Category: Emmanuel Oladesu

Immediate past Kano State Governor Abdullahi Umar Ganduje has assumed the office of the national chairman of the All Progressives Congress (APC) at a very challenging moment in national history.

The ruling party has made a lot of promises to Nigerians, which President Bola Tinubu is expected to fulfill to retain their admiration and support. Although bold policies and programmes are being implemented by the administration, impatient Nigerians are complaining about the preceding but transient pains; they don’t appear ready to consider the long-term benefits of reforms.

APC is also engulfed in some self-contradictions reinforced by the misdemeanours of certain big wigs in its fold. These are the party officials whose activities have negatively affected the cohesion of the National Working Committee (NWC) and the National Executive Committee (NEC). Matters that should be discussed and ironed out internally are sensationalised in the media by some garrulous top officials.

Many chapters are divided, following the outcome of primaries that heralded the last general election. Crisis-ridden chapters include Rivers, Gombe, Oyo, Edo, Delta, Nasarawa, Osun, Ogun, and Plateau. Even as the party prepares for polls in Kogi, Bayelsa, Imo, Edo and Ondo states, the activities of gladiators tend to pose some threats to the platform.

Read Also; Ministerial nomination: Oyo APC youths make case for Raji

Many had predicted that the former national chairman, Senator Abdullahi Adamu, would not last in the topmost position. He was catapulted to the party office, not by the collective wish of the majority, but through the insistence of the party leader, former President Muhammadu Buhari, who was reverenced by many party elders.

The party, under Adamu’s leadership, produced President Tinubu. But the gulf between the party and the young administration it midwifed became widened too soon. Tension was brewing as both appeared to be working at cross-purposes. For example, the endorsement of National Assembly principal officers by the party through consensus was said to have been opposed and resisted by the erstwhile chairman.

Also, the management of party’s finances sparked a controversy when auditors were said to have raised eyebrows.

As Adamu and former National Secretary, Senator Iyiola Omisore resigned, the urgent need for replacement arose. Although it was speculated that Ganduje had been tipped for a ministerial position, the mantle of the party’s leadership instantly fell on him.

It is instructive that presidential preference also played a major role in his selection as chairman, following widespread consultations with members of the National Caucus, the NWC, the NEC and other top party stakeholders.

The lesson is that loyalty and dependability are great virtues on the part of the former Kano governor. These have rekindled the confidence of the President and National Leader of APC. It is now incumbent on Ganduje to beware of the pitfalls and mistakes that drew the curtains on the tenure of his predecessor.

APC is moving into another phase in its history. The fusion of the legacy parties – the defunct Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN), All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP), Congress for Democratic Change (CPC), new Peoples Democratic Party (nPDP) and a faction of the All Progressives Congress Grand Alliance (UPGA) – was a miracle. The 10-year-old party has survived the stress, storms and strains of politics, of which it is a major contributor. It is not an ideological party, although there is evidence of its disposition towards welfarism by many of its progressive members.

APC has also boxed itself into confusion, inaction, trepidation and fear, as underscored by its lack of boldness to tackle what has been described as the “national question”. The party raised the hope of Nigerians when its panel on restructuring, chaired by former Kaduna State Governor Nasir El-Rufai, submitted its report on devolution and federalism. It seems the recommendations are now in the dustbin; or, at best, on the far corner of a dusty shelf.

Hope is not lost as the snail-like progression to devolutionary processes suggest.

However, from being an opposition party nine years ago, the party has dazed the opposition, winning two presidential elections and demonstrating that it has a better strategy than its main rival, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), and the noise-making “structureless” Labour Party (LP) of scattered and “disarticulated” Obidients.

Yet, it is indisputable that APC has been addicted to crises or intra-party squabbles, resulting from the battle for control. Between 2014 and now, the party has produced six chairmen. This underscores a sort of leadership instability.

A feature of APC is the dominance of party affairs by governors.

Five of them – Chief Bisi Akande (pioneer Interim National Chairman), Chief John Odigie-Oyegun, Comrade Adams Oshiomhole, Adamu and now, Ganduje – are former governors. One of them, Mai Mala Buni, is a serving governor.

Apart from Akande, the tenure of other chairmen were marred with crises of varying proportions; some of them were precipitated by the governors.

Akande vacated the interim leadership after laying a good foundation. Odigie-Oyegun had to leave when a tenure extension agenda was checkmated. Oshiomhole got into trouble at home where he was suspended by his ward chapter. The court upheld the sack. Buni’s caretaker committee enjoyed tenure extension, contrary to the initial plan. It was a sit-tight interim structure. Adamu could not get along with the president. The governors saw to his exit.

The Progressive Governors’ Forum (NGF) is a potent force in the party. It was the bloc of influential stalwarts who insisted on presidential rotation or zoning to the South. The governors are party leaders at the state level. They constitute a very powerful force that cannot be sidelined in any critical deliberation and decision-making process.

