The Nation Newspaper

Category: Emmanuel Oladesu

  • Can Obi rebuild LP?

    Can Obi rebuild LP?

    Ahead of the February presidential poll, not many people gave him a chance. He was underrated by the two dominant  parties-the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), led then by Senator Abdullahi Adamu, and the main opposition Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), led by Dr. Iyorchia Ayu.

    But, Obi nearly became the hero the 2023 poll. He made a phenomenal impact, scoring over six million votes, as a starter, to the surprise of the two experienced politicians, President Bola Tinubu and former Vice President Atiku Abubakar.

    Obi came into political limelight when he won the Anambra governorship election in 2003 on the platform of the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA). Although the poll was rigged in favour of Dr. Chris Ngige of the PDP, the stolen mandate was retrieved at the Supreme Court.

    However, after leaving office, he dumped APGA for PDP, where he paired with Atiku in 2019. His choice as running mate did not go down well with Southeast PDP leaders who complained that they were not consulted by the Waziri Adamawa.

    During the preparation for the 2023 poll, he hurriedly left PDP when he got wind of the fact that Atiku was no longer looking in his direction.

    Obi borrowed Labour Party (LP) and launched into the campaigns with enthusiasm.

    Three factors boosted his chance. He almost became the third force, inspite of the limited capability of his “structureless” platform and disorganised supporters because Obi  appealed to many youths who were not impressed by the performance of the Buhari administration.

    Indeed, many youths also gravitated towards Obi through peer pressure.

    The propaganda on the social media by fanatical loyalists was strong, effective, confusing and also largely deceitful, taking along many ignorant and gullible youths.

    Also, the campaign was divisive, anchored on a sort of religious bickering. While the political class was busy resolving the conflict triggered by zoning or power shift, many Christians were of the opinion that after Buhari’s eight years, power should shift from a Muslim to a Christian. The religious issue became popular among Christians who lacked an indepth understanding of the calculations that heralded the APC’s same faith ticket. However, the Christian population that endorsed Obi cut across Northcentral, Southwest state of Lagos and majorly Southeast.

    The third factor was ethnicity, as reflected principally by the bloc votes secured by the LP candidate from his native Southeast and other Igbo-dominated catchment areas in the country.

    Read Also: Infantino cleared of improbity in corruption scandal

    In the entire Southeast, APC and PDP were shut down, making Obi, more or less, a new champion of geographical expression.

    The demography of LP voters also revealed that affection for Obi contrasted with any consideration for LP. Evidently, in subsequent elections, LP could not fly, except in Abia, where Alex Otti, according to observers, was elected largely on his own merit.

    Obi’s adventure into court did not bear fruits. His prayers collapsed at the tribunal and Supreme Court. But, his behaviour few days ago reflected a product of bad companionship. After  Obi initially rejected Atiku’s post-election offer to team up with him, he deviated from his earlier position to fight alone. Like Atiku, he asked President Tinubu to re-introduce himself  to Nigerians who gave him majority votes. But the heat was soon turned on Obi. If as alleged by Lamidi Apapa’s faction his divided party, represented by Arabambi, Obi bears Peter on one certificate and Gregory Onwubwuasi on other certificates, does that not suggest an atom of identity crisis?

    Obi’s appeal at the Supreme  Court, according to the jurists, lacked merit. It meant that he was televised into chasing shadows.

    Many challenges will contront Obi and LP. The former presidential candidate does not know the party totally. He only hired the platform for the poll.

    Obi has defected twice from political parties. Would he may still defect from LP, faced with similar circumstances?

    Currently,  the party is divided. Apapa and Julius Abure, a lawyer, are at loggerheads. The two party stalwarts worked at cross-purpose during the electioneering. The leadership tussle is detrimental to the party’s unity and cohesion . There is an unfinished business of reconciliation.

    Obi also has to organise and encourage his scattered followers to also embrace LP.

    The party lack formidable structures  in many states. Therefore, the party has to embark on membership drive. Although the leadership of the umbrella Labour union endorsed Obi, workers were aloof. LP is not an ideological party. Therefore, it is not different from other parties.

    Another challenge that will likely face the party is defection of its few federal and state lawmakers who are swayed by carrots dangled by bigger parties.

  • Litigation, controversy and equity

    Litigation, controversy and equity

    Nigeria is witnessing the most controversial, sensational, and laughable presidential litigation since the Second Republic when it began the presidential system. Citizens look up to the highest court in the land to resolve the politically motivated legal riddle. Whenever the apex court pronounces its decision, no other opinion will count.

    At the close of the February 25 poll, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) declared Bola Ahmed Tinubu of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) winner of the historic poll that had polarised the country. Two rivals – Atiku Abubakar of the distressed Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and Peter Obi, who had hurriedly hired the often “used and dumped” Labour Party (LP) as an emergency platform – challenged the victory of the president at the tribunal. That move posed a big headache to the layman.

    How can two candidates challenge the victory of one man with each laying claim to the Certificates of Return from INEC? It is a big dilemma, a somewhat maladaptive behaviour to the reality of electoral defeat and loss of political investment. The corollary of their claim, to a layman, is that at least, one of them is either lying, deficient in self-assessment or evading reality, or deliberately looking for an excuse to stir up mischief.

    Atiku, who came second, is challenging Tinubu, which means that he is opposed to the claim of Obi. In fact, the PDP has maintained that its former member, Obi, never won the poll as LP flag bearer. Also, since Obi, who came third, is challenging Tinubu and claiming victory, it means that he is also trying to attack or liquidate Atiku’s claim to victory.

    The long and short of it, as affirmed by the tribunal, is that victory cannot belong to three people at the same time in one presidential election. There must be only one winner while the others must be the losers.

    The tribunal’s verdict explicitly proved that Tinubu won. This means Atiku and his 2019 running mate, Obi, made spurious claims that collapsed like a pack of cards in the temple of justice.

    However, that robust and lucid unanimous verdict is not final. The case has now moved to the Supreme Court, the final arbiter. The two losers have the backing of the law to reject the poll result.

    At the tribunal, the main bone of contention was the lack of substantial compliance with the electoral law. Put succinctly, Atiku and Obi, in their separate claims, alleged ‘fraud’. Their prayers were the same: withdraw Tinubu’s victory and give it to us. The court declined because that victory cannot be sliced into two, with one half allotted to the Wazirin Adamawa and the other half given to Obi, former governor of Anambra State. That is the view of the layman.

    The true picture is that the tribunal dismissed the separate but similar allegations of Atiku and Obi and affirmed the president’s victory. The tribunal judgment dampened their illusory hope; yet, it nevertheless brought out the best of creativity in the two defeated candidates. The previous claims were dusted and tabled before the Supreme Court. But the memory of the tribunal judgment is troubling. Therefore, new claims had to be invented and brought to the front burner: Tinubu had to show evidence of his Chicago University days, including the attendance sheets he signed before taking lectures, to show that he was a student of CSU.

    Also, he needed to convince the court and, indeed, all inclined naysayers, self-appointed social media jurists, and incurable detractors that he never forged his diploma.

    Read Also: Respite as Tinubu okays payment of withheld ASUU salaries

    For Atiku, the desperation is obvious. And it is for a reason. The former vice president is bent on asking the apex court to assume trial jurisdiction in the presidential litigation, although the 180 days for the hearing of the election petition had elapsed.

    But why did Atiku initially fail to challenge the election result based on his allegation of forgery, no matter how unfounded?

    Did he know that the tribunal is a court of trial while the Supreme Court is a court of review? Is the difference not glaring? Why play the ambush game with the nation’s apex court?

    The approach, this time round, is different. It is a two-way attack. Atiku and Obi approached the apex court on appeal. They also took the matter to a court without setting any boundaries, and innocence – or ignorance – appears colossal.

    The judgment passed by the ‘street court’ or court of public opinion is always instant because of the presence of jurists without an idea about the modus operandi of the judicial system. Yet, they are more vocal than the learned men and women who have perused so many cases to draw legal inferences from them in tandem with the issues at hand.

    Atiku and Obi may win with the pedestrian jurists, but the subjectivity will not lead to the achievement of political power.

    Thus, the burden shifted from Tinubu to his alma mater, which confirmed that he attended the school and graduated in flying colours. The disclosure may be detrimental to Atiku’s newest or additional evidence, which may now become a fable before the highest court in the land.   Many commentators – experts, tyros, and ignoramuses – have been dissecting the evidence on the pages of newspapers and the studios of radio and television stations.

    But will the apex court rely on such opinions, sentiments, and half-truths that belie logic, law and precedents? Any further comment may even pale into contempt of the court.

    Despite these obvious limitations, the creative Adamawa politician and his former running mate returned to the street to whip up emotions during their separate media briefings. Atiku challenged Tinubu to bring out more details about the schools he previously attended. He beckoned on Rabiu Kwankwaso of the crisis-ridden New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP) and Obi for a curious post-election collaboration. Kwankwaso of Kwankwansiyyya Movement declined outright. Obi, who initially was undecided, dragged his foot for a few days. Maybe, he later agreed to hold an inexplicable press conference, following tips by ‘Ahitophelian’ advisers who have a score to settle with the president.

