local governments.

    There are threats by some contenders that if what they described as injustice is not redressed, they may explore other options ahead of the November poll.

    The threat has two interpretations. The first part is that the other contenders may defect and team up with foes outside the ruling party on poll day. This may affect the chances of the party. The second part is that they may stay in the party and till subvert its candidate at a critical time. This is more dangerous.

    But exuding confidence, Aiyedatiwa’s Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Dr. Kayode Ajulo, said the primary followed due process and the party’s constitution. Even, the governor has challenged his rivals at the primary to provide convincing evidence of rigging.

    Read Also: No to bully in schools

    A party’s primary is a divisive factor in electioneering. Usually, there is one ticket being chased by many contenders. Although no selection approach or process is perfect, the main issue is that most governorship primaries are hardly insulated from perceived deficiencies. Substantial compliance is a tall order. It is an affront to internal democracy.

    Whether by consensus, direct primary, or delegate system, party primaries are fundamentally skewed to the advantage of incumbent governors. If it is the non-capital-intensive consensus model, which is a by-product of the age-long convention formulated by the residual class of men of the old order, the ultimate beneficiary is the governor who cannot be sidelined during the selection process.

    An indirect primary is what most governors prefer. Half of the delegates are his aides. They include commissioners, special advisers, all appointees, many elective office holders, and grassroots party officers. For the governor’s challengers, who are often intimidated by his formidable structure, the fear of statutory delegates is the beginning of wisdom.

    The participants know that they are loyal to the core; loyalty being the sole criterion for their retention as kitchen cabinet members. Anyone suspected of disloyalty becomes a target of the war of liquidation in official circles.

    The result of the delegate system is predictable. It is a primary for the decoration of the governor as the candidate.

    The most problematic is the direct primary. It is neither here nor there. While it has been sufficiently rationalised as the key to fuller democratic participation at the party level, the conditions for success may be absent. For example, the party register may not be up to date. Also, non-party members can just come in droves on the eve of the primary for registration as party members. They are not turned back. Since the whole exercise still depends on the state’s party structure, the governor, who is the party leader, is likely to always have his way.

    Governors who are sent to states to conduct primaries are viewed with suspicion. Everyone perceives them as colleagues of their incumbents on a mission to do their bidding for the ticket. The allegation is that they may be eager to pander to the whims and caprices of their colleagues.

    The Governors’ Forum is the most formidable political cult in Nigeria. Presidential candidates mostly depend on the governors to win their states. So powerful are the governors that they recommend ministers, special advisers, and corporation chiefs to be appointed by presidents, although they are free to appoint their commissioners, special advisers and other aides without an input from anyone.

    However, while a governor may dominate the primary, which may be cast in his image as the state party leader, chief executive, chief security officer and controller of the state treasury, the real election may be a different ball game, if he does not put his house – the ruling party in the state – in order.

    Opposition parties are not likely to sleep on guard. Their candidates may be ready to profit from the division and polarisation of the ruling party.

    Ondo APC is bubbling with confidence that the state chapter of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) is a famished lion that cannot roar. Such an assessment may not be accurate. Overconfidence is dangerous. Currently, only a thin line separates APC and PDP in Ondo State. The PDP candidate, Agboola Ajayi, has links in the APC, and vice versa.

    To analysts, there is the reality of the post-primary crisis in Ondo APC. No fewer than 14 aspirants are kicking. Many of them are either founding chieftains or long-standing party members with a history of genuine commitment to the platform. They love the ruling party and the state,  and their ambitions are legitimate. Therefore, their complaints and threats should not be ignored.

    The next challenge before Aiyedatiwa, the state party officers and elders is genuine reconciliation; a sort of peace-building and fence-mending, give and take, abolition of ‘winner-takes-all’ and extension of meaningful opportunities for inclusion. The Ganduje-led National Working Committee (NWC) has started the peace move. It should be sustained.

    The party’s primary is just one level of the general electioneering which will culminate in wider participation among the indigenes and residents on poll day. The factors that may shape the poll may contrast with issues that have shaped the primary.

    Aiyedatiwa came from the back, as it were, in the long queue, to become the governor and party leader. Fate had catapulted him to the front burner as the main beneficiary of the incapacitation of his former boss, Oluwarotimi Akeredolu, who passed on last year. The governor’s ascendancy naturally provoked envy among peers, leading to ‘siblings rivalry’. As power was gradually landing on his palm, he was accused of impatience, immoderate eagerness and undue excitement.

    He fought hard to survive the impeachment move against him. Once he inherited the driver’s seat, he immediately consolidated his hold, not only on the government,  but also on the party. He dissolved the State Executive Council (Exco). When it was being reconstituted, there was an intra-party uproar, which he dampened in his next array of appointments.

    Some experienced party elders backed him and aided his aspiration with the novel aboriginal structure. Self-confident, the governor has been forging ahead towards the November poll.

    But now, he needs more support and assistance.

    Aiyedatiwa is the custodian of the APC ticket. But party members should be allowed to take collective ownership of the flag. This is possible through genuine waving of the olive branch, a clear display of humility and demonstration of a genuine intention to bring everybody on board. It should start with the setting up of a broad-based campaign organisation that will enhance inclusion and give the diverse interests in the party a sense of belonging.

    Crisis resolution is always weak in progressive platforms. Their leaders usually allow a crisis to escalate before thinking about a resolution. The reconciliation committee set up by the national leadership can as well kick off its assignment in Ondo State – to reconcile aggrieved aspirants and their supporters and followers. It is in the interest of the ruling party.

    To pacify those who lost in the primary, the current administration could be reconstituted to reflect diverse interests and foster unity and cohesion in the chapter. Aiyedatiwa should be less combative and more condescending. Much sacrifice is expected from the governor.

