The Nation Newspaper

Category: Emmanuel Oladesu

  • Transience of power

    Transience of power

    Power is transient and no condition is permanent. That was the message of former governors to their later-day successors at the recent induction of re-elected state executives and governors-elect in Abuja.

    Reality has dawned on many of the ex-lords of manor about the futility of everlasting opulence in a world of vanity. Once upon a time, their words were laws in their states; their tiny fiefdoms.

    Now, the power of incumbency is gone. None of them came to the Abuja meeting with sirens and retinue of aides funded by public purse.

    The former men of power are not poor, although they presided over povert-stricken states whose problems they compounded through their atrocities. But, their lifestyles have drastically changed because they are no more centres of attraction. As they narrated their experience, or ordeals, to those coming behind at the induction conference, some of them wished they had prepared better for life outside power.

    It was because they obviously ignored the admonition of the late sage, Chief Obafemi Awolowo, who had counselled his followers more than six decades ago to see their sojourn in power as a mere passage, a temporary phase. The great nationalist-politician  had taught them to tame their thirst for vulgarian lifestyle and never indulge in ostentatious living which they cannot sustain after leaving office.

    Awo lived by example by refusing to live in the Government House, Ibadan, as Premier of Western Region. He lived in his modest house at Oke-Bola, a far cry from Government Reservation Area ,(GRA), Bodija. Instead, he was contented with a meagre house allowance,a style later copied by his prostege, Alhaji Lateef Jakande, who as governor of Lagos State also lived in his Ilupeju residence.

    Besides, Awo cautioned against the penchant for flaunting power and abuse of office. When the late Queen Elizabeth visited Nigeria, she was received at Ibadan by the Premier and his ministers, who he introduced to the august visitor along with their spouses. But, he refused to introduce to the Queen a particular lady who accompanied one of his ministers.

    When the particular minister later protested, Awo said he knew his wife and he was not comfortable introducing his concubine to the Queen.

    Also, Awo objected to inordinate wealth accumulation at the expense of the masses. He also warned against the misuse of official privilege. Thus, he directed another minister to refund to the regional coffers the public fund he spent while he was on  private trip abroad.

    Awo’s associate, the late Chief Adekunle Ajasin, imbibed these virtues of discipline as governor of old Ondo State. He led a spartan life, rejecting the temptation to abuse power and misuse opportunities offered by public status. In his memoir, he said he entered office as governor in 1979 with the same set of clothes and returned to Owo, his home town, with the same set of clothes in 1983.

    Ajasin entered the Government House with two personal cars. He returned with only one. While in office, no commissioner was permitted to take government car home during weekend, except he was on assignment.

    The progressives of those days distanced themselves from socio-economic and political vices that could dent their image. To them, politics was not an occupation, but a vacation. None of them was jobless before assuming the reins. They had second addresses.

    Also, their focus was service to the people. They had little to fund the four cardinal programmes of free education, free medical services, full employment and rural development. There was not much to embezzle by state officials.

    When their colleagues were later sent to the prison by the military tribunal after the December 1983 coup, Ajasin and Jakande, despite their long detention, were given a clean bill of health.

    Nigeria had lost it completely since the Third Republic. The new breed invaded the scene and changed the entire landscape. Politics was monetised. Indeed, it became an investment and actors hoped to garner huge returns.

    Governors as primus inter pares craved for more powers, which isolated themselves from the pact. The treasury became their fortress. They exercised control over the House of Assembly, which they incited their thugs to disrupt. It was the height of intoxication. Governors also became party leaders who decided who got what, where and how. Many of them were carried away by their exalted positions. Their hands were heavy on opponents within the same parties. From many of their supporters, they earned conditional and hypocritical loyalty.

    Power is alluring. It draws a wool across the eyes of the power baron who are neck-deep in personal aggrandisement. Not only do they use power, they also allow power to use them. Only few could spare thoughts for tomorrow.

    The first casualty of power is personal humility. In their opulence, while radiating the joy of abundance, politicians never contemplate retirement. There is no leave or holiday. A plan for exit, after deep reflection, is absent.

    Even, when it is evident that they must leave due to constitutional stipulations on tenure, they seek an avenue for the installation of lackeys as successors. The legacies should be defended. There should also be a cover-up of past misdeeds.

    The successor would later adorn the same garment of arrogance and severe the chord. The result is predecessor-successor crisis.