    Obi’s mentors these days include a General and a cleric. Both have the Ota connection.

    Also, Atiku and Obi claimed that they never knew Tinubu: erstwhile Mobil treasurer, Third Republic senator, National Democratic Coalition (NADECO) chieftain, former Lagos State governor who was leader of the Action Congress (AC) that fielded Atiku for President in 2007, and National Leader of the APC, whose presidential ticket Atiku once competed for.

    They allowed whatever hatred they harboured against the President to becloud their sense of honesty. They insisted that the Number One Citizen should ‘reintroduce’ himself to almost nine million Nigerians who endorsed him at the poll. As they drew the president out, Nigerians also asked them to do the same by re-introducing themselves to the world and clearing their identity question. 

    There is nothing Tinubu had submitted to INEC that is new and, according to his party, indefensible. If, as alleged by Lamidi Apapa’s faction of LP, represented by Arabambi, Obi bears Peter on one certificate and Gregory Onwubwuasi on other certificates, does that not suggest an atom of identity crisis?

    From the scattered and ‘disarticulated’ Obedients, mum is the word. Many Nigerians have also turned the heat on the former vice president.

    Politicians should be aware of the unintended consequences of their actions. A searchlight was beamed on Atiku’s WAEC. There appeared a discrepancy, which caught attention. Who is Sadiq? Atiku, in his response, said: “I used Sadiq Abubakar to sit for my WAEC and after passing my exams, I went to swear to an affidavit to say I am the same person as Atiku Abubakar. I went to ABU as Atiku Abubakar and passed my exams as Atiku Abubakar. Interviewed as Atiku Abubakar by the Federal Civil Service Commission and hired into the Customs Service as Atiku Abubakar. So, where is forgery there?”

    This is logical. But the illogicality there is that while Atiku has an affidavit, his supporters do not want to hear that Tinubu also has an affidavit.

    Does that mean some people live in a glass house and continue to throw stones? President Tinubu, it can be said, thrives in adversity. He has cleared himself. Attention has now shifted from his documents to the certificates of Atiku and Obi.

    A faction of the LP has insisted that Obi should reintroduce himself to Obidients and the general public. Whenever you point a finger at a foe, remember that four others are facing you with question marks.

    The lesson is Instructive. Let us be circumspect even in our moments of desperation. Let those who demand equity clean their hands thoroughly before setting out. You never can tell who might spot the stains of yesteryears in your fingers. 

  • The trial of Bola Tinubu

    The trial of Bola Tinubu

    His life could be summarised as divine favour. No one could have survived all he has been through without the Almighty on his side. He has thrived against the wishes and plots of his adversaries.

    Perhaps, in the post-Awolowo era, no other politician has been so vilified, particularly in the media, than Tinubu. He carries on his head the bowl of fate, having been catapulted to leadership positions by destiny, grace. The exalted position he now occupies in national life attracts uncommon envy.

    President Bola Ahmed Tinubu is overpaying the price of fame and leadership. As history allotted to him the pre-eminent status of national, sub-regional, and continental captain, his detractors are swelling in ranks, ranting and wailing uncontrollably to pull him down.

    Like Awolowo, who bestrode the First and Second republics like a colossus, Tinubu looms large with his enviable personality across the country and beyond to the extent that he has remained the issue for over two decades now.

    Like the Iroko tree, he stands tall and sturdy to the envy of his foes.

    Read Also: We won’t tolerate any form of economic sabotage, COAS warns soldiers

    Courage has been the hallmark of his life. He is endowed with a curious intellect that beats the imagination of his less-endowed rivals. His power of ideas remains unassailable; so is his capacity for overcoming obstacles.

     From his troubled childhood, he has endured the vicissitudes of a challenging upbringing, nurtured by God who has ordered his steps. Thus, his steady rise to eminence has stirred rivalry among elite peers who cannot adjust to the import of his triumphs and prospects of survival.

    He seems to understand the grammar of politics better, as well as the value and utility of power, which, in his view, is not served a la carte. In the last two decades, it is incontrovertible that Asiwaju Tinubu has been the subject of public and even clandestine discussions. The question, as it was posed in the days of Awo, is whether you are with him or against him.

    Tinubu is about crossing the last hurdle that is critical to the affirmation of his victory in the February 25 poll and legitimisation of his presidency.

    In the last two decades, the president’s political path has been laced with thorns. It has been a life of struggles, and battles, with some setbacks, and several triumphs. As a Third Republic senator, a pro-democracy activist, an opposition leader, an Afenifere chieftain, an All Progressives Congress (APC) national leader, a presidential aspirant, a standard bearer, a president-elect, and the Commander-in-Chief, he has walked a tightrope.

    Tinubu is fulfilling his destiny as an African statesman wielding political control in the continent’s most populous country. But, for him, self-actualisation is still a tall order.

    Asiwaju has been described as a boardroom guru, a financial surgeon, a seasoned administrator, a mobiliser, an organiser, a strategist, a powerful tactician, a tested, trusted, and dependable leader, a successful governor, and a party leader. Now is the time to prove that he can reposition the country for excellence and make it realise its full potential.

    If after four or eight years there is no significant improvement in the condition of living, his presidency would have been in vain. Therefore, a great burden is on Tinubu, who is expected to live up to expectations.

    Judging by the way politics is played in this clime, detractors have returned to the trenches to plot distractions in this period of electoral litigation. He is expected to deploy the wisdom that enabled him to navigate through the thorny path in the past. Despite past threats, Tinubu has remained on the firing line as a highly focused actor. During the turbulent period of the military onslaught against pro-democracy crusaders, he escaped the military’s re-detention and death plan. It was a life-threatening experience. He left for overseas through the National Democratic Coalition (NADECO) route.

    As governor, he survived the sensational case instituted by the late Chief Gani Fawehinmj, who alleged certificate forgery. He survived the heat, settled for governance and his state became a reference point.

    As governor, the Federal Government turned the heat on his administration, following the creation of an additional 37 local government development areas (LCDAs). Former President Olusegun Obasanjo, in response, withheld the council allocations to cripple Lagos State. Through creative financial engineering, the state, under the leadership of Tinubu, overcame the financial suffocation.

    Ahead of the 2003 governorship poll, the former governor was disowned by his political family, Afenifere. At the close of the poll, the five Alliance for Democracy (AD) governors in the Southwest supported by the socio-political group lost re-election. Only Tinubu of Lagos survived and became the last man standing.

    From a national figure in the Third Republic, Tinubu had become almost a regional champion as from 2003, when he launched the campaign for reclaiming lost progressive territories from conservative, do-or-die leaders, who orchestrated the political earthquake that swept across the Southwest.

    It marked the beginning of his long journey to Abuja, the seat of power. The collaboration with like-minded leaders of legacy parties led to the formation of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in 2014. But, no sooner had it become a ruling party than it was assailed by some contradictions. It was evident that some founding fathers, including Tinubu, were being sidelined in the party and the government it midwifed at the centre.

    Those who tried to alienate Tinubu saw tomorrow. They were sensitive to the prospects of the National Leader. His former boys who joined the central government tactically distanced themselves from their leader since they were responsible to a new master in Aso Villa.

    During the preparation for the 2019 presidential election, the detractors of Jagaban Borgu ‘soft-pedaled’. In their pretence, they stormed Lagos for his birthday only to start keeping a distance again after President Muhammadu Buhari had secured a second term.

    Consequently, national officers of the ruling party perceived to be friendly with the national leader were shoved aside.

    But Tinubu’s popularity never waned in the ruling party; it even waxed stronger by the day. To edge him out of the party’s primary, a screening committee was set up to sort out aspirants in the ploy for consensus candidacy. All the contenders fell for it, except the most formidable aspirant and potential winner, Tinubu. When the John Odigie-Oyegun-led panel sought his opinion on the consensus option, he was said to have given an answer to the effect that he would support it, if he would be the beneficiary. Details of the interview may become public, if the president reflects on it in his future memoir.

    APC was enveloped in anxiety as it prepared for the primary. Predictably, Tinubu won the ticket but not without feeling the intrigues of intra-party traducers. Many contenders saw the wisdom to step down for him.

    Then, there was the hurdle to choose a running mate. A realist, Tinubu chose Senator Kashim Shettima, a Muslim like him, from Borno State. Such a choice was not new. The same-faith ticket of Moshood Abiola and Babagana Kingibe had won the poll 30 years ago. There were hues and cries, but the heavens have not fallen.

    The campaign was tough and stressful. Many Nigerians, seething with rage, were ready to punish the APC ticket for the actions and inactions of the Buhari administration. Amid the already charged atmosphere, Nigerians were thrown into the turmoil of currency change and fuel shortage pari passu.

    Despite the harsh realities, Tinubu defeated his two formidable opponents – Alhaji Atiku Abubakar of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and Peter Obi, the new kid on the block who hurriedly borrowed the Labour Party (LP) platform for the poll.