Today, apart from other governors in the Senate and those coming to the Federal Executive Council (FEC), President Tinubu, Vice President Kashim Shettima, Senate President Godswill Akpabio and the Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF), Senator George Akume, are former governors.

Governors played critical roles in the downfall of Odigie-Oyegun, Oshiomhole and Adamu. Also, prominent NWC and NEC members got to their current party positions through the influence of their governors. To survive, it is expected that Ganduje should carry along these governors. As one of them until May 28, he should demonstrate that he understands their language.

As the chairman of the National Caucus, much is expected of the erstwhile Kano governor. The National Caucus should be positioned as the moral voice and clearing house for major decisions and policies to be implemented by the government. The major assignment of the Caucus is the upholding of party supremacy and restoration of party discipline.

Conflicts and crises are concomitant with political existence. The new leadership, apart from resolving old conflicts that may have deepened old cleavages through genuine reconciliation, should nip potential ones in the bud before they manifest.

Many left APC to borrow some smaller opposition parties for contest. The new chairman should appeal to them to return. Membership drive should be a continuous exercise.

On the surface, it may appear as if some chapters are not kicking against the criteria for picking ministerial nominees. It is the duty of the party leadership to douse brewing or repressed tension by placating silently aggrieved chieftains and reassuring them so that they can have a sense of belonging.

Ganduje should anticipate predecessor/successor crises between former governors and new ones; governor/deputy rifts, which may be rear, and governor/minister face-off in some chapters. Abuja and home politicians should team up for the progress of the party.

Post-primary crises in state chapters warming up for off-season governorship elections, particularly in Kogi, Imo and Bayelsa, should be resolved. Complacency, aloofness, hypocrisy and overconfidence may herald unexpected electoral misfortunes. Rival parties are not in deep slumber.

Ganduje must ensure that the party puts its house in order. APC should be a party of justice. There is need for internal democracy and genuine mechanism for crisis resolution.

If there is crisis in the party, it will distract its government. Officers should never deviate from the party’s rules and constitution. APC should, therefore, govern itself so that Nigerians can have confidence that the party can also govern the country in accordance with the constitution and rule of law.

The review of the palliative package has shown that the Tinubu administration has a listening ear. The review underscores its sensitivity to public outcry. The government means well. But, on the part of the people, there is lack of sufficient knowledge and deep understanding. They need and adequate enlightenment.

Their reaction might have arisen from the spur of the moment because of the urgency the situation demanded. The review is meant to repackage the implementation of the government policy.

Beneficiaries of fuel subsidy have been fighting back. They had resented the removal, but without success. It is obvious they have swelled the ranks of critics who are allergic to genuine innovation and good governance. Their pastime now is fueling blackmail in a bid to incite the people against the government. Their virulent criticisms against the twin policies of palliative for the poor and quest for food subsidy follow a familiar pattern of maladjustment to the new era.

What matters to them is not the intended benefits of change but their expositions on the excruciating yet transient phase of difficulty that, in their thinking, should cripple the new approach to governance. The tactic is to blow the issues out of proportion, hoodwink the gullible and convey a false impression of national hopelessness. The elite, who believe their purpose may not be served by the palliative, are few.

The idea of food security may not also be their priority because of their fat pocket. However, as opinion moulders, government should engage them and other stakeholders with the right communication, which should be consistent, lucid, informative, logical and convincing.

The few months of the administration have rekindled hope. Tinubu has hit the ground running. He has earned applause from stakeholders, including those who did not support him during the historic election. The first salvo that detractors fired at him followed public misunderstanding of how the palliative would be implemented.

During the week, the situation was aggravated. Tension was unleashed on the country by the fuel hike price. Unpatriotic elements instantly resumed their tirade, attributing it to the fuel subsidy removal, which they said smacked of insensitivity.

What has happened in the last four days is reminiscent of the reaction of some undiscerning people to Tinubu’s style at the inception of his administration in Lagos in 1999. He was derided as a go-slow administrator. They later ate their words when his policies and programmes revolutionalised governance in the Centre of Excellence and Tinubu’s Lagos became a reference point.

Tinubu has the antecedent of striving in adversity. He has a reputation for surviving the greatest of odds. His strength lies in his power of ideas and focus. After the initial challenges, which the president and his team will surmount, Nigeria will be better for it under the Tinubu administration.

The proposed palliative is not another market jamboree of the former vice president or any trader money permutation. Previous traps, loopholes and pitfalls are to be avoided. There will be good coordination, an important element of the implementation.

Tinubu, a welfarist, is committed to the success of the policy. The $800 million World Bank loan, which is expected to be distributed to the poorest of the poor to cushion the effects of subsidy removal, is accompanied with conditionalities.

The money, N8,000 for each of the very poor, is expected to be transferred into the bank accounts of intended beneficiaries. The scheme is not for all Nigerians. It is not for all workers. Even, the aged parents of illustrious citizens are not expected to benefit from it. Only vulnerable and extremely poor Nigerians are entitled to the palliative. The scope will not cover many top members of the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC), Trade Union Congress (TUC), members of the tertiary institutions’ academic unions and many others in thriving occupations in the private sector.