    The transition from power to ordinary citizenship is challenging. As pecks of the exalted office disappear, friends and associates begin to cut their contact. Those in high office are also used and dumped by their beneficiaries. Sources of revenue decrease and they are off the radar of public protocol. As they are gradually deserted, they can only draw succour from their nuclear families.

    Few months to the expiration of tenure, they become lame duck. No mistake can be corrected at this time. The number of hangers-on sharply decreases as they gravitate to new power centres. They deny previous benefits. They betray the benefactors. They cast aspersions. They move on in their disdain for the outgoing ruling executive.

    Outside power, they now become vulnerable. It is the period of accountability. They face battles on two fronts; from bitter, disloyal and uncooperative successors, and anti-graft bodies. The books are opened and previous deeds, including decisions long forgotten, are laid bare on the day of reckoning. The cost and rigour of litigation, and the burden of public virtuperation are heavy.

    The sight of former public figures in prison uniforms evoke pity. Not all ill-gotten wealth can be recovered, but they forfeit to stand on any moral podium. Their seats are vacant among men and women of honour, credibility and integrity.

    The wisest ruler in human history, King Solomon of ancient Israel, had urged all mortals to take heed. For every thing there is a time, he said. The philosopher, himself a wealthy monarch, later discovered the vanity of primitive accumulation,  warning that vanity upon vanity, all is vanity.

    Office holders have a lot to learn from the men of the old order who served society diligently and never suffered any ridicule from the society that appreciated their service. Their joy was not their fat bank accounts, the estates they built by dipping their hands in public treasury, their chains of exotic cars and other property abroad.

    Those in power should derive joy in the society they have rebuilt, the reforms they have midwifed, the infrastructure battle they have fought, the legacy of a new lease of life for the greatest number of citizens. They should be able to celebrate their conscience; that after all, they served, made a difference and left indelible marks.

  • Lessons of 2023 presidential poll

    Lessons of 2023 presidential poll

    The February 25, 2023 presidential election has been won and lost. There had been nine others before this year’s exercise under the American political model which began in our country in 1979. None of them was accepted by either the political class or some other interests in the polity as flawless. Even the 1993 election adjudged to be the freest and fairest in the nation’s history, was, mindlessly, annulled by the dishonest military top hierarchy in cahoots with some Mafia politicians.

    It is possible that political scientists and historians are already documenting this year’s contest for posterity. Doing so will enable Nigerians, particularly the political class, the contenders and pretenders in the concluded race, and their discerning and gullible followers, to draw lessons from the historic exercise.

    History offers an opportunity to study the past and present for the purpose of understanding and preparing for the future. The lessons of history are instructive. They are meant to make us wiser than we were. Those who fail to learn often lack the tools, skills and experiences required for avoiding past mistakes and pitfalls. But wise politicians will be guided by events of 2023 as they return to the drawing board ahead of future polls.

    The goal of politics is the attainment of power. Power, as it is now understood, is not served a la carte. Wining requires the right strategy, hard work and the ability to garner widespread support and acceptance across the country.

    Also, an election is an emotive issue. Ordinarily, the contest should be perceived as a festival of choice and change. But it has often become, largely, a nightmare; a source of acrimony and division. This is due to the do-or-die attitude of some desperate politicians and their allies.

    The elements of the stiff competition include antagonism, strife and rancour. These could be rationalised as requirements for power hunt. But the excesses are counter-productive because they can unleash tension, heat up the polity and damage the health of the highly heterogeneous country.

    The votes garnered here and there that cannot take a presidential candidate to Aso Villa only raise a false hope. Yet, its inherent importance cannot be dismissed. The point is that on poll day, the freedom of choice, as constitutionally guaranteed, is exercised. Voting underscores an expression of personal feeling, group opinion and popular judgment, if the exercise is free and fair.

    An election is meaningful if the votes count. However, no election is perfect anywhere in the world. Yet, what ignorant members of the public do not want to hear is substantial compliance with laid down electoral laws and guidelines. They are fascinated by utopia, due to their idealist yearning and self-delusion.

    After the periodic election, the ballot box is the ultimate decider. But polls in Nigeria are often subjected to judicial scrutiny and affirmation as the battle shifts to the court. This year’s poll is not any different. It is still democracy in action, while the temple of justice remains the final arbiter. The only dark side is that bad losers hide under the provision of the law to ventilate imaginary grievances, thereby wasting the time of the court.