    While the winner savoured the euphoria of victory, the poll appeared inconclusive in the wild imagination of the bad losers. The battle shifted from the ballot box to the court. Simultaneously, armchair critics and social media urchins constituted their own court from where they preconceived where the pendulum of justice should swing. They fired misguided salvos at jurists handling the petitions filed at the tribunal.

    To the egoistic losers, law, logic, reason, precedents, and justice are unimportant. Their main concern is to have their defeated candidate declared the winner by all means and at all costs. To fulfill their wishes, the desperados have embarked on a journey of blackmail and smear campaigns against the winner. The bad losers have gone to the most despicable lengths to illegally ask for what has been legally declared the prize for the obvious winner.

    Attention-seeking Sadiq and Gregory the propagandist have brought to the street a strict matter of law, twisting facts, indulging in fabrication and prevarication, confusing their ill-informed supporters and taking along with them like-minded jesters.

    Nigeria is breeding a generation of social media scoundrels – intellectually bereft, dictatorial in tendency, and gullible in dispositions. They constitute a befuddled gang of supporters that trade in distortions and intimidation. They are mostly adult delinquents bereft of the knowledge of history and the understanding of national complexity. They have the semblance of a mob that acts before thinking. They beat the drums of war, apparently hoping to vanish into thin air when the fires they stoke engulf them.

    It is on these disorganised armies of fanatical chorus singers that some mournful presidential candidates rely for mindless protests, rumour mongering, and campaign of calumny against the election winner in a highly populous and heterogeneous country.

    Their pastime is a social media trial, which will lead to nowhere. Their desperate principals are the accusers, prosecutors, and judges. The awful picture of subjectivity they portrayed was at variance with the lucid verdict of the tribunal, premised on sound legal interpretation. Indeed, the truth about law and justice was below their misguided expectation and in contrast with their predetermined agenda.

    As an afterthought, a principal of the split opposition travelled to the United States and came back empty-handed. What is most striking is that while they are in court, they are not sure of their depositions, making them to return to the court of public opinion with propaganda to whip up sentiments and malign the victor.

    Now that their allegation of a forged certificate is collapsing like a pack of cards, they are inventing new accusations in their laboratory of falsity. It is another dirty campaign packaged by the rejected candidates that Tinubu must provide all documents from the embryonic stage of his life to Mobil or surrender his mandate.

    It is the height of daydreaming and delusion.

    But it also underscores the burden of power. Since Tinubu had anticipated the litany of mischief, he had also prepared for the assaults, insults, disappointments, betrayals, and war. Like he sometimes admits, leadership often entails absorbing insults even from unexpected quarters. Perhaps, this personal philosophy has helped President Tinubu to weather the storm and remain unscathed.  

    After a dark night comes a glorious dawn. However threatening the storm might be, the sky always remains intact.

    Like he did in the past, Tinubu will survive the current travails and live to reminisce on them, hopefully, in his memoir.

  • The limit of desperation

    The limit of desperation

    After losing the ballot box battle, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) presidential candidate in the February 25 poll, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, shifted his election war dispute to the temple of justice.

    After kissing the dust at the tribunal, the Wazirin Adamawa, apparently afraid of another round of drubbing, employed propaganda to sway gullible hangers-on that have no inkling about the modus operandi of the legal system or chose to ignore it on his voyage of self-delusion.

    What will be examined at the Supreme Court is neither public opinion nor the sentiments of armchair critics recruited for television showmanship. The apex court has never been swayed by the befuddled tirades of beer parlour denizens that relish falsity as facticity.

    The jurists at the apex court, just like the tribunal judges, will rely, not on street protest or mob action, or gangsterism in social media, but on law, reason, logic, judicial precedents, and the sanctity of truth.

    The court will not give an ear to any campaign of calumny, blackmail, threat, and intimidation of respondents and judges. Ultimately, the rule of law and due process will not be sacrificed on the altar of sentiments.

    If Atiku Abubakar, a former Vice President of Nigeria and veteran presidential candidate, was a lawyer, he would not have organised the Thursday press conference. He would have just focused on the imminent legal fireworks at the Supreme Court, which is the final arbiter in the historic presidential litigation.

    But the PDP candidate, who lost to his long-standing friend and better rival, President Bola Tinubu, is a politician. The feeling is that the eminent politician has opted for the court of public opinion, knowing that his appeal has a slim chance of survival. This is debatable.

    The aim might be that if the PDP finally loses the case to the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), the President’s image should be dented by exposing him to ridicule and disrepute.

    This is the general illusion of hope by Asiwaju’s confused opponents who, in the process of dragging his name through the mud, are most likely to be smeared by the attendant dirt. They are most likely to face the penalty of throwing their conscience overboard in their desperate journey for power.

    Indeed, the public was incited against the President over a phantom certificate scandal, but without success. Atiku, in his desperation, sought comradeship with an agitated Labour Party (LP) presidential candidate, Peter Obi, and his embattled New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP) counterpart, Rabiu Kwankwaso, to join his expedition to pull down the President.

    It appears that the Atiku voyage is focused mainly on either getting the Presidency through judicial declaration or forcing Tinubu to forfeit his legitimate mandate. If the labour unions’ joint strike had not been averted, perhaps, the PDP candidate would have also drafted the workers into the gamble.

    But Obi appears the wiser now. He distanced himself instantly from the stealth for a nebulous conspiracy, saying he does not see Atiku as his role model.

    Is it not illogical that Atiku is now asking Obi and Kwankwaso to join him to win power after the election has been concluded, after turning his back on them during the electioneering?

    Why did he not rally opposition platforms to fight APC at the poll? How could he have even done that when he could not reconcile with PDP’s aggrieved G-5 governors who were boys when he and Iyorcha Ayu were PDP founding fathers?

    Yet, the latest disclosure during the woeful press conference was the capture of the Southwest states of Oyo, Ondo, Ogun, Osun, and Ekiti by the PDP-led Federal Government under Olusegun Obasanjo and Atiku. Twenty years later, Atiku is saying he deserves approbation for aborting the extension of that rigging to Lagos State, where Tinubu was governor.

    It took the Southwest several years to recover from the political earthquake of 2003 masterminded by OBJ. But, should it not be instructive to Atiku that Tinubu, the last man standing, took off from that tragic period in a journey of two decades that culminated in defeating the Wazirin Adamawa and the PDP at the February 25 presidential poll, despite starting earlier in what has now paled into shadow-chasing, right from the aborted Third Republic?

    Atiku reiterated his opposition to a Muslim-Muslim ticket. But in 1993, as a Muslim, was he not among those being considered for running mate to the late Chief Moshood Abiola, the presidential candidate of the defunct Social Democratic Party (PDP), before the Aare Onakakanfo, also a Muslim, opted for another Muslim, Alhaji Babagana Kingibe, following pressure from governors?

    Today, attention has shifted from who won the recent presidential poll and why the election was won and lost to whether Tinubu has a certificate or not. It is an afterthought, which is meant to divert attention from the shame of defeat, despite the bravado, pomposity, and arrogance of a leader who grossly failed to put his house in order ahead of the election.

    Read Also: Stop impeachment moves against Akeredolu’s Deputy, APC orders Assembly

    Atiku has succeeded in stirring controversy, but it is futile since the effort is not likely to pave the way for the return of his party to Aso Villa.

    The entire enterprise is laughable. The drama will lead to nowhere. In a breath, Atiku cried foul, saying Tinubu did not have a certificate. In another dimension, he alleged forgery without trying to plead or prove any allegation of forgery in his petition. He is running from pillar to post, whipping up sentiments and indulging in self-deception.

    Did Tinubu submit a fake or forged certificate to the umpire? The Chicago State University (CSU) in the United States said he never did. The school even affirmed under oath that Tinubu attended and graduated from the institution. Another important fact that the Atiku forces are not ready to admit is that the school does not handle replacements for lost certificates.

     The poser: can Tinubu forge a certificate he already has? Can a person forge the academic records he possesses? In the deposition by the CSU, there was nowhere it said the certificate presented to INEC by Tinubu was fake. Remarkably, the institution insisted under oath that the President graduated with honours, in flying colours. Also, CSU never denied that replacements for lost certificates are done by vendors, not by the university.

    Indeed, Atiku and his gang of political jesters embarked on a mere academic exercise. Isn’t what the main opposition brandishing amounting to “after discovery information?” Atiku never presented a certificate forgery allegation in his petition at the tribunal. Can he now add what was not part of his case at the tribunal at the Supreme Court?

    The assessment or verification is beyond the ken and comprehension of laymen. Only legal experts, particularly the honourable jurists, can resolve the legal riddle.

    Atiku, even if he denies labouring in vain, has found out a number of facts that can nevertheless, be twisted by PDP supporters.

    Tinubu was admitted into the university as a male student. The testimony of his schoolmate, Adeniji, is incontrovertible. But, the diploma, which is the bone of contention, does not add value because it is a ceremonial document.