    The onus is on Aiyedatiwa to drive the compelling reconciliatory vehicle aimed at preventing defections and polarisation in the interest of the party.

    His style of handling the reconciliation will either motivate them to make more sacrifices and see his ticket as a joint ticket, or cause dissensions that could upset the party’s chances in the November poll.

    All eyes are on the governor to give concessions, build consensus and unite the party ahead of the November poll.

  • Sixty years after Sir Adeniji-Adele

    Sixty years after Sir Adeniji-Adele

    Like a flash of lightning, six decades have passed since the demise of Sir Musendiku Adeniji-Adele, highly revered Oba of Lagos, whose reign brought progress to his traditional domain and the environs. He was a Knight of the British Empire (KBE).

    Itinerant traders of 1950s and 1960s from the Yoruba hinterlands often spoke glowingly about a certain ‘Lago de Kuramo,’ cast in their dialects as ‘Eko Wenjele, Eko Adele,’ in adulation for His Royal Highness and adoration of city prosperity.

    Charismatic, charming, and colourful, he was a delight to behold in public: in the full regalia of the Eleko, with the long staff; himself being a man of excellent gait and commanding presence.

    Oba Adeniji-Adele was fashionable. He was credited with a good dress sense that showcased the rich Yoruba cultural heritage, which earned applause from the British interlopers.

    Read Also: Tinubu appoints new Board for NAICOM

    But he was also endowed with a beautiful mind. He was very proud of his kingdom and protective of his stool, the heritage of his illustrious forebears as the grandson of the legendary Alayeluwa Adele Ajosun.

    Oba Adele Ajosun, who died in 1837, reigned twice as Oba of Lagos: first, from 1811 to 1821, and a second time from 1835 to 1837. His father was Oba Ologun Kutere and his siblings were Oba Esinlokun and Oba Akitoye. There is cause to believe that the Ologun Kutere line has remained the dominant line in the kinship of Lagos, although all Elekos are of the same blood line.

    Sir Adeniji-Adele was conscious of history and the responsibilities on his shoulders. From 1949 and 1964 when he called the shots at Iga Iduganran, his priority was the progress of Lagos. He was not only a monarch, but also a nationalistic politician.

    The monarch was involved in the politics of resistance against the colonial interlopers who wrongfully dethroned Oba Eshugbayi Eleko. He supported the royal delegation, along with Herbert Macaulay, to seek redress at the Privy Council in London in the ’20s.

    He also stood on the side of the truth during the protracted land tussle between Chief Ahmad Tijani Oluwa and the colonial government. Adele escorted Oluwa to London; Oluwa won the historic case.

    It should be pointed out that many of those principled positions which some colonised indigenes of Lagos are remembered for today actually brought discomfort to them. But, they insisted on their inalienable right of land ownership and refused to play the second fiddle.

    From 1930s, Colonial Governor David Cameron had encouraged the installation of literate princes as natural rulers in the colony and protectorates. But, that condition was not strictly imposed on the communities in the days of indirect rule. However, when he aspired to the throne after the death of Oba Falolu, Adeniji-Adele was not only an educated man, he had also made a name as a civil servant.

    Born in Lagos in 1893 to Buraimoh Adele and Moriamo Lalugbi, Oba Adele studied at Holy Trinity Primary School at Ebutte-Ero and then at CMS Grammar School in Lagos. After his secondary education, he joined the colonial service as a trainee surveyor. After completing his training, he was posted to Kano. He served as a land surveyor with the Cameroon Expeditionary Force during World War I.

    In the 1950s and 1960s, many prominent traditional rulers played active roles in politics. Apart from the House of Chiefs, which was created for them, some of them were elected into the council and the House of Assembly. Examples were Oba Adesoji Aderemi, Governor of Western Region; Oba Claudius Akran of Badagry, who was a regional parliamentarian and minister; Oba Olateru-Olagbegi, the Olowo of Owo; Oba Sikiru Adetona, the Awujale of Ijebu land; and Oba Alhaji Olanipekun, the Sarki of Arigidi-Akoko, who were ministers without portfolios.

    There was a bitter contest for the throne in 1949. It coincided with the period of decolonisation and resurgence of political activities. Oba Adele II was a supporter of the Nigerian Youth Movement (NYM) and a member of Egbe Omo Oduduwa, led by Obafemi Awolowo. He was an Action Group (AG) sympathiser. Therefore, his political affiliation was in opposition to the National Council of Nigerian Citizens (NCNC) which dominated the politics of Lagos in the 1950s.

    That was why the party, led by Dr. Nnamidi Azikiwe in post-Herbert Macaulay era, was opposed to Oba Adele’s ascension and preferred Prince Adeyinka Oyekan, a descendant of Oba Dosunmu. In fact, NCNC leaders filed legal actions to thwart his coronation. Oba Adele’s right to the throne was finally sustained by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in England, years after his traditional coronation.

    Oba Adele II was conciliatory once he secured his royal seat at Iga Iduganran. He tried to retroactively resolve the royal crisis of the 1930s and 1940s though without success. But his genuine intention for unity and peace in the collective royal household was not in doubt.

    When Eleko Eshugbayi was wrongly removed by the colonial government and sent on exile, he was succeeded by Oba Ibikunle Akitoye. After his death three years later, Oba Sanusi Matiku Olusi was installed during the interregnum. When Eshugbayi won his case in court, the colonial government asked Olusi to vacate the throne. Eshugbayi regained the throne, only to pass on a year later.

    Then, the struggle for the stool escalated. Isale Eko was polarised between supporters of Olusi and Oba Falolu who won the throne.