    The outcome of the 2023 presidential election was influenced by a combination of factors. Apart from ethnicity, there were also issues about religion, structure, support base, emotions and sentiments.

    Religion was both a strong and weak factor. Once religion was projected as the main issue, the outcome of the election was dictated by its effective deployment or otherwise.

    But special skills are needed to effectively deploy religion as a weapon. To be effective, religious sentiment cannot be exploited in isolation of other factors. For example, the same faith approach never stood alone. While it was meant to appeal to highly populated Muslim-dominated zones, an objective it eventually achieved, other factors, such as formidable structure, personality, antecedent and pedigree of the candidates were added advantages.

    Conversely, the religious sentiment expressed by the clangorous Labour Party (LP), which only targeted Christian votes, in the absence of the aforementioned factors, proved inadequate. The lesson is that an appeal to religion as the sole factor cannot pave the way to victory beyond inflaming passion and emotion.

    Also, ethnicity, when projected as an independent factor, grossly failed. It is instructive that the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and LP, which sought to profit from ethnicity, failed to garner sufficient votes like the ruing All Progressives Congress (APC) whose calculation was based on its national spread and appeal.

    The implication is that in a highly heterogeneous federating nation like Nigeria, no presidential candidate can survive by leaning on a single ethnic support. While a candidate is expected to secure home support first, it should be borne in mind that cross-ethnic agreements, partnership and collaboration are more potent tolls that should be deployed to gain more political mileage.

    Regional responses to the recent poll were an eye opener. They have implications for future political cooperation in the country.

    The Yoruba of Southwest exhibited a cosmopolitan disposition, which affirmed their predictable liberal attitude. They voted for three political parties – the ruling APC, main opposition PDP and the clamorous LP. In Osun State, PDP won. In Lagos, LP triumphed.

    Also, the three regions of the North – the Northwest, the Northcentral, and the Northeast -distributed their votes among the three parties. The Southsouth followed suit.

    A sort of synergy developed among these collaborating regions, which can be built upon in the future. It contrasts sharply with the one-way voting style of the Southeast, which focused exclusively on one party, the LP, oblivious of the import of strategic political fellowship with other regions.

    The deficiency of that approach is obvious. The regional appeal was narrow and not broad-based. No single zone can install a president independently of others. Besides, the voting style, which resulted from the resurgence of contemporary nationalism, created a deep suspicion, as the presidential and senatorial elections, which were conducted simultaneously in the Southeast, produced divergent results.

    The consequence is that neither the ruling APC nor the main opposition PDP is thinking about zoning the Senate President to the Southeast because it is viewed as an attempt to reap where it did not sow.

    Voting could become a tool for negotiation. It is a core element of a political tact and pact. Voting wisely will always achieve a better result than adopting post-election tactics that are regressive to the dispositions that are associated with threats of self-alienation, exclusion, and futileⁿ agitations for disintegration.

    How the people also understand a candidate is a critical factor in ensuring they make a rational political choice. What the February 25 poll has revealed is that majority of Nigerians who voted, consciously chose a president they knew had a national outlook.

    In addition, particularly for the APC candidate, bridge-building was critical to making an inroad to untapped electoral potentials.

    More poignantly, targeting votes from more populous states and zones can boost the chance of any candidate. Populous states and zones are electoral assets. The North, particularly the seven states in the Northwest, two states in the Southwest, and two states in the Southsouth, if properly courted, would always supply the bulk of votes to the beneficiary candidate.  

    Also, the electorate was interested in what the candidates could offer. The informed voters vetted the performance of the candidates in the previous positions they had held and simply chose the best with their votes.

    The platforms on which the candidates ran also played important roles. There were four major parties – APC, PDP, LP and New Nigerian Peoples Party (NNPP) in the race. The NNPP is not a national party. But it maintained its hold on Kano State. The PDP and LP are crisis-ridden. In fact, LP’s struggle appeared to have reduced the PDP’s chances. Only the APC had put its house in order and remained united and most widespread throughout the election period, and till date.

    While the PDP paid dearly for ignoring the threat posed by the G-5, LP remained a party without formidable structures across the regions. It only attracted sentimental votes in the Southeast, Lagos and some parts of the Northcentral. Besides, its efforts were inadequate.

    There is a limit to relying on propaganda as a tool for gaining political mileage in the face of reality. Social media hoodlums had a pastime during the electioneering. Their target was the APC candidate. The political leeches viciously attacked him and attempted to de-market him in order to shore up the image of the LP candidate.