    Before he was admitted,  he sat  for a qualifying examination. Throughout, he was on the Dean’s Honours’ List. Tinubu was even a campus politician. He ran for the office of President of Accounting Association.

    Also, once the certificate is collected, it is no more in the file of the school. The university is only in possession of diplomas of those who have not collected theirs. It is also significant to note that when graduates come back to ask for the replacement of lost diplomas, vendors that are the third party handle such matters and not the university.

    Also, what the university adds value to is the transcript and not the diploma that Atiku was chasing.

    Whichever way the pendulum of justice swings at the Supreme Court, it is doubtful if Atiku would be able to maintain the same level of affinity with President Tinubu and so many other Nigerians as he used to before embarking on his desperate voyage for power. His current outing has exposed him as a sportsman without sportsmanship. There should be a limit to desperation – for power, for wealth, for anything in life, however coveted.

  • Nigeria at 63

    Nigeria at 63

    On October 1, 1960, the future of Nigeria looked bright. Many world leaders anticipated a progression towards the emergence of an African giant, a medium-ranking global power that would be sustained by steady economic growth, political stability, military prowess, and technological breakthroughs.

    The population has remained huge, signifying a big market, resilient manpower, and a colourful blend of cultures. Besides the vital human capital, also exemplified by the quality of population, Nigeria is blessed with a limitless endowment, including the typical black gold – oil – and a large land mass filled with enumerable mineral deposits and arable ground.

    However, 63 years after independence, the vision of the founding fathers is yet to be fully realised. While it cannot be said that the country has been static, the progress made, compared to other nations that were on the same pedestal as Nigeria six decades ago, falls below expectations.

    To many observers, the national tribulation attests to the failure of indigenous leadership.

    Nigeria has expanded structures for function performance at federal, state and local levels, but service delivery has been dismal. State and local government creation may have given hope for a redress of inequality and identity problems, but the lopsided distribution in the polity has also triggered agitation for equity and balance. As it turned out, the exercise only offered the elite access to public resources and monopoly by a few.

    Also, there is a wide gulf in the country’s democratising experience. Nigeria has achieved self-rule. But democracy ought to be the destination to redress injustice and restore rights, ensure equity and fairness to all.

    When elections remain a nightmare and the battle often shifts from the ballot box to the court, the discerning is left wondering what democracy truly represents in this clime. The nation’s blind rush for power acquisition is driven by the lure in the corridor of power and the perception that it holds limitless privileges and uninhibited personal acquisitions.

    The country is grappling with weak institutions, a trend that has strengthened the overbearing influence of power barons who monopolised and personalised power, even in the first two decades of the Fourth Republic.

     From a country of three, and later, four regions, there is now a 36-state structure with little bearing on the quality of living. The paradox of a rich country with poor people is confounding.

    From few schools at independence, the country now boasts over 170 universities belonging to federal, state, and private operators. Many of the public schools are now underfunded. Whereas the acquisition of education should be fundamental for all citizens, it has now been so commercialised that getting its basics is like a camel passing through the eye of the needle.

    Even after acquiring it through thick and thin, the job market has become so saturated that thousands of graduates struggle daily to find just any job. In the end, they run away from their land of birth which is ill-prepared to offer them the means to fend for themselves.  

    Many undergraduates live in perpetual fear of what life holds for them after their academic pursuits.

    Today, many youths have lost confidence in their country. They are eager to migrate to Europe or America or anywhere else in search of real and imagined greener pastures. Many of them do not hope to return.

    Nigeria survived the threats of disintegration, particularly the civil war foisted on it by parasitic interlopers, the soldiers of fortune who loomed large on the polity for 29 years. But, their legacies have remained a factor in retrogression.

    The nation’s industrialisation is signposted by abandoned projects. The manufacturing sub-sector is on its knees. Gone are the giant firms and industries of old that generated jobs and produced great technocrats. They have been converted to commercialised churches.

    Nigeria laments the foreign exchange debacle, but it loathes productivity. It has become a country of imports with attendant capital flights.

    The country has not lived up to its role as a model for Africa. Although it has not become a failed state, Nigeria has become an obviously fragile entity. There are danger signals in every region. The national fragility is potentially a stepping stone to state failure.

    As Nigeria celebrates its flag independence, Labour, in its war-mongering approach, is planning a strike to protest the high cost of living triggered by the inevitable removal of fuel subsidies. The subsidy removal is not the problem. The issue is that the sixth-largest producer of oil in the world does not have a functioning refinery.

    Crude is exported. It is meant to bring in revenue and refined products. But the by-products or petrochemicals are lost in inexplicable circumstances. The proceeds are said to be used to import refined fuel for home consumption. In most cases, the revenue and the products always throw up controversies. Given the number of barrels produced daily, a huge revenue is expected to accrue therefrom. But the nation’s sales account has always been hidden in mystery. It is laughable.

    This rich country is in pain. Its oil is supposed to be a blessing. However, due to mismanagement, it has become a curse. The natural resource is domiciled in a region. Ironically, the zone is in penury. The Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC), which was established to fast-track development in the oil-bearing region has become a bastion of graft, where the steal-and-go mentality rules the minds of the agency’s handlers. Perhaps, it will turn a new leaf under the current administration.

    Life expectancy has dropped abysmally in Nigeria. Basic amenities, including potable water, electricity, medical facilities, and roads, are in disrepair. The only prosperous people are those who have been in government, cornered state power and appropriated public resources. This is the reason many analysts have described Nigeria as a big contract up for grabs.

    Read Also: APC intervenes in Ondo impeachment saga

    What has Nigeria learnt from Asian countries, including India, Singapore and Malaysia? They have left Nigeria behind in the march towards development. Although they are not more endowed than Nigeria, they became the Asian Tigers because they had good leadership.

    Across the six geo-political zones, there is no peace. There are security challenges: terrorism, banditry, herder/farmer clashes and unprovoked violence in the North; kidnappings, ritual murders and Yahoo Plus in the West, as well as the unknown gunmen that are always on the prowl in the East.

    In Nigeria, the state is the corrupter of society. The military milked Nigeria without challenge. Civilian authorities also deepened the culture of graft and sleaze among public officeholders, despite prosecution by anti-graft bodies.

    It has been a tortuous journey since 1914. Colonialism was devoid of benevolence. The colony wobbled in the course of its problematic journey to a difficult future.

    At independence, Nigeria was a country of many rival and competing people struggling for relevance. It could not become a nation, but a complex and highly heterogeneous nation-state in coerced cohabitation. The ray of hope was the subscription to federalism by the leaders who sought to build on the foundation laid by the colonial masters.

    The three premiers tried to lay examples of transformational leadership in the Western, Eastern and Northern regions. But, deep-seated rivalry, mutual suspicion and bitter competition for power at the centre upset the polity. The nationalist politicians – Zik, Sardauna, Balewa and Awo – despite their pioneering efforts, refused to play politics of tolerance, accommodation and understanding.

    The 1966 military coup that followed unleashed monumemtal disasters. It deepened the distrust and suspicion among the unequal regions. Legitimate authorities gave way to dictatorial leadership. To whom were the soldiers accountable? Surely, they were not answerable to the “bloody civilians”. The mistake of the first military ruler, Major-General Thomas Aguiyi-Ironsi, who foisted the strange unitary system on the country through his controversial unification decree, marked the beginning of the journey to gloom.

    Today, some leaders may be dodging the national question. Yet, its resolution is critical to peace and harmony. The crux of the matter is that it was not Nigeria that was colonised by the British. It was the kingdoms – Yoruba, Nupe, Fulani, Kanuri, Ebira, Efik, Ibibio, and Bini, among others – that were colonised.

    Nigeria has aptly been described as a mere geographical expression. Diverse people from incompatible social formations were lumped together to coexist. The question is: on what terms?

     The 1999 Constitution has continued to lie against itself. What is the basis for peaceful coexistence? Restructuring, the anticipated elixir for true national cohesion, should not be put in abeyance. If Nigeria desires security, it should also consider state and community policing.

    Nigeria is still being confronted by an identity crisis. Why is a section still pushing for disintegration or Balkanisation? It is not due to feelings of alienation, marginalisation and injustice?

    The country has also continued to grapple with a distribution crisis. How the wealth is generated is usually less important than how it is distributed. Thus, fair play is said to be absent.

    The past is consigned to history. But the present can be devoted to reforms and other corrective measures, which should permeate the sectors.

    Nigeria yearns for great leadership. An opportunity is presented to President Bola Tinubu to lead the country through these lean and challenging times. Expectations are high for him to implement his ‘Renewed Hope Agenda’ with utmost fidelity.

    If President Tinubu can restore regular power supply and revive the ailing refineries, Nigeria will be on the path to survival. The informal sector would have been liberated and the measures would be an incentive to local and foreign investment.

    The government should refocus public spending in a way that will trigger productive activities and wealth generation. The country should pay attention to agriculture to guarantee food security.

    Leadership should have a national outlook. This is being demonstrated by the President’s critical appointments. Nepotism will only accentuate suspicion and generate nasty thoughts about ethnic domination which would fuel the fear of marginalisation and exclusion.