    After Falolu died, Adele II was preferred to mount the throne. His ascension to the throne closed the chapter of futile exclusive claim to the palace by the Dosunmu family. The implication is that government only recognises only one large ruling house in Lagos and all the princes or descendants of all obas of Lagos are eligible.

    Up to now, efforts to divide the large ruling house have been an exercise in futility. All the princes of Lagos have the same root as blood brothers.

    Oba Rilwan Akiolu once said in the law court: “All Lagos princes who have no curse placed on them are entitled to run for the kingship. It is, however, the prerogative of the king makers to choose who will be king. Many are called, few are chosen.”

    Although Adele II requested that the body of Olusi should be exhumed from the cemetery for proper interment at Iga, the family of Olusi was said to have turned down the offer, to his consternation. However, the fate of Olusi was better than that of Prince Adedoyin Dosunmu Temiyemi, a popular and successful prince, and a good man like Olusi. While Olusi ruled for three years before he vacated the palace, Temiyemi was not allowed to taste the throne.

    As a politician, Adele served as a councillor in the old Lagos Council. He aligned the political party he formed with the AG. But, while he aspired to serve as chairman of the council, NCNC councillors, including non-indigenes, gravitated towards Ibiyinka Olorunnimbe. Later, Adele left the council.

    He was later to be locked in a quarrel with the AG over its claim that ‘Lagos belongs to the West.’ Shouts of ‘Gedegbe l’Eko wa’ filled the air. Politically, there was a symbolic parting of ways.

    However, Lagosians now fully agree today that Lagos is a Yoruba state and a reference point in the Southwest. What the people of Lagos loathe is its inappropriate and provocative description as ‘a no man’s land.’ The owners of Lagos are known from time immemorial. To stop that description, wise indigenous Lagosians are now disposed to leasing their lands than selling to ‘foreigners’.

    Oba Adele’s political life was interesting. He became a member of the ceremonial Senate. But, he was not allowed to become the Senate President because Zik’s NCNC favoured Dr. Nwafor Orizu. His Deputy Senate Presidency was a dignified compensation for his enigmatic personality.

    Adele was passionate about Lagos. He was a great lover and advocate of education, advising parents to send their children to school. When the walls of schools on Lagos Island of his days fell after a downpour, killing six pupils, he lamented the tragedy. He, therefore, appealed to Prime Minister Abubakar Tafawa Balewa, who obliged the monarch, and the schools were rebuilt.

    Adele was the monarch of decolonising period and chief host of the first indigenous central government in Lagos. The importance of those periods conferred enormous responsibilities, obligations and privileges on him as the King of Federal Capital Territory.

    The FCT has been relocated and request for a special status is ongoing.

    However, the beat stopped abruptly in 1964. Adele passed on. Prince Rilwan Akiolu was among the boys playing football around the palace when the incident occurred. The photographer of a newspaper captured him in the palace and erroneously captioned the picture as a ‘palace page’ in the newspaper of the following day. He protested and rejected the label, worked hard, got to the top in the police, studied law, prayed, and became the Olowo-Eko.

    Oba Adele was succeeded by Oba (Papa) Adeyinka Oyekan, who presided over the city in a more modern era.

    The glory of the household of Adele (Ajosun) has been sustained by his children – Ademola, a former council boss, pro-democracy activist and commissioner before he died, and his son, Sultan, a former member of the House of Assembly.

    Sixty years after, Lagos has changed. Its population is soaring because it is the land of varied opportunities; a greener pasture.

    The foundation was laid by past obas, chiefs, nobles, investors and patriotic and visionary political leaders.

    Today, a Lagosian, Bola Tinubu, is president. Lagos has also produced many notable sons and daughters, thanks to the vision of Oba Adele and other eminent monarchs that ruled the megacity after him.

    There is need to immortalise Oba Adele II beyond the Adeniji-Adele Bridge on the Island and other sundry decorations. He was a monarch worthy of many laurels, even in his eternal rest.

  • The fall of Shaibu

    The fall of Shaibu

    Philip Shaibu, the impeached deputy governor of Edo State, fell from power during the week in a plot believed to have been orchestrated by his boss, Governor Godwin Obaseki.

    The handwriting was boldly on the wall. The target saw the danger coming, but he lacked the street wisdom and the political firepower to avert it.

    Shaibu is downcast. He has vowed to fight on, partly encouraged by the few dispirited sympathisers he has attracted. But as Godwins Omobayo, a 37-year-old engineer from Ibilo in Akoko-Edo Local Government Area, immediately filled the vacuum created by his ouster, the reality about the end of his era dawned on his powerless supporters.

    The huge loss in the power game contrasted with the status he acquired almost four years ago. The same man who fought to keep him on the joint ticket dropped him, six months to the end of his second term with his erstwhile boss. He was cast out like a nominal fellow without a rich political background – used and dumped.

    Shaibu is down. But it may not be the end of his political career. Moments of political adversity can either strengthen or weigh down a political actor. The opportunity is still there for an astute politician to return to the drawing board and arm himself with novel strategies for survival.

    Read Also; How governors usurp Ifa’s role in choice of traditional rulers

    Some deputies like him were shoved aside in the past, only to bounce back in the National Assembly as senators. Others were not that lucky; they went into oblivion. Few in that category are yet to completely find their feet. They are loafing and floating in their regression to self-pity, licking the wounds of their mistakes and the tragedies inflicted on their illustrious political careers by senior political partners.

    Shaibu is a trained accountant. But he hardly anticipated that day of accountability when the table could suddenly turn. He is versed in auditing, a core professional course in his chosen field. But political auditing is a different ball game. The assessment criteria and tools could be highly subjective, suspect, partisan, sentimental and harsh. Thus, when the panel audited his activities, using an inexplicable method handed to them by his tormentors in the executive and legislative organs, he was inevitably found guilty.