    But, as the poll results have shown, the presidency cannot be for a neophyte or an upstart masking as a national icon.

    Many youths were carried away by rumours and falsehoods. Many voted without rational appraisal of burning issues that shaped the contest. Voting by peer pressure, on the spur of the moment, became an uncritical response and lazy electoral behaviour on the part of youths whose main concern was delusional generational shift rather than the quality and worth of the candidates and the manifestos they offered to the electorate.

    The greatest lesson of the 2023 poll is the God factor. Power flows to individuals through human efforts but crowned by divine favours. The Almighty is not partial. He does not use the human yardstick for His projection. Permutations can go wrong on the slippery political field. The ultimate is providential grace.

    Nobody can get anything, including power, unless it is granted from the Divine Throne.

  • Tinubu: Fuel subsidy removal and power sector stability

    Tinubu: Fuel subsidy removal and power sector stability

    President-Elect Bola Tinubu has a beautiful and highly captivating national agenda. If they are well implemented, the country is not likely to remain the same. As he assumes the reins on May 29, expectations are high.

    One of the promises he has made to the country is the removal of fuel subsidy; another is regular electricity supply.

    If there is no fuel shortage; if the burden of subsidy is lifted without incurring adverse effect and outages become history; Nigeria will heave a sigh of relief.

    However, there is a need to broaden the communication channels and enlighten stakeholders, particularly organised labour, including drivers’ unions, on the immediate and transient effects of such a removal, when the policy is implemented.

    There is also the need to fashion out an effective framework for palliative implementation and management, different from past controversial, corrupt, shoddy and failed implementation.

    It must be noted that the genesis of the problem in the petroleum sector was the collapse of the nation’s four major refineries. Efforts aimed at reviving them have proved abortive. Although billions of naira have been voted for turn-around maintenance, the efforts have been in vain. The money has gone down the drain.

    The failure made the government to resort to importation of fuel. Crude is produced in Nigeria; yet, it is exported. Then, the proceeds are used to import fuel for home consumption from the same Western world where it was exported.

    As crude is exported and not refined at home, other refined or by-products, including gas, asphalt, and other petro-chemicals, are wasted. Indirectly, there are also job and revenue losses.

    To many experts, fuel subsidy removal would be a decisive move, though a tough decision to make. During the presidential campaigns, major standard bearers who exhibited some understanding of the economy, supported by their political parties, promised to end fuel subsidy.

    Arguments for the removal sound persuasive and convincing. The trial removal from budget, between January and May, was a tonic. Since enormous amount is spent on subsidy, it has drained successive budgets. The N60 trillion subsidy annual budget is bogus and inexplicable. Some experts have claimed that $850 million is spent monthly on phony subsidy. It has also been alleged that a good percentage of the figure earmarked for subsidy is a fraud. There is need for forensic investigation on the matter. Is 80 million litres actually consumed daily? Also, what is the actual amount of crude lifted? How much is diverted? Arguably, the amount lost to fuel theft remains elusive in the realm of conjecture. The Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation Limited (NNPCL) has not been able to remit much money to the national treasury because it claims it is spending so much on subsidy.

    There is the allegation that subsidy, which underscores an element of regulation, is to the advantage of the few in the supply chain who smile to their banks while the country groans under the heavy weight of the subsidy payment.

    How can investment in the sector survive without deregulation, in the absence of a free market? In a layman’s language, how can those investors in oil and gas operate effectively when subsidy is being retained?

    Gradually, the economy is dying. Much is required to sustain subsidy, but only very little is available. The resort to borrowing for the purpose of keeping the regime of subsidy afloat does not make an economic sense. The consequence is that following incessant borrowing, Nigeria may not be credit-worthy in the nearest future.

    Today, there is pressure on foreign reserves in an unproductive economy. Nigeria, a country blessed with human and natural endowment, is yet burdened by a majority of citizens wallowing in abject poverty. The nation’s per capital income is too low when compared with its huge and diverse resources that ought to translate to accelerated human development across board. Job loss and dissatisfaction across sectors lead to migration to greener pastures.

    Yet, the solution may remain illusory unless the refineries are revived and protected from economic saboteurs who profit from fuel importation at the detriment of the nation. If government cannot revive them, why not revisit privatisation? But the new exercise should be devoid of previous fraud.