    Where should Nigeria be in the next 63 years?

    Hopefully, a technological giant; a great federal democracy; a self-sufficient country; an industrial hub; a secured polity; a united nation-state; and a world power should be birthed sooner than later, if all goes well. What will, however, point in that direction is the foundation that is being laid today.

    The government and people of Nigeria should dream big about the future, jettison habits that impede development in private and public, and lay a concrete foundation for future prosperity under a rational and responsible leadership.

  • Governor-deputy feud in Ondo

    Governor-deputy feud in Ondo

    History is repeating itself in Ondo State. It may be the fallout of the refusal to learn from the lessons of the past.

    Also, some have attributed the brewing crisis in the state to a curious ill luck or stroke of fate. Others believe that it is a fait accompli.

    Governor Oluwarotimi Akeredolu and his deputy, Lucky Ayedatiwa, are at war. When this kind of face-off broke out in the past, it defied solution. Reconciliation was difficult, for obvious reasons.

    During the week, the governor applied his hammer, following his return from a three-month medical leave in Germany. All the aides of the embattled deputy governor were axed. Fear has now gripped other members of the State Executive Council (Exco) over an imminent reshuffle.

    The major issue is power, which is either constitutionally monopolised, reluctantly shared, or compulsorily delegated with reservation by the governor, who is the boss, to his deputy, who is perceived as a spare tyre.

    The presidential system only bestows power and authority on one man-president or governor. The deputy governor is like a footnote, except the chief executive dies, or he is impeached by the House of Assembly, or he is totally incapacitated by illness. It is only under any of these rare circumstances that the lone deputy can enjoy substantial power. It is unlike the parliamentary system where the next-in-command to the prime minister or his successor is picked by the party with the majority in the Parliament.

    Closely related is whether the beneficiary of seemingly shared power under the presidential system should be carried away by the relatively transient privilege to the extent that he now becomes oblivious to the limitations of the exercise of delegated executive power as acting governor.

    The correct interpretation of the executive presidency is that in the Governor’s Office, the governor is the boss who fully calls the shots. Other functionaries, including the deputy governor, are clustered with the most junior Personal Assistants. They are perceived as the governor’s servants who are not expected to compete for prominence with the big boss.

    The third dimension is human nature, which is brought to bear on constitutional interpretation of political roles. While the presidential system was suggested as a replacement for or better alternative to the parliamentary system in 1979 to prevent a scenario of “a nominal or ceremonial president working hollow to a power-loaded prime minister or head of government,” it has also unleashed a scenario of bitter feud between the President and Vice President, and between governors and their deputies in some states.

    The pattern of governor-deputy rift in Ondo State, and Edo, is, in part, the consequence of the practice of presidentialism.

    However, it is noteworthy that the governor-deputy crisis in Ondo State is usually associated with the politics of succession, which usually unfolds in varying dimensions. Reminiscent of previous dispensations, trust has broken down between Akeredolu and Ayedatiwa because certain mistakes or pitfalls were not avoided. Only a few indigenes, residents, and outsiders could be said to be neutral as the crisis escalated during the week. Tension engulfed the State Executive Council, the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), the Aketi political family, and some parts of the state.

    The problem with the political class is that when cracks appear on the wall of brotherhood, political actors usually lack the skill and the right disposition to agree on how to mend them. The split is worrisome, bearing in mind that the governor also parted ways with the man that Ayedatiwa replaced, Agboola Ajayi, who was accused of scheming against his boss, ahead of the last governorship election in the Sunshine State.

    Read Also: Tinubu names Cardoso CBN governor in major shake-up

    The Ondo State governor is not a typical Nigerian politician. Those who know him have testified that he is neither pretentious nor aberrant. Despite being an experienced lawyer, he is not favourably disposed to administrative dribbling and cajoling. He does not incite or promise what he cannot deliver. Highly principled, Akeredolu does not hide his feelings; he has little time for political diplomacy. Among his virtues is investing trust and confidence in his aides.

    Conversely, he is swift to commence malice when trust is breached. The governor, like many leaders, loathes betrayal. He could be hot-tempered. But being the son of a priest, he forgives a lot. But, it is debatable if he can easily forget whenever he is seriously injured through backstabbing.

    Details of the governor’s dispute with his deputy are unknown. However, it is obvious that their interests no longer align. Besides, the usual argument is that a governor only moves against his deputy if – and only if – the honorary number two man has seriously breached the code of loyalty, which is the sole criterion for political survival. Although Ayedatiwa has reiterated his loyalty to his boss, it seems his leader perceives this as an afterthought.

    Why the deputy governor’s case has attracted more attention is that he was the governor’s choice when the more experienced and popular Agboola was dropped. Ayedatiwa was not imposed on Akeredolu. Besides, it was believed that the now embattled deputy governor was among those being considered for the governorship ticket ahead of next year’s election. He is from Ondo South District, where the ticket has been informally zoned.

    In the past, and even now, the bone of contention between governors and deputies is the approach of the latter to the actualisation of the ambition to occupy the number one seat. It has often resulted in a clash of interests within the dominant, but fictionalised camp within the ruling platform. Instead of waiting for Akeredolu to fight the battle for the ticket for him, it appeared the deputy governor, in perceived insensitivity to past instructive lessons, made some political moves in the absence of his boss, which ultimately became his undoing.

    Already, the deputy governor seemed to have an edge, following the relinquishing of power to him, as demanded by the constitution, when the governor embarked on the medical leave. He was proclaimed acting governor. But while in the eye of the constitution the acting governor is expected to take charge, it may be impracticable due to some political factors. The office of the deputy governor is a delicate place. Loyalty to the governor is not easily transferable to the acting governor. It is worse when the acting governor is also bidding for the governorship ticket, like some commissioners and other aides, who believe they only owe the governor their total submission.

    As the practice of presidentialism in Nigeria has shown, the vice president and deputy governors who acted for their bosses in periods of illness usually have crosses to carry for their actions and inactions when the president or governors return from medical vacation. That is why during the emergency, a deputy governor, who wields temporary power, should exercise caution or restraint in anticipation of the day of reckoning. Besides, the deputy governor is in a vantage position to know that no number two man has ever triumphed over his boss. This is because conflicts are often resolved in favour of governors. Power resides with the Senior Excellency.

    Historically, when a crisis broke out between former Ondo State Governor Adekunle Ajasin and his estranged deputy, Chief Akin Omoboriowo, over the 1983 electioneering, the deputy governor had to resign. Yet, the Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN) governorship ticket still eluded him. He went to the rival National Party of Nigeria (NPN), where he also lost his deposit. Also, when a disagreement broke out between former Ondo State Governor Olusegun Mimiko and his deputy, Ali Olanusi, over defection, the deputy governor was impeached, in error, because he refused to follow his boss to the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). Ayedatiwa also witnessed the war of attrition between Akeredolu and Ajayi. The former deputy governor lost the war.

    The trend of appears the same across states: Olaniyan of Oyo, Abaribe of Abia, Aluko of Ekiti, Omisore of Osun, Agbaso and Madumere of Imo, Pedro of Lagos, Adesegun of Ogun, and Achuba of Kogi.

    All these scenarios point to one fact: the influence of a deputy governor is limited. His scope of constitutional responsibility is restrictive. Therefore, running mates require coping implements, adjustment skills, and emotional intelligence that are critical to survival while playing the second fiddle.

  • Judiciary and electoral democracy

    Judiciary and electoral democracy

    The Judiciary is not for or against any political party that participated in the February 25 presidential election. In the final analysis, the temple of justice is for the people of Nigeria and democracy.

    That was the essential message from the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal on Wednesday. The verdict affirming the victory of President Bola Tinubu and his deputy, Kashim Shettma, was long, thorough, well researched, objective and instructive. A standard was set in the adjudication of a presidential dispute.

    The verdict underscores the triumph of the rule of law and natural justice, which has ultimately rekindled the people’s hope in the court as the last hope for resolving disputes. It bears eloquent testimony to the popular mandate conferred on the president by majority of Nigerians in this year’s presidential poll.

    It is also an affirmation of the legality and legitimacy of the electoral process that produced the current administration.

    Ahead of the judicial pronouncement, the judges were subjected to blackmail and intimidation. They were threatened by social media gangsters and other shadowy characters who decorated some streets in Abuja, the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), with banners containing warnings to the jurors about the risk of not dancing to their tune.

    But the honourable men and women, who are now legends and giants of the Bench, took the path of honour. They did not just deliver a judgment; they robed the judiciary with an immaculate garment of integrity, the type of which the nation had not seen before. The jurists painstakingly elevated that arm of government to a new level and wrote their names in gold. It was evident to all that those men and women were determined to rebrand the judiciary; and they did.

    What happened at the tribunal was unprecedented. World attention was on the most populous country in Africa. The proceeding was broadcast live on television and some radio stations for the home and international audiences. There was nothing to hide, and the truth stared all and sundry in the face.