Due to past experience, many Nigerians are sceptical. It is not without justification. They have raised some posers: how would the beneficiaries be determined? Why is it being limited to “just 12 million households?” Will N8,000 for an individual household for six months cushion the effects of economic distress? Does Nigeria have a data base? How would the demography be determined? Is the process not susceptible to manipulation and corruption?

Some have also argued that if government is able to get hold of billions, should the funds not be channeled to education, health, social welfare, agriculture and infrastructural development?

There appears to be a mix-up. Many people have uncritically confused the World Bank loan with the N500 billion saved from fuel subsidy removal. In this regard, government needs to broaden the explanation, with facts and figures, to erase the misconceptions.

During the week, the official explanation by the National Social Safety Nets Coordinating Office (NASSCO) confirmed that the Federal Government has a database of 15 million poor and vulnerable Nigerians and that details of those already captured across the 36 states and Abuja are on its National Social Register (NSR).

Thus, the $800 million will be transferred, using the database. This has shifted the discussion to the plight of the poor who do not operate bank accounts. How can the money get to the intended poor? Will they not suffer in the hands of POS operators when they tender their codes? It is an issue that should be resolved, among others, ahead of the implementation. The onus is on the government to deploy the appropriate apparatus for an effective implementation of the palliative distribution through conditional money transfer to the accounts of intended and registered beneficiaries.

When the exercise begins, eyes will be on the National Cash Transfer Office. If the approach had succeeded in Europe and America, why should it not succeed in Nigeria, the acclaimed giant of Africa? What is important now, as the case may be, is the review of the register. This may be necessitated by demographic changes, including transitions, change of location, migration, and even slight progressive movement of individuals and households to upper socio-economic status.

More attention has focused on money transfer. But it is short-lived. It has a short-term impact too. Therefore, emphasis should even shift to the plan for food security, which seems to have a long-term value.

Also, the benefit of food security is not restrictive; all Nigerians – rich and poor – are beneficiaries, in the long run. The logical interpretation is that government’s mobilisation is directed towards the development of agriculture, particularly farming. The N19.2 billion is a good starting point.

But the problem on the ground is more than the intervention fund. Agriculture is beset with many challenges. In developed countries, it is heavily subsidised to ward off hunger and ensure food surplus in households, markets and stores. The watchword is large scale farming. The government must uphold the role of farmers as guarantors of food, the prime giver of life.

If successive governments had sustained the achievements of the defunct four regions in this critical sector, perhaps the story would have been different today; Nigerians would have been exporting food crops instead of importing rice. Farmers are often neglected – without incentives, improved seedlings, modern implements, access to loans, and farm extension services. In most rural areas, subsistence farming is the prevalent practice without improved technology and hope of expansion by the farmers. In most communities, some vital cash crops are even becoming extinct. Worst hit farmers are those who cannot get their perishable food crops to the market on time due to lack of roads. Resultantly, the crops rot away.

Also, youths shun agriculture in their desperate scramble for elusive white collar jobs in towns and cities. There is rural-urban migration because the rural areas are not attractive.

In the sixties, seventies and eighties, pupils were inducted into agricultural practices through the school garden system. All children were engaged in basic agriculture without any claiming superiority, as we have today among the kids of so-called elites. There was dignity of labour among the young generation, and that positive psychology was widespread.

Labour days were declared and all children went to school with cutlasses, hoes, seedlings, brooms, bamboo and other implements from their parents.

Gone are the days. Today, the mentality is different. Every child wastes away in indolence, craving the fake lifestyle that most young musicians portray in their videos.

There is also the security challenge that farmers face. Apart from cattle rustling, farmer-herder clashes in the North and some parts of the Southwest, banditry also poses a clear and present threat to farming and agricultural productivity. Farmlands are not insulated from terror, leading to the dispersal of farmers.

Security is vital. Its absence has scared away most farmers and those contemplating to venture into the sector for commercial and subsistence practices. Even if the big-time farmers can afford their security, the beginners cannot, thus enfeebling this vital segment in the production of vital foodstuffs to many households across the country.

Farmers’ means of livelihood evaporate in the security brouhaha, and poverty has been on the rampage through the agents of violence in remote parts of the land.

The Federal Government does not have its own land. This is why state governments have a major role to play in agricultural development, after the initial support by the central government. There should be synergy among the Federal, state, and local governments with farmers who may wish to also organise themselves into cooperative societies.

Tinubu’s intervention in agriculture should be applauded, supported and defended. The president’s vision and policy to make food available to the citizens at affordable prices is a tax that all Nigerians must support for sustainability.

Three factors may have been responsible for the appointment of Mallam Nuhu Ribadu as National Security Adviser (NSA) by President Bola Tinubu.

 The President believes that the Adamawa State-born lawyer and a retired police officer has the experience, competence and ability to do the job. It is never a matter of trial-and-error or job for the boys. It is another clarion call to national duty.