    If subsidy must be removed, the people should be prepared to brace up for the unavoidable effects. Economists have warned that inflation would worsen when the cost of fuel goes up. The burden, they caution, would be passed to the poor masses.

    As the incumbent administration prepares to leave office after eight years, its move to increase the minimum wage of civil servants is good. But it should be noted that federal workers are in the minority, relative to the more vulnerable general populace, especially the huge number of those in the informal sector and youths. The impact may be severe on the transport sector. Thus, a mass transit system to ease the cost of transportation is imperative.

    Palliative is the way to go. But what is required is a structural economic design, not the penchant for dishing out money.

    A workable SURE-P, sincerely implemented and not sabotaged, is also an option that is necessary to lessen the economic burden of the masses. In the past, the programme never met public expectation.

    The Federal Government said it has spent trillions on the Social Investment Programme (SIP). Yet, according to statistics, millions of Nigerians are still assailed by want and misery.

    Now, there is a proposal targeting households for another social intervention programme. A reliable database for the programme is still a problem. How will 10 million households be selected?

    The International Monetary Fund (IMF) is lending money to Nigeria to deflate the effects of the removal. The country is to pay back in 25 years. It is like embarking on a rescue operation by giving free money to Nigerians. Nigeria should utilise it well.

    It looks like a gift today. Interests will be paid. More debts are being accumulated for the future generation.

    Currently, the national debt profile is $171.8 billion. Borrowing without restraint and optimal utilisation for desired results is counter-productive. Why should Nigeria borrow if the purpose is not for infrastructural development?

    Is the World Bank loan not being mismanaged already? How can the allocation of $53 million for logistics be justified?

    The major gains of subsidy removal would be the elimination of fraudsters who profit maximally from the scam and the loopholes associated with its implementation. The nation’s ability to save trillions of naira that could be channelled to productive and developmental projects for the benefit of all and sundry would also be among the gains. These appear to be the motive of the incoming All Progressives Congress (APC) Federal Government under Asiwaju Bola Tinubu.

    If the crisis is resolved and the adverse effects of removal are curtailed, Nigerians may witness a new dawn.

    Also, it is gratifying that the next president will be focusing on critical infrastructural development. The starting point, in his view, is the resolution of the power sector crisis.

    Power outages have wrecked the economy and pauperised the informal sector. Households agonise due to the poor metering policy accompanied by huge monthly estimated bills.

    The huge amount spent on petrol and diesel has jacked up the cost of production. It has become an albatross to the manufacturing sub-sector. It has served as a disincentive to investment and stifled the drive for industrialisation.

    If electricity supply is regular and the industries begin to rise, job creation will get the needed boost and the idle hands among restless youths would be gainfully engaged.

    A new dawn may just begin through the repositioning of the sector.

  • Electoral melodrama in Adamawa

    Electoral melodrama in Adamawa

    Twenty-four years after the restoration of civil rule in the country, the battle for a free and fair election has not been won. Doubts are still being expressed about the neutrality and integrity of some electoral officers.

    In Adamawa State, there is a big question mark on the performance of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). Few bad eggs tried to dent the image of the umpire at a critical time, despite the feats it has recorded through its reform of the voting process by its innovative Bimodal Voter’s Accreditation System (BVAS).

    A deep hollow has been created in its scorecard by the misdemeanour of its Resident Electoral Commissioner (REC), Hudu Yunusa-Ari, who breached the provisions of the Electoral Act during the recent supplementary governorship poll in the state.

    It was an equivalence of daylight robbery. It was crude, bizarre, and deliberate; a contempt for transparency and rule of law.

    Yet, the situation would have become worse, if the Abuja Headquarters of INEC had not halted the absurdity. The error was quickly corrected. But the bad impression could not be promptly erased.

    The attention of the country had focused on the northeastern state for some reasons. Being the base of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar, the poll was a major test for him at the home front.

    The former Vice President and Wazirin Adamawa, who had become a wounded lion for not winning the presidential election, returned to his home supporters for a showdown with the All Progressives Congress (APC).

    But there was a rugged and determined opponent. The candidature of Senator Aishatu Dahiru Ahmed (popularly called Binani) of the All Progressives Congress (APC) generated more interest. She is the only woman governorship flag bearer in this year’s election.

    In this season, she has seized the politics of the state by storm. Even, Governor Ahmadu Fintri acknowledged that he could not dismiss the threat possed by the highly popular woman with the wave of the hand.