    Armchair critics domiciled in city beer parlours were jolted to life, from their delusion. Facts were separated from fiction by the five-man panel of jurists, led by Justice Tsammani. For 12 hours, the court justified its judgment, which was hard on both petitioners and respondents in varying degrees. The learned jurists threw more light on the danger of acting before thinking by lawyers to desperate candidates.

    Never in the history of a presidential litigation has any tribunal held the nation spell-bound with a rigorous rendition of judicial pronouncement. At the end, the verdict contributed to the deepening of democracy and drove home the need to avoid filing frivolous petitions.

    Novel cases of electoral claims could arise under un-imaginary situations and upon strange facts. Although the tribunal agreed with respondents on almost major issues of disputes before it, its elaborations on the reasons for upholding the counter-claims also opened the eyes of counsel, not only to the candour and objectivity of the judges, but to their depth of knowledge, experience, skill, cour age, commitment to truth and time-tested reputation as the last hope in any dispute.

    As facts were separated from fiction at the tribunal, the weight of evidence, the allusion to sound and settled legal principles, and the demonstration of knowledge and depth by the eminent jurists, as exemplified by the rigour of judgment, represented a major contribution to the growth of jurisprudence in Nigeria.

    The battle for Aso Villa had been tough. It was a long chain of fights along each step till the election was won and lost. It shifted to the tribunal out of malice and frivolity, to a large extent, as the outcome of the case has shown.

    The lessons are instructive. Those who indulge in street gossips do not know the judiciary well. It has now dawned on everyone that the arsenal of the law encompasses facts, evidences, proofs, findings, settled legal principles,  judicial precedents, the statute, rules, guidelines, legal interpretations, linguistic understanding and circumspection, logic and commonsense.

    Read Also: Stop disrespecting Ondo people, PDP tells Akeredolu

    What apparently agitated the minds of the jurists was that the critical elements unleashed on the social media were virtually absent in the claims and prayers of the petitioners. Therefore, there was a deep hollow in their claims.

    The candidates of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Atiku Abubakar, and Labour Party (LP), Peter Obi, went to stage an inexplicable drama. Politically, Atiku started losing the election months to the poll when he could not put his house in order. He was preparing for the electoral battle while he was losing the war that ravaged his divided, polarised and fragile party.

    As five governors of his party were up in arms against him, he hung on to a paper-weight party chairman, with a diminished electoral value.

    If the PDP was not balkanised and its followers were not in disarray, the main opposition party might not have lost so much ground. Just maybe.

    The main element of the drama was that while Atiku, who came second at the poll, consistently maintained that Obi never won the poll, the former governor of Anambra State, who placed third, never raised any objection to Atiku. From his third position, Obi demonstrated that he only had an axe to grind with Tinubu and the APC.

    However, Obi/LP only relied on hearsay and the torrents of vituperations on the social media by his disorganised, exuberant followers who he mistook for a solid bloc behind his “structureless” platform. Having approached the tribunal based on the advice of his Ahitophelian advisers, he failed to be meticulous.

     Instructively, when Obi, then of the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA), reclaimed his stolen governorship victory from Dr. Chris Ngige, then of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in Anambra State, he won by tendering witnesses and proofs, including figures that could not be faulted. The interpretation is that the wisdom that permitted him to have a successful outing at the Awka tribunal deserted him at the Abuja court.

    The LP failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Tinubu lacked academic qualifications to vie for the number one position; that a criminal case was hanging on his neck in the United States; and that Shettima was a product of double nominations.

    However, it turned out that all these amounted to fabrications and concoctions by bitter opponents.

    The judgment was an eye opener. It has re-established the reality that in matters relating to nomination of candidates by a political party, candidates of other parties should just be on-lookers.

    But, if the interlopers have any cause to poke their noses into other people’s personal affairs or they think that the activities of other parties may undermine their interests – which is now a figment of hyperactive imagination – they are at liberty to approach the High Court before the commencement of the election, because this is clearly a pre-election matter.

    According to the verdict, if they fail to do so before the poll and bring their self-imposed troubles to the tribunal, it would be an exercise in futility.

    Also, while the reality of Abuja as a semblance of state was affirmed, the fallacy of superiority of the FCT voting public was condemned by the tribunal.

    In fact, it is noteworthy that the tribunal decried the insinuation that a presidential candidate should get 25 per cent of Abuja votes. Chiding those behind the falsehood for unjust manipulation of the constitution, the tribunal ruled that equality of votes from all states of the federation and FCT is the reality.

    It may be argued that the aggrieved have the inalienable right to go to law, up to the apex court, if they feel injured on poll day. But, it is not important that an attempt should be made all the time to distract symbols of legitimate mandate from governance through unnecessary law suits.

    Losers should be patriotic and courageous to concede defeat, even after a bitter contest. It is the hallmark of maturity.

    This is one perspective. But, another perspective is that judicial pronouncements after legal battles are not in vain. It categorically separates the winners from losers. Besides, it judgment become law, or judicial precedents, which increases the knowledge of the wise and enriches our understanding of the constitution.

    There is need for electoral reforms that will reduce the cost of political participation and electioneering, from the primary through the tedious and expensive campaigns to general elections. If the cost is not high, may be, losers will not have a sense of double tragedy arising simultaneously from the loss of power and political investment.

    In Africa, many people gravitate towards winners while losers are perceived as liabilities. It is a major contributor to political desperation.

    There is, indeed, a correctation between the desperation to win and the huge electoral expenses by certain politicians who lack the capacity for self-assessment and realistic appraisal of their chances.

    Congratulatory messages have poured in for Jagaban. But, as the president has put it, this is a victory for democracy.

     The verdict should further spur President Tinubu to rededicate himself to the cause of democracy and good governance.

    The judgment should also be an energiser for him and his team to sustain the tempo of national healing and unity as he continues to mobilise vital human and material resources for the implementation of his administration’s Renewed Hope Agenda, which has resonated with the populace as the key to national survival, development and progress.

  • Solid minerals and quest for diversification

    Solid minerals and quest for diversification

    Nigeria is not just rich but very rich with human talents and natural resources. But both resources are either underutilised or largely neglected. With every part of the country having a great number of natural resources that could fetch billions of dollars annually into the nation’s coffers, if the resources are well harnessed, the country has no reason to be poor or complain about funds.

    However, successive governments have paid less attention to the diversification of the economy as they focused too much on oil. Besides, the country’s leadership, over the years, has not adequately addressed the fundamentals that would aid the development of the mineral resources sector as the money-spinner.

    This might be the reason the current administration is changing the narrative in the sector. So far, the government has expressed its readiness to develop the non-oil sector in order to increase national revenue generation drive to propel prosperity for all Nigerians.

    Before the advent of oil in the 1970s, solid mineral was only second to agriculture as the pillar of the economy. It contributed 10 per cent to the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), despite the lack of emphasis on the sector. The sector was a source of pride, aptly captured as a future asset.

    As the Minister of Solid Minerals, Mr. Dele Alake, begins his assignment, expectations are high. Many challenges will also confront him. Through the cooperation of stakeholders in the sector, he is expected to surmount the problems, add value and make a difference.

    Already, the minister has warned interlopers in the sector to flee. He has read a riot act to speculators and illegal miners, saying there will be no business as usual.

    The drop in oil earnings and associated crises in the oil and gas sector has exposed Nigeria as a country that has failed to adequately explore alternative sources of revenue. This reality has made the diversification of the economy non-negotiable. Apart from neglecting agriculture, which was the mainstay of the economy in the fifties and sixties, solid minerals development has taken a back seat. There is need to maintain a break from the past and reposition the industry.

    Read Also: Court bars Gov Adeleke from appointing Osun Poly Rector

    Many experts have warned against the danger of over-dependence on a single product for national earning. To them, the monolithic nature of the economy is unsustainable. Thus, Nigeria should begin to initiate and sustain policies directed at economic diversification. Besides manufacturing and agriculture, solid minerals also have the potentials to boost national revenue and generate employment opportunities.

    Reality should dawn on the Federal Government that the country can no more be solely salvaged by oil. The way out is for Nigeria to start emulating countries that are reaping the fruits of natural deposits. Examples are China, India, Mexico and Indonesia. Nigeria’s natural endowments that should be tapped in accordance with law include bitumen, tin, copper, zinc, coal, gold, celica, clay and limestone. Others are: yelsolare laterate, cassilitrite, kaolin stones, columbite and marble.

    According to the Nigerian Mining and Geosciences Society, of the 44 non-oil resources domiciled in the country, at least 20 are of economic value. Not tapping them means that Nigerians suffer in the midst of plenty.

    The association believes that if government can devote just about 10 per cent of what it has devoted to oil and gas to the solid mineral sector, national income will be more than triple and MDAs under the Ministry of Solid Minerals will be richer than the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL).

    Yet, there is no adequate data or means of capturing the entire gamut of our natural endowments. In the absence of close monitoring, some of the minerals are dug and smuggled outside the country. Investment drive in the poorly organised and uncoordinated sector is very low and money earned ends up with mineral resource speculators.