Also, President Tinubu, a strategist in his own right, may have taken cognisance of the compelling need for a paradigm shift in the anti-terror war and pursuit of general security in the national interest.

Experts say that the clean break from the past, as underscored by the choice of a security adviser from a non-military background, has closed a gap in history. Nigeria, it can now be said, has gone far in its post-1999 democratisation process as reflected in the legitimate subjection of the military to civilian authorities.

 Africa’s most populous country now mirrors the mature democracies, particularly the United States of America, which leads in the global practice of picking experienced intelligence officers, not necessarily Generals, to coordinate its security infrastructure and efforts.

As Nigeria continues to wax stronger in democratic maturity, and in an atmosphere of political stability, there is bound to be an increasing appreciation of security role-demarcation among security agencies as well as inter-agency synergy and collaboration, and the displacement of inter-agency discord and feelings of superiority and inferiority among security agencies.

 The NSA is the eye and ear of the President and  Commander-in-Chief in that critical and crucial frontier. Times are changing and challenges are mounting. The country thirst for security and peace. Therefore, much is expected of Ribadu and those people and agencies he will coordinate.

 The appointment of a police officer as NSA is not new. The position has not been the exclusive preserve of the military. For example, Gambo Jimeta, a former Police Inspector- General, was saddled with the responsibility by former Military President Ibrahim Babangida. 

Also, Ismaila Gwarzo, former Director-General of the  Department of State Services (DSS), also played the role under the Interim National Government headed by the late Chief Ernest Shonekan, and later, under  Head of State, Gen.Sani Abacha.

 Other predecessors, but mainly military officers, are Gen. Aliyu Gusau, Col. Kayode Are, Gen.  Abdullahi Mohammed, Gen.  Sarki Mukhtar, Gen. l Andrew Azazi, Col. Sambo Dasuki, and Gen. Babagana Monguno.

 Ribadu’s job is not merely about coordinating a fighting force on behalf of the Federal Government. The scope includes intelligence gathering, processing and dissemination of security information,  and more importantly, the coordination of the various intelligence agencies working for the attainment of national security objectives.

 These agencies are the Army, Navy, Airforce, police, Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA), National Intelligence Agency (NIA) and the DSS. Even para-military apparatus-Customs, Immigration and Civil Defence Corps-have important roles to play. Inter-agency cooperation, collaboration and synergy are critical to success.

 Like his predecessors, Ribadu is expected to properly advise the President on intelligence activities of these agencies. Automatically, he occupies a strategic position in the National Security Council and the Federal Executive Council (FEC).

Read Also: ‘Ribadu’s appointment as NSA reflects Tinubu’s commitment to security’

The major challenge now is combating terror. According to the Terrorism Prevention Act 2011, as amended in 2013, “the Office of the National Security Adviser (ONSA) shall be the coordinating body for all security and law enforcement agencies and under this act shall provide support to all relevant security, intelligence, law enforcement agencies and military services to prevent and combat acts of terrorism in Nigeria”.

Under the law, Ribadu is expected to “ensure the formulation and implementation of a comprehensive Counter-Terrorism Strategy and build capacity for the effective discharge of the functions of relevant security, intelligence, law enforcement and military services.”

 There has been an emphasis on a military-led Counter-Terrorism Strategy, with the allocation of tasks to intelligence, security and law enforcement agencies. This should always be complemented by the non-military strategy of counter-insurgency. The goal is not to replace the efforts of troops in fighting terrorism but to also pay attention to the aetiology of insurgency and terrorism, particularly the sociological and psychological factors-the dimensions of poverty, social injustice, isolation and sectarianism.

 If these are considered in the general security plan, the scope of solutions to the challenges will have to include poverty alleviation,  redress of inequality and injustice, economic development, peace talks and public enlightenment.

 Intelligence gathering, which is part of the security framework, entails increased responsibility for the police, which, according to the constitution, is charged with the maintenance of internal security in the country.

 The antecedent of Ribadu shows that he is a man of action; diligent, focused, and goal-oriented. The attribute of ‘team spirit’ He had displayed at his previous duty posts, including the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), is required as he now coordinates the security apparatus.

He is prepared by sound training, as a police officer, crime fighter and lawyer. He joined the Nigeria Police Force (NPF) immediately after his national youth service in 1984. In 2008, he was also at the Harvard Business School where he did a programme on the strategic management of law enforcement agencies.

 He had become a household name as the pioneer chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), where he exhibited patriotism and courage. Before then, he was sighted as a star prosecutor at the Oputa Panel set up by the Obasanjo government. He was also the chairman of the Petroleum Special Revenue Task Force (PRSTF).

 The anti-graft agency successfully investigated allegations of corruption against important persons, who ended up in jail. Under his leadership, the fear of EFCC by the symbols of graft, sleaze and fraudulent practice became the beginning of wisdom. In three years, it secured over 200 convictions. It also built the Crimes Training and Research Institute. Unfortunately, there were allegations of using the anti-graft body to witch-hunt perceived opposition elements of the government that set it up. Ribadu did not leave when the ovation was loudest.