    Binani, a household name in Adamawa, campaigned vigorously. She enjoyed the sympathy, goodwill and solidarity of many Nigerians who wanted her to make history as the first woman governor. An added advantage is her clean record in the National Assembly. Her personal structure is formidable. Her party is strong and supportive. She was determined and focused to upset, displace and break the power of incumbency.

    Binani may have been underrated as a woman. But the senator has a heart of steel. She was resolute, focused and prepared to rub shoulders with any man in the political arena. She made an impact and attracted votes that beat the imagination of PDP chieftains.

    The initial March 18 election was inconclusive. The PDP and APC gladiators returned to the drawing board in dejection and anxiety. When they returned to the field eight days ago, the state was enveloped in tension at the tail end of the contest.

    The residual poll was largely peaceful. However, the collation of result was halfway when Yunusa-Ari took the law into his hands. Accompanied by some security agents, he stormed the final collation centre, hijacked the function of the Returning Officer, Prof. Mele Mohammed, and declared Binami winner.

    Yunusa-Ari is a lawyer. Therefore, he is conversant with the Electoral Act and the nation’s constitution. Why did a legal officer decide to trample on the law and ethics of his profession? This is a big puzzle.

    The security officers could not have refused a REC when he asked them to protect him. It was doubtful if they knew his intention. Even, if they knew his motive, were they in a position to disobey or shun the REC’s directive? Investigation will reveal the extent of their complicity or otherwise.

    In reaction to the REC’s misadventure, there was an uproar. Many people, including chieftains of the APC in other states, were taken aback. When the news got to President Muhammadu Buhari, he was said to have expressed surprise, because it was contrary to his ‘due process’ posture. But the Commander-in-Chief, as it was later revealed by Information and Culture Minister Lai Mohammed, insisted on non-interference, preferring that INEC should clear its mess. On Thursday, after a formal briefing, the President ordered the REC’s prosecution.

    The electoral process instantly ran into turbulence through the action of a single individual. The poll, at that stage of illegal announcement by Yunusa-Ari, could not pass the test of integrity and credibility. This was the reason the nation watched in awe the unfolding melodrama. Despite the political ruction, the nation waited with bated breath where the electoral pendulum would swing afterwards.

    The trouble could have immediately evaporated after the announcement. But it was exacerbated by Binani who, instead of rejecting her proclamation as winner when the final result was still hanging, hailed the illegality and delivered an infantile acceptance speech.

    Who were the Ahitophelean advisers who also counselled her to hurriedly approach the court to seek a review of the process? To its credit, the Judiciary declined to give a frivolous ex parte injunction and asked the other side to be put on notice, thereby refusing to set Adamawa on fire.

    Binani, an Amazon with widespread esteem, would have become an idol of the poll, if she had not jumped the gun to claim a stillborn victory, after the REC had willfully subverted the electoral process.

    If, in reaction to the antics of Yunusa-Ari, the APC candidate had rejected the move to truncate democracy, history would have placed her on a golden page. After all, despite losing the election, she has a very bright political future ahead.

    In the midst of the hoopla, Yunusa-Ari, the lead actor in the failed coup against democracy, was promptly summoned to Abuja. Later, the collation continued in an orderly manner and Governor Ahmad Fintiri, who had earlier been falsely declared loser, retrieved his mandate. Binani fought a good fight at the level of ballot box. But the governor laughed last.

    The controversial REC could only be directed to go on indefinite suspension. INEC is constitutionally handicapped to sack him, despite his excesses. The process of removal is laborious. The powers to do so reside with the President and the National Assembly. It cannot be done by any fiat.

    The Adamawa drama drew INEC backwards. It betrayed public confidence in the electoral umpire. Stakeholders may now have the justification to suspect their RECs, judging by the way Yunusa-Ari had arrogated to himself the power to hold a state to ransom.

    To keen observers and students of history, the dog went back to its vomit in Adamawa. Yunusa-Ari only mimicked the INEC under Maurice Iwu’s ‘do-and-die’ electoral superintendence. It was a mock of how an old soldier and erstwhile president directed an inglorious election when results were announced while collation was still ongoing; when losers were declared winners and later asked to go to court. It was a period of political darkness when the Commander-in-Chief wore the garb of impunity with outrageous arrogance.