    The former Minister of Solid Minerals, Dr. Kayode Fayemi, tried to work on a new policy and a legal framework that would have guided exploration and mining activities during his tenure. Due to the neglect of the sector, illegal miners have been on the prowl. They constitute a big threat. To Fayemi’s consternation, five million Nigerians were discovered to be engaged in illegal mining as at 2018.

    The illegal miners are not ordinary people. They are highly connected individuals and groups who have persisted in their unpatriotic activities to the detriment of the country. However, their patrons are not invincible.

    To curtail their nefarious activities, the ministry tried to propose a mining road map that was to define the standard practice in the sector. Also, the ministry pushed for partnerships with governors and the host communities to ensure that environmental safety was made a norm. A machinery was also to be put in place to coordinate miners as they organised themselves into cooperative societies so that they could acquire licences and work legally.

    Then, the Ministry of Solid Minerals also tried to woo investors by granting them tax holiday and making their equipment duty-free. Since funding is crucial, the ministry also proposed a synergy between itself and the Central Bank, the Bank of Industry and other financial institutions, to make funding available to miners. Banks were encouraged to set up mining desks and guarantee them lease on equipment because mining equipment are expensive. The ministry also set out to work with the ministries of works, transportation, and Interior to ensure a better investment environment and tight security.

    Despite these, the gap between expectation and reality has remained wide.

    The solid mineral industry is beset with many problems. Although solutions are not beyond reach, it has been difficult to apply the remedies with a strong determination in order to achieve set goals.

    Investment in solid mineral exploration is capital-intensive. Only few companies and individuals have the wherewithal to venture into the business. The problem of capital outlay is compounded by lack of specialised financial institutions that can offer aid to the operators. For example, until now, Nigeria does not know how to tackle the positive challenge posed by bitumen in Ondo South Senatorial District. It is said to be the second largest deposit in the world.

    Although the Solid Minerals Development Fund was established in 2007, its impact has not been felt. It has often been alleged that the fund was diverted to other uses, including road construction, elections and sports sponsorship.

    Investors are also said to be constrained by unfavourable laws that restrict lawful activities in the sector. The Land Use Act is an impediment and there is hazy clarification over mineral resource ownership. While some states are made to believe that the Federal Government is the exclusive owner of the vast mineral resources, some states have taken ownership of deposits in their domains. This approach smacks of double standard.

    The infrastructure decay is also a mitigating factor. Inadequate basic infrastructure, such as bad roads, epileptic electricity and deficient communication facilities, tend to discourage foreign investors. Mineral resources are domiciled in local or remote areas, which are largely inaccessible.

    Seven years after it was birthed, the mineral resource development roadmap is yet to be implemented. There is, therefore, no framework for guidance, direction and control. This has grave implications for the fragile sector.

    Instead of yielding revenue into the national treasury, operators continue to exploit the sector. A former Minister of State for Mines and Steel Development, Uchechukwu Ogar, painted an awful picture of the colossal financial losses the sector incurs. He regretted that Nigeria loses $9 billion annually to illegal gold mining and smuggling alone. Other illegally mined minerals are not even captured in the estimate.

    Efforts have been made by security agents to arrest some illegal miners. However, when arrested, their prosecution is sabotaged or stalled by some “powerful forces”.

    One of the consequences of illegal mining is environmental denigration. Local inhabitants suffer enormous environmental problems, ecological challenges and other life-threatening impacts arising from mining without proper guidelines and codified directives.

    The dimension of insecurity traceable to mining activities is also worrisome. Miners are said to have offered support to terrorists and bandits. For example, it has been alleged that in Zamfara State, arms were being exchanged for mineral resources.

    It is incumbent on the minister to convene a meeting of genuine stakeholders and brainstorm on the problems and proffer solutions that will lead to the repositioning of the sector in national interest.

    Perhaps, in the coming months, the nation might discover that it overlooked the huge wealth in its vast soil and begin to create lucrative jobs for its army of unemployed youths while also earning enormous revenue through the sector.

    But the foundation has to be solid enough to withstand envisaged challenges, which are inevitable, given the interest of internal and external forces in the lucrativeness of the sector.

  • Impact of legislative/executive feud

    What could have sparked a protracted rift between the legislature and the executive in the same ruling party?

    This is a big poser that agitates the minds of concerned parties in Lagos State where the House of Assembly has shelved the confirmation of 17 of the governor’s 39 commissioner-nominees.

    The legislative/executive face-off, which leaders of the ruling party are now sorting out, is confounding to many people because the occupants of the two organs of government belong to the same All Progressives Congress (APC) family.

    Some observers might not find anything puzzling about this kind of misunderstanding. To such persons, it is not new. They liken it to the inevitable – however occasional – disagreement that usually occurs within a family. As elder statesman Oluyole Olusi put it: “It is the side effect of the operation of democracy.”

    But the pattern of legislative/executive bickering that has dogged the practice of the presidential system in Nigeria is worrisome.

    The question is: could the slippery pathway of a crisis be avoided rather than resort to damage control after the collision? Could the row have been prevented instead of making appeals for dialogue after the disagreement has degenerated into a crisis?

    It bears repeating that the greatest challenge confronting big progressive parties, either at national, regional or state level, is lack of speedy crisis resolution mechanism. The sluggish approach to peaceful settlement can be costly.

    Read Also: Mutfwang: A new development plan for Plateau

    While it is now generally accepted that inter-organ crises are normal – though better prevented or managed internally before they become subjects of public gossips – some circumstances may make it impossible. When it is eventually resolved, the collateral damage tends to stare participants in the politics of strife in the face. Egos are bruised.

     It is worse when the governor and lawmakers are from antagonistic parties. The most embarrassing scenario of utter discord happened in Kaduna State in the Second Republic. The list of commissioner-nominees sent by former Governor Balarabe Musa of the defunct Peoples Redemption Party (PRP) to the House of Assembly dominated by the National Party of Nigeria (NPN) was rejected. For over one year before he was impeached by the hostile House, the governor ran the state without commissioners. Kaduna was bruised by the  acrimony in the corridor of power.

    Indisputably, unresolved discord and mistrust between the two critical organs have the tendency to create strains for the party on whose platform the governor and the lawmakers were elected. The impression often created is that the party is has lost cohesion, unity and harmony. That was the trend of acrimonious relationship associated with the Executive and Legislature, also in Second Republic, when the then Ondo State Governor Adekunle Ajasin and Speaker Richard Jolowo never saw eye to eye.

    Majority of members of the State Executive Council backed Ajasin while majority of lawmakers backed the estranged deputy governor, Chief Akin Omoboriowo.

    The reconciliation brokered by the Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN) Leader, Chief Obafemi Awolowo, collapsed. The great politician was helpless. The two sides could not be pacified. The Ondo chapter was so polarised by the executive/legislative crisis that it nearly rendered the state government comatose. The governor’s proposals to the House, including the nomination of Chief Nathaniel Aina for the vacant position of deputy governor after Omoboriowo resigned, were rejected.

    Recent experience has also shown that differential styles, not necessarily related with ideology, can create a gulf between the head of the legislature and the head of the executive. Between 2015 and 2019, President Muhammadu Buhari had it rough with the Senate, led by Dr. Bukola Saraki, despite being chieftains of the same party. The suspicion, if not hate, was so deep.

    The fallout was that some presidential nominees were not confirmed. When the president came to the Upper Chamber to table his administration’s budget, there was uproar and the session was almost disrupted. The founding fathers of APC were in a sober mood.

    The constitution prescribes roles for the Legislature and Executive in presidential de mocracy. The Legislature is the first and the most important organ of government because of its attribute of “representativeness”. The Executive is to be envied for always stealing the show, not only as chief executor of big projects but as the exclusive custodian and controller of huge financial resources.

    While constituencies send representatives to the law-making organ, they also crave representation in the Executive, the real heart of government, where things happen. The slots of commissioners and special advisers, no matter the seeming duplication, expansion or enlargement, are still relatively fewer. The scramble for the slots is always intense.

    In contemporary times, societies have accommodated the criteria being evolved by political players to reshape the scramble. These include experience, competence, expertise, gender, population, religion, ethnicity, autochthony (indigeneship), preference of governor, godfatherism, quota system, slots for youth, and consideration for the physically challenge. To maintain a balance is difficult or problematic.

    While relations between Executive and Judiciary, and relations between Legislature and Judiciary are smooth, there is usually tension between the legislature and the executive for obvious reasons. The principles of constitutional separation of powers and the accompanying checks and balances are guaranteed under the presidential model. In exercising its legislative, oversight and ratification powers, legislators see an opportunity to restrain or tame the executive. The implication is that the ruling executive should always moderate its activities in utter sensitivity to the presence of a legislature that is always alert.

    Yet, the exercise of the role of “approval” and “questioning” should be done with wisdom. It should not be allowed to slide into a deep gulf or lack of cooperation between the two branches. There should be mutual respect, flexibility, understanding and collective dedication to the cause of good governance.