    The overzealous House of Assembly closed its eyes to the subsisting court case and the presiding judge’s directive that the respondents, including the lawmakers and other agents of the state, should be put on notice.

    The transformation of the dethroned politician was instant. It was akin to a change of status from an asset to a liability. He was in Benin in the morning as a titular, lonely, and rejected ‘deputy’ man of power. Before noon, he had lost his immunity, strolling out of power as a loner. All entitlements – severance allowance, gratuity, and pension – if any, are hanging. Even, if he is pardoned in the future and the impeachment is reversed, the time lost cannot be regained. Left in the cold, he now contends with a fading influence.

    Shaibu has, for now, lost on two counts. Apart from losing the number two seat in Edo, he cannot also be fielded by any political party for the governorship election. According to the electoral commission, party nominations have closed. He lost out in the succession plan, which, fundamentally, was the bone of contention between him and his boss.

    It is ironic. When the hand of his principal was heavy on the state parliament, Shaibu was his partner in tyrannical tactics that smacked of the violation of the principle of separation of powers. For more than a year, 14 All Progressives Congress (APC) lawmakers-elect were not allowed to take their seats in the hallowed chamber till the end of their tenure. The state legislature was operating at half capacity. Those times were remarkable for panic and pain as democracy was on crutches in Edo and duly elected Assemblymen forfeited the legal and legitimate right to represent their constituencies.

    Little did Shaibu know that a fatal blow of fate awaited his position. He is not a greenhorn. But it is doubtful if he had taken cognisance of the nature of the Nigerian brand of presidential system that has made presidents and governors some sorts of emperors, dictators, neo-colonialists, imperialists, and lords of the manor. They brooked no opposition.

    A former governor once retorted: “Ordinary deputy governor? Who is his father?”

    The former deputy governor of Edo is not oblivious of the fate of those before him, including Enyinnaya Abaribe, Christopher Ekpenyong, Kofoworola Bucknor-Akerele, Femi Pedro, Iyiola Omisore, Abiodun Aluko, Jude Agbaso, Ali Olanusi, Eze Madumere, and Simon Achuba. Their offence may be due to their lack of adjustment to the role of a spare tyre. Shaibu’s history or current affairs teacher in secondary school would have hinted him about the consequences of Ajasin/Omoboriowo, Ige/Afolabi and Ali/Akpofure imbroglio in the Second Republic. The scenarios conveyed the impression that though the constitution mandates the governor to run with a deputy, the deputy has no clearly defined and visible role, duties and responsibilities to perform in a presidential democracy beyond what the principal is inclined to permit.

    In some states, commissioners are in better reckoning than many deputy governors. Governors have never liked the fact that their deputies are the number one beneficiaries of official mishaps, either through impeachment, incapacitation or death. Obaseki might have been ready to accommodate Shaibu to the extent that he would not dream of succeeding him. That meant a sort of career sealing for an ambitious youth who perceives politics as a career and vocation.

    A star student union leader during his university days, Shaibu joined politics without much experience in remunerative labour and private business. Luck smiled at him as a member of the House of Assembly and later, the House of Representatives. His godfather and benefactor was the erstwhile labour leader, Comrade Adams Oshiomhole, former governor and incumbent Edo North senator. Indeed, Oshiomhole was responsible for choosing Shaibu as Obaseki’s running mate in 2016. But the cordial relations ended after his inauguration. What only remained was the radical dress code; like the adorning of phoney Awo caps by some clever guys in the progressive camp.

    There was a conflict of interest. When a crisis broke out between godfather Oshiomhole and godson Obaseki, Shaibu declared his absolute loyalty to the governor. It was expected. But he did more. He also declared war against his mentor to the extent that when the senior comrade fell from the APC national chair, he was mocked by those whom he had assisted in gaining power, including His Excellency, the erstwhile deputy governor. .

    As the APC became hotter for Obaseki, he sought refuge in the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). After securing the ticket, he also fought a hard battle to retain Shaibu as deputy. If the governor had not insisted on him, Shaibu would have suddenly become a wanderer in the wilderness.

    Shaibu’s ambition to become governor never aligned with Obaseki’s succession plan. When he tabled his proposal before the captain, it was declined. Obaseki insisted, in the spirit of equity, fairness, and justice, that the slot should go to Edo Central, which has not produced a governor since 1999. Those were not the only reasons. It may be that Obaseki also peeped into the future and realised that someone who could ditch his mentor may also do the same thing to him after leaving office.

    Shaibu has an inalienable right to contest, but it was evident that without the support of the state party leader, his ambition was dead on arrival.

    The options open to the former governor are four. Shaibu can team up with APC in his district to battle PDP. There is no permanent friend or foe in politics but permanent interest. However, at the initial stage, Shaibu’s former APC colleagues may loathe his defection while recalling the old betrayal.

    He can join another party, either the Labour Party (LP) or any mushroom platform, rebuild it, and use it for negotiation. It is not an easy option.

    Alternatively, he can remain in PDP, and endure the shame and pain of denial. This means that he would not earn the label of a serial defector.

    The last option is to retire from politics and pursue a career in his enviable accounting profession, acquire a chartered status if he has not already done so, work hard to become an ICAN Fellow, launch into business, using his political connections, and become an entrepreneur of repute and employer of labour.

    The last option is fantasy. Politicians never contemplate retirement from the game of intrigues. They keep hope alive, despite any setback, and hope is an elixir of life.

  • Ondo APC and direct primary

    Ondo APC and direct primary

    A Primary, an intra-party shadow poll, is not less important than the general election involving the generality of people who are not members of political parties.

    A general election gives the people an opportunity to make a choice and change. However, voters’ choices are narrowed down and limited to the candidates. How the flag bearers in a party emerge underscores the primacy of internal democracy in the party system.