 In 2007, Ribadu, in recognition of his achievements,  was promoted to Assistant Inspector General of Police (AIG).  The African Union (AU) later made him a member of its advisory board on anti-corruption matters. He also became a board member of the Friends of the World Bank/UNODC initiative on Stolen Asset Recovery.

Ribadu’s scorecard also led to the delisting of Nigeria from the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) List of Non-Cooperative Countries and Territories, its admission into the Egmont Group, and the withdrawal of the US Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FINCEN) Advisory.

 Ribadu was a fellow at the Center for Global Development, a TED Fellow, and a Senior Fellow at St. Antony’s College, University of Oxford, United Kingdom.

 Under the Yar’Adua administration, the anti-graft czar ran into turbulence. The hunter became the hunted. He went into exile.

 On his return in 2010, he joined the political fray. In 2011, he contested for president as the candidate of the defunct Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN), led by Asiwaju Tinubu.

 Ribadu has inherited an unfinished business of tackling insurgency and warding off threats to national peace and sovereignty. Many innocent Nigerians are still in captivity. There is a threat to freedom of movement and transportation. Villages are still being set ablaze and people are killed at home by invaders and terrorists. Kidnap for ransom has not abated. Nigerians seek an end to violence.

  Ribadu’s tenure will be assessed based on the anticipated success his team will record as Nigeria intensifies the anti-terror war.

On Monday, some civil society groups will gather to celebrate ‘June 12,’ the anniversary of denial, deprivation and crude manners by military conquerors, oppressors and exploiters.

Many youths will turn to their parents to ask questions, since the study of history has been downplayed in most schools. They are likely to be taken aback that a free and fair election held on June 12, 1993 was cancelled by despots.

It is a story of great betrayal. It happened on two fronts. The first was disloyalty to the cherished values of friendship. That was an unresolved personal matter between former military President Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida (IBB), the Evil Genius, and his friend, the late business mogul, Bashorun Moshood Kashimaawo Olawale (MKO) Abiola, who died in the struggle to reclaim his mandate.

The second was infidelity to the bewildered nation-state that was thirsty for a new order. There is still lamentation over what had amounted to a waste of time and public resources on a transition programme that led to nowhere, and the resultant illusion of hope.

The casualty was democracy, as the long and tortious journey to the envisaged popular rule was truncated. The Army Generals and their befuddled treacherous collaborators loomed large on the nation’s administrative stage back then. They caused mischief, wreaked havoc and unleashed terror on the people’s psyche. They wallowed in the illusion that there would not be a tomorrow.

Read Also: NAPOC, others hold global June 12 Day in U.S.

Key actors and those who witnessed the dark period cannot forget the treachery and the inhumanity of man against fellow man. Apart from the destruction of the federal principle, the criminal annulment of the historic, credible and transparent June 12, 1993 presidential poll won by the defunct Social Democratic Party (SDP) candidate, Abiola, would have been the greatest legacy of military rule.

The pain has lingered for three decades. The scars have not totally healed. Life became short, brutish and nasty in Nigeria as the soldiers stood against the people, turning the thriving country into a banana republic without caring a hoot.

As protests in defence of the people’s mandate turned bloody, innocent souls were wasted through the smoking guns of foot soldiers. Homes of pro-democracy crusaders were bombed. Their families were molested. Their businesses were crippled. Fear became palpable.

Scores were hounded into detention where they were subjected to inhuman treatment. They lost their freedom. Many others were exiled. Even those who escaped through the National Democratic Coalition (NADECO) route suffered deprivations. They never planned for the nightmare of sojourning in foreign lands without sources of income and minimal comfort.

Tribes were played against tribes. National unity was sacrificed. What mattered to Babangida before he stepped aside in shame was self-perpetuation in power. He obviously underrated the complexity of Nigerian society. His inglorious agenda collapsed. But, sadly, the collective goal of an orderly transfer of power was not realised.

The same script of regime protection and sit-tight prognostics were acted by the late Head of State, Gen. Sani Abacha, following the collapse of the interim contraption headed by frontline economic manager but political naive Chief Ernest Shonekan of blessed memory.

Regrettably, June 12 was a failed battle. The efforts of freedom fighters were in vain for three reasons. First, the annulment of the poll result was never reversed by the annullers. Second, the symbol of the legitimate struggle, Abiola, died mysteriously in detention without realising his ambition to govern. With him also died his agenda to abolish poverty in the country.

Third, when civil rule was restored in 1999, power eluded true democrats at the centre. The beneficiaries were majorly military lackeys and confederates.

But it is now gratifying that 30 years after, a key witness, pro-democracy arrowhead and democrat, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu, who was instrumental to the proclamation of ‘June 12’ as Nigeria’s ‘Democracy Day’ by former President Muhammadu Buhari, is now in the saddle as President and Commander-in-Chief.