    When a conflict between the governor and the legislature festers or escalates, the two arms are distracted, governance is slowed down, energy is dissipated on crisis resolution and service delivery is hampered. Therefore, legislators and members of the executive elected on the same ruling platform should have a moral voice they can defer to, and this is the Party Caucus.

    Herein lies the solution to the legislative/executive imbroglio. If the party caucus is strengthened, it can affirm its supremacy, whip its party members in the executive and legislative organs into line and enforce discipline.

    This is very important because the perception that a crisis has engulfed the legislature and executive means that the party ultimately is enveloped in a crisis. It thus implies that the platform is devoid of cohesion, unity and peace. It is not tidy that the executive and legislature should watch the dirty linen of the party in the public. Party followers would be confused and the opposition would be motivated to make a mockery of the feuding arms of government.

    The goal of the legislature and the executive should be collaboration for good governance without jeopardising the principle of separation of powers. The achievement of the objective depends on a harmonious working relationship between both arms of government. Experienced politicians should be appointed as Laison Officer or Special Adviser on Political and Legislative Matters as the “go between” to stem or moderate the compelling tension between the two arms.

    In a moment of crisis, dialogue, which may be difficult to initiate by the two organs in dispute, should be brokered by the party, which is the parent of quarrelsome siblings in the two feuding arms of government.

  • Tinubu, new ministers and challenges

    Tinubu, new ministers and challenges

    The euphoria over ministerial appointment should just fizzle away. There is so much work to do, particularly by the central government, which has as its core mandate the mission to rescue the nation from sundry challenges. But members of the Federal Executive Council (FEC), when they take their oaths of office, have to brace up to more challenges, judging by the high public expectations.

    The cabinet, a blend of politicians and technocrats, was painstakingly chosen, obviously. If the assigned duties do not change before the inauguration, it is safe to say that many of the ministers are round pegs in round holes. They are versatile, experienced and competent. Many of them have lived up to expectations in their previous positions as governors, senators, ministers and top-flight private sector managers.

    President Bola Tinubu, a visionary, has indicated in his Renewed Hope Agenda the comprehensive areas of focus, where the ministers, who will be inaugurated on Monday, are expected to shoulder enormous responsibilities. It is incumbent on those of them who are not politicians to really study and understand the manifestos so that they can know where the President is heading.

    The President wants to expand the nation’s revenue base while blocking the loopholes and leakages. He is also determined to channel the resources to developmental priorities, to guarantee public welfare. The priority of the President is the promotion of the wellbeing of the masses, who are in the majority.

    All eyes are on the ministers. In the past, ministers were even made to simultaneously sign letters of resignation after swearing in, to draw home the point that should they fail to perform well, they would be fired. Much more patriotism and commitment are demanded from the new aides at this crucial time.

    The incoming FEC is starting work at a time of economic adversity that has taken its toll on Nigerians. The standard of living is abysmally low. The traditional “three square meals” daily have slid into utopia and households are agonising. The Naira has lost its value. The monthly salary cannot take any worker home. Nigeria battles with high inflation and foodstuffs are beyond the reach of the masses.

    Read Also: CBN returns BDCs to forex market with new rule

    Despite the good intention of government, the effect of fuel subsidy removal is choking the people. After buying fuel at a prohibitive price, nothing is left in the purse of the man behind the wheel. Nigeria, the acclaimed sixth largest producer of crude in the world, found itself in this pitiable condition because successive administrations could not fix the refineries.

    The economy lay prostrate; perpetually on crutches. It is not productive, completely stagnant. Therefore, the advantage of big market cannot be maximised. The debt burden, if it persists, means that before long, Nigeria may not be creditworthy. The foreign reserve is depleted; neither is the home condition quite conducive for investment. Adequate power supply is a tall order. For a long time, investors have been relocating to saner clines. Unemployment soars in geometric proportions. Poverty grows in leaps and bounds. Cries of despondency fill the air.

    This is the awful picture of a dilapidated economy which Olawale Edun, an economist, prominent banker and one-time Lagos State Commissioner for Finance, is expected to salvage, with a speed of lightening. His coming on board tends to rekindle hope, the elixir of life.

    His counterpart in the Works Ministry, Senator Dave Umahi, former governor of Ebonyi State, cannot also be envied. He inherits a huge infrastructure deficit, as reflected in many impassable federal roads, which are death traps across the six geo-political zones.

    The former governor was assigned the duty of fixing the roads because of his antecedent as an engineer and workaholic manager of a sub-national unit that successfully fought the infrastructure battle. The scope is now broader. The mandate is bigger.

    There is no region where people are not complaining about bad highways. The Southeast is in despair over the Enugu/Port Harcourt Road. The Southwest is in a mess: the Ibadan/Oyo/Ogbomoso/Ilorin, the Efon/Aramoko/Ado and Akure/Ado roads, among many others, are eyesores. The wisdom that permitted Umahi to accomplish much feat at the state level is urgently required at the centre.

    For over a decade, Nigeria has been fretting under the yoke of terrorism. Many lives have been lost and scores of villages sacked. At home, in schools, markets, offices, churches, mosques, farms and highways, there is the fear of invasion by merchants of death. Kidnapping for ransom, outright killings and other forms of violence have led to displacement of thousands of people from the places they once called their homes.

    The worst hit region appears to be the North, where porous borders with other countries have exacerbated insecurity. The impact is also being felt in the agricultural sector. Farmers are displaced from their farms by killer-herders, leading to a sharp drop in farming and the produce they harvest season after season.

    The composition of the incoming FEC shows that majority of those expected to drive the security agenda of the administration are from the North. They include the National Security Adviser (NSA) Nuhu Ribadu, Defence Minister Abubakar Badaru, Minister of State for Defence Bello Matawalle, Police Affairs Minister Ibrahim Geidam, Minister of State for Police Affairs Imaan Sulaiman-Ibrahim and the Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) General Christopher Musa. They just have to live to expectation.

    Security agencies should learn to work in synergy. This means that inter-agency bickering should be confined to the dustbin. The civilian authorities overseeing the security apparatus should know that intelligence gathering is key to the success of decisive steps taken to nip terror and banditry in the bud.

    Reality should also dawn on them that a more effective security will only be achieved through state and community policing.

    During the campaigns, the then APC candidate, Tinubu, promised to fix the power sector. Epileptic electricity supply has crippled production and rendered the manufacturing sector comatose. The informal sector is grossly affected. Importers of generators experience a boom while power distribution companies (DisCos) oppress many households with inexplicable estimated bills.

    A heavy responsibility rests on the shoulders of Adebayo Adelabu, the Minister of Power, as he is expected to turn the sector around and foster public confidence.

    Closely related to these is the concern for the repositioning of the oil and gas sector. There is no alternative to full, functioning refineries. It is only when home refineries guarantee fuel distribution for domestic consumption that Nigerians will heave a sigh of relief. The nation will be so disappointed if President Tinubu is unable to resuscitate the dead refineries which gulp humongous amounts for dubious turnaround maintenance.

    Two other important sectors are education and health, which are critical to the promotion of general wellbeing.

    The incoming Minister of Education, Prof. Tahir Maman, is to ensure that there is stability in academic calendar of tertiary institutions. He is not like the former minister who confessed that he did not understand his scope of duties. The perennial Federal Government/ASUU conflict has not been fully resolved. But there is a ray of hope, judging by the assurance given by the Tinubu administration.

    Students look forward to the effective implementation of the loan programme set up by the new government to enhance access to quality education in universities and other higher institutions.

    Many have hailed the return of Prof. Ali Pate to the Health ministry, where he previously served as Minister of State. Brain drain has robbed public hospitals of experienced and competent doctors, as well as other health workers who have jetted out to escape the hardship at home.

    Solutions to the current malaise in the Health sector would be found in improved welfare package to retain the services of health practitioners and provision functional modern infrastructure.

    The Minister of Communications, Innovation and Digital Economy, Bosun Tijani, has a mandate to actualise President Tinubu’s plan to create one million jobs from ICT. This can be achieved through the cooperation of those who own the infrastructure. The President set two years for the actualisation of the dream. It is possible because digital economy currently contributes a lot to the nation’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP).

    Every portfolio is important. The achievements of a ministry depend on the minister, who occupies the driver’s seat. Besides, a government functions better when there is tight cooperation among the various ministries, departments and agencies (MDAs) as well as those entrusted with overseeing the affairs. Rivalry should give way for camaraderie to take root among the ministers and all government functionaries.

    Inter-governmental cooperation for faster implementation of programmes and policies should become the norm and not the aberration. In a globalised world, government businesses should be digitalised for more effectiveness. The ministers should make this a law for their jobs to get faster results.

    Over the years, most government employees have taken their jobs as avenues for asserting authorities or for acquiring personal wealth at the detriment of public good. This is why most ministries and their agencies are mere conduit pipes for siphoning the commonwealth. It explains why huge yearly budgeting does not lead to prosperity for all but affluence for a few.

    The incoming FEC should emplace a monitoring system across board to check sabotage, if they want to succeed. There have been too many cases of “powerful” junior government officials that impeded well laid out government programmes and policies.