    In Ondo State, the coast is clear for the adoption of the direct primary for the election of the All Progressives Congress (APC) governorship candidate. The national leadership may have settled for the option, which may have been dictated by the mood of the state chapter, for two reasons.

    The first is that majority of the aspirants see it as a model that may assist them to win the ticket. The second reason is that top contenders may feel that it is the best option, in their calculation, that can make them to resist fraud and still turn the table against their rivals.

    The constitution of the ruling party has provisions for not only direct but also the indirect primary. The consensus option, which is the permanent preference of old political war horses of the First and the Second republics, is becoming old-fashioned or outdated. Although these old and experienced politicians are still largely perceived as the esteemed moral voice; they are now in clear minority.

    When consensus was in the vogue, ideological parties set the criteria for the choice of their standard bearers. The conditions for eligibility of candidates included agood conduct, sound education, previous working experience, contributions to the community and the party, seniority, and loyalty to the platform.

    That was in the days of strict party discipline and supremacy. The economic status of contenders was secondary. Party members deferred to the elders; the youths, who were being groomed for future leadership, learnt the ropes within the party’s organisational structure.

    However, the consensus option gradually became outdated because of allegations of imposition. Although it is democratic, the mode could not meet the expectations of moneybags who promoted the culture of monetisation of politics as from the Third Republic and treated the method as archaic.

    Direct and indirect methods have their merits and demerits. How the outcomes of direct or indirect primary are managed has implications for the chapter, ahead of the governorship poll.

    The indirect or delegates’ system is not less democratic. It underscores the value of representativeness. The delegates are selected at the party’s congresses. The congresses have tap roots at the wards and local governments. But as experience has shown, the system became more expensive due to delegate targeting and financial inducement by the highest bidder.

    A few days to the governorship primaries in some states, moneybags usually camp delegates whom they woo with money and juicy promises in hotels where they temporarily live like kings.

    When delegates are bribed or financially mobilised by an aspirant, they are obliged to vote for him at the shadow poll. He who pays the piper calls the tune. The implication is that financially weak candidates are edged out, even if they are more capable and fit for the exalted office.

    Read Also: Ondo APC aspirants jostle for Tinubu’s support

    For successful candidates, electioneering is an economic investment and returns must be garnered after victory. Since the ticket is largely purchased, the standard bearer may only have little respect for the delegates he has bought.

    While the delegate system worked in the Second Republic without financial inducement, the Third Republic was a different ball game. Indeed, the Fourth Republic has built on the legacy of the ill-fated Third Dispensation.

    In this dispensation, there are statutory delegates who are not elected at the congress. They are elected and appointed functionaries and aides of governors, party leaders, members of Board of Trustees(BoT) and former office holders. Their strength lies in their bloc votes.

    The adoption of the direct primary often usually provokes special enthusiasm and interest. The direct system implies that party members have withdrawn the mandate previously given to delegates to choose on their behalf. The college of primary electors is dismantled. All party members, rich or poor, would be involved in the process. The turnout is usually huge. The horizon of intra-party participation is broadened. Although there may be residual post-primary hues and cries, they may not culminate in litigation.

    The day of the primary election is a day of inescapable judgment for an unpopular aspirant. Even the governor who is seeking the ticket would be on the weighing scale, despite his power of incumbency.

    If a governor alienates himself from the party structure, sidelines party chieftains, oppresses perceived opponents, and behaves like a lord of the manor, he may lose the renewal of his intra-party mandate as a candidate. That has been demonstrated in Lagos State.

    Parallel primaries instigated by factions under the delegate system may not be possible under the direct system.

    The direct primary is another form of effective mobilisation. Party members perceive the primary as the first leg of the general election. Since a direct primary may provide a level-playing field for aspirants, the system fosters equity, fairness, and justice.

    More importantly, the option will reduce the influence of money on the process, eliminate cash and carry syndrome, and prevent the penchant for “kidnapping” delegates by the highest bidder.

    Generally, the direct primary is less expensive to organise and manage. But the direct primary may be impossible in a period of national emergency, like COVID-19. It is not protocol-friendly. Social distancing may be difficult.

    But anytime the direct mode is adopted, the process will be ward-based and crowd control will not be a Herculean task.

    A party’s register may be problematic. But it could be taken care of by a party identification mechanism at the grassroots. Party members who attend meetings regularly know one another.

    The direct system is the legacy of the American progressive democratic model whereby registered party members choose party candidates through a secret ballot, like a general election. Since it is perceived to be more transparent, the corruption, which often mars the delegate system, is reduced. There will be no room for ‘delegate camping.’ There is the likelihood of increased participation and aspirants may develop confidence in the wider elective process.

    The direct primary offers an opportunity for the candidate to test his popularity, ahead of the main poll. It gives party members an equal chance of electing their candidates.

    However, the crowd is huge and management of the crowd will require skill and strategy. Emphasis may now be placed on quantity instead of quality of participation. Many voters may not be informed and, therefore, lack the competence to make informed choices. Therefore, the “mass voters” need education and enlightenment. Since a lot of mobilisation has to be done, it may be too taxing for aspirants who lack the resources for intra-party campaigns and logistics. The voting hour may be elongated, thereby creating stress for the Direct Primary Committee.

    As the world waits to see how the APC shadow poll will go – ahead of the November 16 election – there would be anxiety among the contenders. But as this election method is seen as the most transparent and the least dramatic, it is hoped that the outcome would be accepted to all the contenders.

    Despite being the ruling party at the state and the national levels, APC is not immune to intra-party squabbles. What the leadership of the party should commence immediately is the harmonisation of the various interests to ensure that nobody rocks the boat after the shadow poll. Keeping the house united after the primary is more important than the result of the primary itself. Elections come and go, but the development and peace of a state should be permanent. It should not be sacrificed on the slaughter slab of a political ambition.