The surviving NADECO warriors may take solace in the fact that they may still have a unique opportunity at the twilight of life to contribute ideas to the reshaping of Nigeria through constitutional reforms under the leadership of a trusted ally and dependable comrade.

If the political class had heeded Chief Obafemi Awolowo’s admonition to exercise caution about jumping at the deceptive transition programme, perhaps, the polity would not have been taken for a ride. In his letter to the Political Bureau, chaired by Dr. J. S. Cookey, the sage observed that Nigeria had embarked on an deceptive search for democracy, warning that when people had imagined that the new order had arrived, they would be terribly disappointed.

Babangida converted Nigeria into a political laboratory for endless experimentations. After banning, unbanning and banning politicians, he advised them to form political associations. None of the 14 associations was registered as a political party. Instead, the military regime imposed two parties – the SDP and National Republican Convention (NRC) – on new breed politicians. The military also wrote manifestos for the two federal agencies christened political parties.

Twice, the handover date was shifted, thereby elongating the dubious transition programme that IBB, a wily political gambler, had designed to fail. The nation endured his antics. Politicians went through the hurdles of Option A4. When Abiola and Bashir Tofa of NRC were named the candidates for the contest, the coast became clear.

Nigerians, who were already fed up with military rule, trooped out on poll day to elect Abiola. The election was not shaped by ethnicity and religion but by the determination of Nigerians to draw the curtains on military rule.

The election was free and fair. There was no report of violence, rigging or any unruly behaviour among voters. It was a festival of choice and change. The National Electoral Commission (NEC), chaired by Prof. Humphrey Nwosu, had accomplished a big task. Results were being released in trickles. Suddenly, NEC stopped further release of the results, following an “order from above”. It was the end of the exercise.

Read Also: Between June 12, 1993 and February 25, 2023

A judge had been instigated at midnight to give an order restraining the NEC from conducting the poll. The infamous Association for Better Nigeria (ABN), led by maverick Senator Arthur Nzeribe and a phony character called Abimbola Davies, mobilized forces and resources to discredit the poll. But it was futile.

Abiola, the clear winner of the election, was derided by former Military Vice President Augustus Aikhomu, an Admiral of the Navy, saying the rich were not necessarily philosophical kings. In utter insensitivity to the wind of change, Babangida became more imperious. He said although he did not know who would succeed him, he knew those who would not.

The military became divided. Majority supported the conclusion of the political process. But the few who opposed Abiola were more powerful.

June 12 became a big battle of the people. Amidst the melee, there were clear barriers. Abiola had jetted out to rally the support of the international community for his mandate. Former Information Minister Uche Chukwumerije mocked him, describing him as the first Aare Ona Kankanfo of Yoruba land to run from a battle.

Abiola returned to Nigeria only to meet a divided and rancourous SDP. His business was ebbing away. Government had clamped down on his newspaper, Concord, and other media sympathetic to his cause. While NADECO, Afenifere and other pro-democracy groups stood firm, prominent members of the political class changed their allegiance.

When Abiola declared that he had won the poll, IBB yelled like a power-drunk ruler on the National Television Authority (NTA). People shook their heads as the military president was staggering after he alighted from the Armed Forces Ruling Council (AFRC) meeting. Asked by reporters to react to Abiola’s declaration, he said: “We know how we declare our president.”

Babangida vowed to deal ruthlessly with protesters who demanded his exit on August 27, 1993, warning that “we are not only in office, we are in power”.

But the protest became more sporadic. He was forced to hand over, but to an unelected government, thereby forfeiting a honourable mention in the history of democratic transition.

However, IBB wreaked havoc beyond August 27, 1993. He set up an interim government without a specific tenure. He said it was meant to exist within a reasonable period. The status and powers of the interim Head of Government were suspect. It appeared the Minister of Defence, Abacha, who he left behind, was the actual Commander-in-Chief.

Rationalising the interim option, General Olusegun Obasanjo, an ardent critic of the Babangida regime, said although it was regrettable, it was nevertheless understandable. Later, he even said Abiola was not the messiah Nigerians were expecting.

Yet, Abiola himself played into the hand of Abacha, who shoved Shonekan aside, after Justice Dolapo Adesanya had declared the ING illegal. In his naivety, he collaborated with the maximum ruler, deluding himself into thinking that he would later hand over to him.

There was a parting of ways. At the Epetedo declaration, the die was cast. Following Abiola’s declaration of himself as president, the military authorities started to hunt for him. He went into hiding. He was later arrested and detained for five years. He did not come back alive. The rest, as it is said, is history.

What are the gains of June 12? The first lesson is that a free and fair poll is possible. Nigeria requires electoral reforms. It is an unfinished business expected to be undertaken by the Tinubu administration.

The second is that only a cross-ethnic support or votes from diverse parts of the people can install a president for all Nigerians. That was the reality in the days of Abiola. It was also demonstrated on February 25 when Tinubu was elected by popular votes.

Third, the electoral commission of the Third Republic embraced its duty with passion and patriotism. The method of voting involved lining up and straight counting. It is now old-fashioned. The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) of Prof. Mahmood Yakubu era has come up with innovative methods, including BIVAS. It should only be fine-tuned for future polls.

Fourth, those who lose elections should embrace the reality and wait for another day. Remarkably, many NRC chieftains accepted Abiola’s victory.

Fifth, the same-faith presidential ticket is possible in a highly heterogeneous country with diverse religious inclinations. The option can be dictated by inevitable circumstances. These were exemplified in Abiola/Babagana Kingibe ticket in the 1993 poll and Tinubu/Kashim Shettima ticket in the 2023 election.

Sixth, the message in 1993 was that military rule was outdated. Nigerians yearned for civil rule and political stability. Since 1999, civil rule has been in place. But, it is just one element of democracy, which is broader.

Abiola’s associate, Tinubu, is now in the saddle. It was “Hope” then; it is “Renewed Hope” now. The greatest tribute to Abiola’s memory is for the President to implement the agenda of poverty abolition across the country. That was the late Abiola’s plan for Nigeria. This is what the poor masses expect from their capable and trusted President Tinubu.

In the next forty-eight hours, a new chapter will open in the history of Nigeria. It is a momentous occasion. Hope is rekindled. It is a time of greater expectations.

Global attention is already focusing on Nigeria. All eyes are also on the man of the moment, President-elect Bola Tinubu, and his deputy, Senator Kashim Shettima. As they assume the reins, they also inherit a big burden of a country thirsty for a new lease of life.

Tinubu, who will be Nigeria’s 16th president, is different from his predecessors in some ways.

He is not a product of military confederacy, like the Ebora Owu, General Olusegun Obasanjo. It is ironic that Tinubu will now occupy the exalted office that once inflicted a deep financial injury on Lagos State when he was its governor. That was when Obasanjo seized the state’s local government allocation for about three years, following the creation of local council development areas to enable the state enjoy a more effective administration at the grassroots.

The President-elect is not a product of imposition, like the late Umaru Yar’Adua, who rode to power on the back of a severely flawed election.

Tinubu is also a wide departure from the accidental president, Dr. Goodluck Jonathan, who was promoted to the number one seat to cover up a lacuna.

He is also not a former military leader, like General Muhammadu Buhari, who, despite his nostalgic feeling for the more speedy and efficient “command and obey” centralised structure of the military, had to make a difficult adjustment to democratic civilian life and its constitutional safeguards and restraints.

Tinubu, a technocrat and financial surgeon, is a complete civilian who can easily feel the public pulse in any situation. He is a democrat who has made enormous sacrifices for the government of the people, by the people, for the people. He is a crusader who has fought the people’s battle in national interest, a strategist, and a bridge builder. Many believe that the astute politician is prepared for the huge task and challenges of post-Buhari era.

His courage, resilience, wit, forthrightness, determination, focus, capacity, diligence, patriotism and fidelity to progressive principles are invaluable assets. His past feats motivated Nigerians across five of the six zones to vote for him. Therefore, much is expected of his administration by a far-flung, diverse people yearning for a better country.

Many Nigerians perceive Tinubu as the solution centre. They recall with nostalgia how he changed the face of Lagos and turned it into the fifth viable economy in Africa. They want him to replicate such a feat at the centre. Indeed, Nigerians expect wonders from the incoming President: to provide solutions to a myriad of challenges that seemed to have defied solutions for decades.

Most of the challenges still linger. A wobbly economy, lingering insecurity, pervasive corruption and worsening disunity stare the nation in the face with mulish ominousness.

Debts are piling up. Youths are no longer at ease with joblessness. Many are migrating in droves for real and imagined greener pastures. Others are seeking refuge in voodoo money for survival. So many citizens appear to have lost confidence in the country. You really cannot blame them. The economy is on crutches.

Bold reforms are required to resolve these crises and reposition the country.

As governor of Lagos State, Tinubu assembled a competent team, a blend of knowledgeable politicians and competent technocrats. The state’s Executive Council had so many talents that were second to none in Nigeria at the time. Their activities made Lagos to become a model and reference point in good governance.

As President, he is, therefore, expected to build a solid team of patriotic and experienced aides, ministers and advisers who share his vision for a new and prosperous country. Nigerians expect round pegs in round holes.

But a highly heterogeneous developing country like Nigeria is not insulated from crises of nation-building and development. They range from identity crisis to participation, legitimacy, integration and distribution.

Legitimacy is a quality which all governments should always strive to acquire through performance. The perception of government policies and programmes designed to bring succour to the people and their effective implementation is crucial. The goals of the leader and the electorate should align. Government at all times must be sensitive to the needs and aspirations of the populace.

Read Also: Atiku breaks silence on Supreme Court’s dismissal of suit against Tinubu

To resolve participation crisis, the incoming Tinubu administration should create opportunity for citizens to influence decisions that have bearings on their wellbeing. Government should fulfill its campaign promises. Decisions should be dictated by need analysis and the mechanism for feedback to ensure proper assessment of government activities. Besides, no component unit or region should be marginalised or sidelined in appointments and distribution of public offices.