    Thus, there should be an undertaking among the contenders that they will abide by the result of the primary and work with the winner to ensure that APC retains Ondo State.

  • Reconciliation in APC

    Reconciliation in APC

    There is no political party in the country that is insulated from a crisis. It is the degree or dimension of hullabaloo that differs. But the impact is usually, more or less, identical.

    Currently, each of the three main parties is waging a war against itself. The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) is yet to recover from its internal contradiction. There is no meeting point yet between Northern PDP and Southern PDP. The bone of contention is still zoning, of either the national chairmanship or the presidential ticket.

    The leading opposition party is doing introspection. Those investigating its 2023 electoral loss would find out that lack of equity, fairness, and justice heralded its fall.

    Also, the Labour Party (LP) ran into turbulence, even before last year’s election. Julius Abure and Lamidi Apapa spent more time in the court than at the party’s secretariat and rallies. Now, it is Abure versus the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC), which is claiming ownership of the party.

    The setting up of reconciliation panels across the six geo-political zones by the All Progressives Congress (APC) implies that all is not completely well with the ruling party. It is dangerous for the party to carry on with arrogance, unmindful of the fact that its predecessor in power, the PDP, once boasted that it would rule for 60 years, only to be booted out by popular vote, after 16 years in Aso Villa, Abuja.

    The lesson in the axiom that pride goes before a fall is instructive. That is why the APC has to learn from it, avoid the pitfalls, and put its house in order.

    The very nature and character of politics is conflict-induced, competitive and antagonistic. In the game of politics, morality often takes a flight. In some instances, going into politics is akin to going into a war.

    Read Also: Five Nigerian meals for Easter vacation

    It is because of the hunt for power, which, as it is now understood, is not served a la carte. It may also be due to the political culture which wholly permits winner-takes-all. It may as well be due to the fact that as the winner begins to exercise authority or legitimate power, the loser is isolated, ignored, and neglected. Ultimately, he becomes or is perceived as a liability; a symbol of a ticket that could not fly.

    But he fights back within the party by undermining or subverting the platform. Other aggrieved losers defect and obtain what has eluded them in their former parties in their next point of call. Others engage in prolonged protest, drawing the party into protracted litigations. The cost is burdensome. It takes its toll on esprit de corps.

    Then, the party is divided, polarised, or factionalised and rival camps work at cross-purposes. It breaks into antagonistic caucuses that divide rather than unite. As the history of party politics has shown in Nigeria, intra-party squabbles sometimes tax the parties to the brim than inter-party electoral contest.

    As warring party leaders take their battle to the media, the conflict is amplified, sometimes blown out of proportion. The party wobbles on into the election as a divided house. The chance of victory becomes slim. Ahead of election, things would have fallen apart and the centre would be too weak to hold.

    Many parties have gone through these phases of bickering with their leaders dissipating more energy on crisis resolution than growing the party and fortifying its organisational structures. It is ironic that in most cases, reconciliation often hits the rock because those who created the crisis are saddled with the peace mission. A great feature of the Nigerian party system is the weakness of crisis resolution mechanism.

    According to the First Republic politician, the late Chief Kingsley Ozumba Mbadiwe, fondly called a ‘Man of Timber and Calibre’ by admirers, people often gravitate to winning parties. Therefore, the coast of the ruling party is enlarged. But the bigger the party, the bigger the headache. As defectors enter in droves, the platform gains a numerical strength. But a party can also be polluted by strange bedfellows if the defectors are not like-minded ideologues.

    Also, there is the problem of harmonisation triggered by the battle of supremacy across the chapters and the desire to control the party’s machinery by entrenched forces and interests.

    An element of the protracted rift is the acrimonious relationship between governors and Abuja forces; ministers, presidential advisers and National Assembly members. In some states, they do not see eye to eye.

    So debilitating also is the cumulative effect of godfather/godson imbroglio. When beneficiaries turn against their benefactors, they enlist behind themselves an army of fanatical supporters who fire salvos and heat up the chapter.

    The latest source of conflict in some chapters has to do with ministerial nominations. There are hues and cries over appointments into the federal cabinet and agencies. While the President is at liberty to appoint anybody into his cabinet under the presidential system, based on personal criteria, some party chieftains complain that some appointees representing their states never identified with the party’s structure and its power struggles.

    It is noteworthy that the current reconciliatory effort in the APC is the third attempt. The previous attempts were inconclusive. It smacked of hypocritical commitment to the vital assignment.

    A heavy responsibility rests on the shoulders of Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu of Lagos State, who is to reconcile aggrieved chieftains in the Southwest. He is neutral in the crises that have engulfed Ogun, Oyo, Osun, and Ondo states’ chapters of the party. The only seemingly peaceful chapters are Ekiti and Lagos. Even in Lagos, some party chieftains uncritically feel that they are left in the cold and become envious of those in power. When the House of Assembly Speaker can afford to go on air to attack the governor in a bid to demarket, when the list of commissioner-nominees is publicly sent back to the sender, and when notable party chieftains invade the social media to lodge complaints that could have ordinarily been placed before top party leaders and the elders’ forum for peaceful settlement, it is an evidence of repressed tension within the large political family.

    Those to be reconciled in Ogun are the camps of Senator Ibikunle Amosun, Senator Gbenga Daniel and Governor Dapo Abiodun. The three groups are not friends.

    Former Governor Amosun contributed to the growth of the party in the Gateway State. He is annoyed because his succession plan crumbled on two occasions. He had raised candidates from outside his party to confront the APC candidate in 2019 and 2023. That pattern of endorsing rivals is inimical to the growth of the progressive party.

    Last year, a crisis broke out between Abiodun and Daniel. Sources said the rift has to do with 2027, after the expiration of Abiodun’s two terms of eight years, when he will be eligible to vie for the Senate in Ogun East District, to the displeasure of Daniel, who may want to renew his senatorial mandate. Abiodun’s supporters are adamant that Daniel never supported the governor’s second-term bid, an allegation that the supporters of the senator have denied.

    In Osun, the two camps led by Blue Economy Minister Gboyega Oyetola and former Interior Minister Rauf Aregbesola are locked in a war of attrition. The cost of division is huge. Apart from failing to retain political control in the state, the party also lost last year’s presidential poll to the PDP.

    In Oyo, there is a gulf between Mrs. Florence Ajimobi/Adebayo Adelabu camp and the group led by Senator Teslim Folarin.

    In Ondo, the party crisis has been worsened by the demise of former Governor Oluwarotimi Akeredolu and the scramble for the governorship ticket ahead of the November poll.

    The Rivers APC crisis is much more complex. Leading PDP leaders are supporting APC at the centre. At the state level, the Rotimi Amaechi/Tonye Cole camp and Senator Magnus Abe’s group are foes.

    In Kwara, many chieftains are up in arms against Governor Abdulrahman AbdulRazaq. In Kogi, there will be a need to reconcile former Governor Yahaya Bello and Senator Smart Adeyemi. In Gombe, there isfriction between elder statesman Senator Danjuma Goje and Governor Yahaya Inuwa.

    The list of camps and political dissents in the ruling party is long. But a resolution of the dissension among the gladiators is not impossible to achieve.

    The body language of the party’s leadership and the attitude of those saddled with the reconciliation would determine how easily APC can bring back peace into its fold. It would be nice for the reconciliators to avoid bias and approach their job with open minds. This might be difficult if those handling the assignment have vested interests.

    Besides, it takes a large heart to embrace a former foe and agree to work with him to enthrone peace and progress. The party’s peace negotiators could learn a lesson from former Head of State, General Yakubu Gowon, after the thirty months of the civil war. To avoid further blood-letting, Gowon announced that the pogrom had produced neither a victor nor the vanquished. That pronouncement calmed down the frayed nerves of the warring parties – the Nigerian and the Biafran sides. Years of national development followed.

    For APC, peace will return to the fold when party chieftains, especially, overlook the faults of either side and embrace peace. Clinging to the feeling of who did the wrong and should take the blame would prolong the resolution of the crisis.

    Peace is never a party to apportioning blame but a deft player at the game of seeing no evil and hearing no evil. Aggrieved members must let the feud of the past go away without further argument. They must open their doors for a fresh embrace of camaraderie to make this political family more united.

  • A peace mission and a massacre

    A peace mission and a massacre

    The Nigerian Army is bereaved. Indeed, the entire country is in a pensive mood. But the excruciating pain that followed the death of our soldiers in a Delta State community is felt deepest by the relations of the departed servicemen now called fallen heroes.

    Their fathers, mothers, widows, children, and associates are mourning. The faces of these family members that always lit up in joy whenever the soldiers were around them are now bowed in deep sorrow for the military men who died in active service. They never provoked their assailants. The killers are public enemies.

    The Okuoma/Okoloba incident has further depicted Nigeria as a country with a widening nest of killers, including civilians who willfully murder soldiers.

    There was no justification for the killing of 17 soldiers and officers on a peace mission to the two age-long neighbouring Delta communities that are now at daggers drawn – Okoloba and Okuoma. Turning your communities into lands of hate, acrimony, and blood is not the best way to show strength and claim supremacy.

    The dead soldiers include a Lieutenant Colonel, two Majors, a Captain, and 12 soldiers.

    Before responding to the call to duty, many civilians had been wasted on both sides, warranting the deployment of soldiers to halt the carnage.

    The death of the soldiers was devastating to peace-loving Nigerians. The circumstance of the killing would heat up the blood of any relative. It was not surprising that colleagues of the slain officers moved to avenge the deaths.

    It could be said that the aggressive community is paying a huge price for harbouring, aiding and abetting lawless militants and restless youths who ambushed and killed the soldiers. The incident was tantamount to the declaration of war on constituted authotities.

    It is doubtful if any of the perpetrators was caught in the retaliatory fire. They had reportedly fled the community, leaving their kinsmen and other vulnerable residents as casualties of official reprisal attacks and horror.

    The genesis of the hostility was the ethnic tension between Okoloba (Ijaw) and Okuoma (Urhobo). It was a replica of the communal clashes that unsettled Delta State over two decades ago when a coalition of tribes fought the Itsekiri.

    Okoloba and Okuoma communities were locked in violent clashes over what some have attributed to a land dispute. An account said it was a quarrel over a natural resource; another said the rift had to do with a fishing lake.

    As the crisis exacerbated, the traditional rulers of the two communities became helpless. The intervention of soldiers meant that policemen could not curtail the tension; so, the soldiers were drafted to the villages as reinforcement to restore peace.

    There is no evidence to show that the soldiers took sides or demonstrated bias while on the peace mission. Many of them reportedly did not have links with the communities. They were on an assignment to halt the carnage and restore normalcy.

    Read Also: Military kills 106 terrorists, apprehends 103

    Unfortunately, they became casualties of the protracted conflicts they were called to stop. The yet-to-be-identified killers of the soldiers are guilty of impunity. Reports said the officers and servicemen were given undignified death, thereby putting their families and relations in a state of psychological torture. It was also reported that the arms of the slain soldiers were carted by the killers who are said to be on the run. Thus, the military was provoked. The “bloody civilians” have murdered sleep.