The resolution of identity and distribution challenges makes federalism, or what is called true federalism, more compelling. The basis for peaceful coexistence should be agreed upon by the diverse zones. Over-centralisation of power is antithetical to federalism. Devolution or decentralisation through restructuring will enable the partners in a federal nation-state to confront their peculiar problems, preserve identities, develop at their paces, promote healthy competition and foster unity in diversity.

Tinubu is assuming political control at a most difficult time. As president, his constituency is every part of the vast country. Nigeria is currently suffering from disunity. The onus is on the new leader to unite the country by maintaining a national outlook and giving the regions, ethnic groups and component units a sense of belonging. Equity, justice, fairness and an aversion for nepotism should be central to his policies.

As a democrat, Tinubu should spearhead the strengthening of democratic institutions. Strong institutions are ingredients of stability. For example, while collaboration among the arms of government is important, it should not erode separation of powers and the accompanying checks and balances. This does not mean that the incoming president should not show interest in the election of the next principal officers of the National Assembly. The President-elect is at liberty to choose between the 2015 style of aloofness or indifference, which led to acrimonious Legislative/Executive relationship, and the 2019 corrective style premised on party supremacy.

The Armed Forces should be fortified with essential tools and more patriotic personnel to effectively defend the nation’s territorial integrity and combat terror. Effective policing is only possible through state police. A free press should be further guaranteed and strengthened. Government should obey court orders. Political parties need to offer sound education and enlightenment to strengthen national unity. The civil society also needs to monitor the activities of government without hindrance and hold those in power accountable.

All these point to the fact that Tinubu’s incoming administration will necessarily need to pursue essential reforms.

It is gratifying that his blueprint shows that he understands the challenges ahead. For example, he has proposed to halt fuel subsidy. It is a bold initiative. However, the stakeholders, particularly labour unions, need more enlightenment so that they can be on the same page with government. The newly inaugurated Dangote Refinery may offer a big hope and relief. The fact is that until the nation’s moribund refineries are on their feet again, the crisis in the oil and gas sector will persist.

Besides, the reality should now dawn on Nigeria that it cannot be salvaged by oil alone. Government should see the futility of over-dependence on the acclaimed black gold and emulate other countries that are reaping the dividends of diversification. Sources of revenue should be expanded through a renewed focus on the development of solid minerals and other resources. It is noteworthy that the President-elect has promised to resolve the power logjam. He made an attempt as Lagos governor through the Enron/PPP, but it was frustrated by the Obasanjo administration.

Regular electricity supply is crucial to the resuscitation of dead industries that generated employment in the past. It is also a condition for the protection of the informal sector. If electricity becomes regular and fuel scarcity becomes history, Nigerians will heave a sigh of relief.

Besides, only a productive country can be economically prosperous.

Read Also: Asiwaju Bola Tinubu: May your road continue to be rough!

Tertiary students are hopeful about an uninterrupted academic calendar in public institutions. The root cause of strikes is the under-funding of the system. While government should be prepared for improved funding, the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASSU) should create room for necessary compromise.

Also, the incoming government needs to examine the yearnings of resident doctors and implement an action plan that will prevent constant industrial actions which are detrimental to patients in particular and the health sector in general.

As many patriots have observed over the years, most of Nigeria’s problems are rooted in corruption and its underlying maladies. An effective reduction in acts of malfeasance will ensure that the nation’s huge resources are not cornered by few individuals at the detriment of the collective, but used for the benefits of all and sundry.

Tinubu’s impressive management of the resources of Lagos has since put the state ahead of others, even those with more endowments than the Centre of Excellence.

It is true that the states enjoy their constitutionally given autonomy in the management of their resources. But the incoming administration will need to partner the second tier of government to industrialise every part of the country to create opportunities and an environment that will be conducive for talents to thrive and be rewarded.

Infrastructure battle is an unfinished business. Many federal roads are death traps. The new government should turn Nigeria into a huge construction site, subject to availability of finance.

The incoming government will need to create more direct and indirect jobs, monitor development agenda, tackle corruption, sanction grafts, reward honesty and hard work, as well as build confidence in the people to give their best for their country.

This is why Nigeria’s education system should be urgently repositioned from mere academic to real production. The sector should become the bedrock where various institutions will find, nurture, and strengthen the vast fields of talents that abound across the land.

Some evil forces prevented the country from realising its full potentials in the past. We missed it when the late sage, Chief Obafemi Awolowo, offered to spread modernity, which his administration pioneered in the Southwest, across other parts of the country.

In 1993, business mogul and frontline philanthropist, Bashorun Moshood Abiola, attempted to do the same, but the same evil forces stopped him. 

Now is the time for all Nigerians to roll up their sleeves to realise the objectives of the Renewed Hope agenda of the incoming Tinubu administration. Africa’s most populous country should not miss this golden opportunity.