    Twenty-five years after the restoration of civil rule, Nigeria is still grappling with the challenges of civil/military relations. The society is becoming more violent to the extent that policemen are not enough to quell riots. They are not only handicapped by numerical strength but also by tools. Warring communities can even defy the police when the battle is hot. Under such a circumstance, soldiers detest any form of resistance by civilians, which police can discountenance.

    However, when soldiers are killed by civilians during operations, trouble becomes a willing companion in the affected areas.

    Had the people of Okuoma learnt from history, perhaps, they would not have plunged their community into an avoidable disaster. A semblance of the Odi massacre of November 20, 1999 should have been prevented. If they had forgotten Odi, is there no elder in the community to remind them also about Zakin Biam?

    On November 4, 1999, an armed gang killed seven policemen at Odi in Bayelsa State. Later, five policemen were also murdered. Those killed included CSP Thomas Jokotola (Osun), DSP George Nwine (Rivers), St. Emmanuel Bako (Bauchi), CPL Ayuba Silas (Kaduna), PC Shaibu Zamani (Kaduna), CPL Elias Bitrus (Borno), CPL Robinson Obazee (Edo), Sgt. Alhaji Atabor (Kogi), PC Stephen Abu (Cross River), and PC Umoh Ukbo (Cross River).

    There was a public outcry. The then President Olusegun Obasanjo was enraged. He contacted former Governor Diepreye Alamieyeseigha, asking him to fish out the suspects within two weeks and arraign them in court.

    It appeared the directive was taken with levity or the governor found it difficult to apprehend the killers. The visit and discussion of the Police Affairs Minister, Major-General David Jemibewon, and Senate President Chuba Okadigbo to Alamieyeseigha did not yield any result. The militants, armed robbers, cultists, kidnappers, and pirates allegedly responsible for the murders could not be found.

    Gen. Obasanjo said his administration would not ignore the atrocity. He declared a state of emergency in Bayelsa. Later, 300 soldiers stormed Odi with an instruction to dislodge the perpetrators of violence, restore law and order and apprehend the suspected murderers.

    The mission was code-named Operation Hakuri. The team was ambushed between Kaiama and Odi. Four soldiers allegedly died during the exercise. But, there was no turning back. The Navy ensured that no one escaped via the waterways. The police ensured civilian movement was contained. Within 48 hours, life deserted Odi; it became a ghost town.

    Only a few buildings, including a church, schools, hospitals and a bank building, survived the operation. Men and animals were wiped out. Human bodies littered the community. According to reports, no fewer than 375 people were killed during the military action.

    Okadigbo described it as “high handedness”; Nobel Laureate Prof. Wole Soyinka called it “a callous overkill”; but the force commander said it was a “defensive action”. The then-president named it “the animalism of the military”.

    In 2013, Justice Lambo Akanbi of the Federal High Court ordered the Federal Government to pay the victims of the Odi Massacre N37.6 billion as compensation. On May 26, 2014, former President Goodluck Jonathan negotiated an out-of-court settlement of N15 billion, and the compensation was paid.

    Today, Okuoma community does not attract the kind of sympathy that Odi got. The dislocation, displacement and dispersion in the former are confounding. Families were scattered. Parents hardly remembered their children and other dependents as they fled from the carnage.

    Those who travelled could not return home peacefully; those at home forfeited their liberty in the face of military rage. Lives were lost and property destroyed. Houses went up in flames. Socio-economic activities were disrupted. Schools, clinics, churches and markets were deserted. The dispersed natives are still enveloped in grief. The community has become a shadow of its past days.

    Okuoma has nurtured some monsters, mainly non-state actors. Militias were bubbling with a curious capability to neutralise trained and experienced military officers and men. They exhibited an audacious barbarity by dehumanising the bodies of their victims. What the thoughtless devil’s disciples failed to consider was the dire consequences of their actions.

    During the week, the community became a military zone. Civilians, even policemen, were kept at bay. The current development has birthed a serious security job that carries a lot of weight and message for those who breach our collective peace with mindless haughtiness.

    The lessons of the entire scenario are instructive. The background was communal violence. That appeared to have taken the back seat now due to the dimension of the Army/militia confrontation.

    If the two communities had embraced dialogue, the conflict would not have escalated. Local security measures, and not a police action or military deployment, would have been sufficient to restore order.

    While the government needs to look at the causes of the communal conflict, it is essential to emphasise that recourse to a legally established process for conflict resolution, ventilation of grievances and redress of injustice is more profitable than some people taking the laws into their hands.

    Celebrating militancy should now be old-fashioned in the Niger Delta. What gave birth to militancy has been addressed, and is still being addressed, by the Federal Government. Many intervention programmes for the welfare of the zone are manned by indigenes across the six Southsouth states.

    Politicians and traditional rulers in the zone should know that the perpetually tension-soaked environment breeds more militants who are not fighting for the common good but for personal survival through nefarious activities, including oil bunkering, kidnapping, and other exploitative tendencies.

    For the umpteenth time and for the sake of law and order, it is expedient to ask: where do the hard guys get their guns? It has been suggested that many of them were armed by rival politicians during the electioneering. The recent Okuoma violence attested to a condemnable proliferation of arms in the region.

    The community owes it a patriotic duty to itself and the country to assist in apprehending the agents of violence, their collaborators and other troublers of public peace. No information should be hoarded about their whereabouts. They should face the wrath of the law to serve as a deterrent to persons with a similar violent disposition. Justice should be well served to placate the souls of the departed soldiers and the psychological torture suffered by their loved ones. Without doing this, the bereaved families will remain in endless agony.

    The atmosphere is still cloudy. The horizon remains blistering. But after the hullabaloo, there should be respite, sooner or later. The dust is expected to settle someday. But one thing is certain: Okuoma will not remain the same again.