    Any lover of democracy understands that a false declaration of results is dangerous. In 1983, the false declaration by the defunct Federal Electoral Commission (FEDECO) plunged the old Ondo State and parts of old Oyo State into violence. Lives were lost and property destroyed.

    In 2007, the false declaration by the electoral umpire led to protracted litigations that compounded the cost of electioneering. Political parties and candidates had to spend fortunes to seek judicial redress. The period of conducting a thorough scrutiny of the election generated tensions across the land. It took years to retrieve the stolen mandates in Ekiti, Osun, Ondo, and Edo states.

    It is important to remind those with Yunusa-Ari’s mindset, and desperate politicians, that the law prohibiting fraud at every stage of the electoral process is still in force. INEC has the power to prosecute the culprits, after conducting a diligent investigation.

    Electoral officers should be made to understand that voters are more vigilant now than they were before and ready to defend their ballots. They should learn lessons from the fate of their colleagues who were tried and jailed to serve as deterrents. They should know that the same tribulation also befell erring professors on ad hoc electoral duty.

    The setting up of an electoral offences tribunal for the prosecution of lawless polling officers and unscrupulous politicians will no doubt nip electoral fraud in the bud. The stiffer the punishment for desperate politicians and their conspiratorial INEC officials, the more sanitized our elections will be, and vice versa. It is not too late to begin to wield the big stick against those who subvert the electoral process for personal gains or favoritism.

  • Wanted: Credible Senate President and House Speaker

    Wanted: Credible Senate President and House Speaker

    Never has the jostling for Senate President and House of Representatives Speaker been so intense. Nine popular senators, including the incumbent, are scheming to be elected as chairman of the 10th National Assembly. No fewer than 10 representatives are competing for Speaker.

    Opposition parties and lawmakers are watching the unfolding drama with keen interest. The contestants know power is not served a la carte. Thus, they are throwing their strengths, connections and resources into the crowded race.

    There are fears that their struggle, which is legal and legitimate, may put the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) on edge, in the interim. That was why the party’s national chairman, Senator Abdullahi Adamu, had cautioned the contenders and pretenders to desist from creating tension.

    To observers, a crisis might be in the works. The ruling party’s national vice chairman (Northwest), Salihu Lukman, recently cried out about the desperation of those aspiring to become presiding officers.

    He said the senators and representatives were monetising their campaigns. Unlike what happened during the general election, old (and may be, new) notes are now in circulation. While seeking endorsement, aspirants are said to be wooing their colleagues with big cash, cows, rams and other inducements, particularly during the fasting period.

    Lukman, who expressed concern about the consequences of a monetised campaign, said the same gestures had been extended to many party leaders who savour the gifts as fruits of their political labours. To most observers, this is bribery and corruption cloaked in sartorial allurement.

    Esteemed party leaders, including members of the National Working Committee (NWC), past and current governors, ministers and other influential party stalwarts, receive aspirants, accompanied by their supporters, on daily basis. The logistics is costly.

    The fear is that as the contenders spend so much to get the numbers Three and Four positions in the country, the likelihood exists that they will perceive their campaigns as an investment. Like businessmen, they may believe their investment should equally generate returns. The party’s general vision of service thus becomes automatically eroded.

    No doubt, the search for appropriate presiding officers is the first major task of the incoming APC administration, led by Asiwaju Bola Tinubu, when it assumes the reins on May 29.

    The contest for choosing the leadership of the legislature has generated some controversy. A few factors have been thrown up. The ruling party has to manage these issues to avert a crisis.

    The President-elect and Vice President-elect are Muslims. Some believe that the Nnumber Three Citizen, at least, should be a Christian. There is a solution to this question if the Senate Presidency is zoned to the South east or Southsouth. If this is done, it may douse real or imaginary religious tension, or a fabricated tension by some religious bigots.

    Apart from this, the distribution of the offices will satisfy the requirement for some kind of ethnic balancing.

    If a Christian senator from the North, especially from the Northcentral, is picked as Senate President, would it assuage the feeling of the Southeast and the Southsouth Christians? It is doubtful. It may lead to a clash of ethnicity and religion. The unity of political Christians is a farce.

    The next question is: which part of the Southern zone – the Southeast or the Southsouth – should fill the slot? This may lead to another political permutation. The Southeast APC tried frantically to contribute to the party’s electoral victory during the presidential election, but its effort was futile. Yet, it tried to regain strength during the governorship and House of Assembly polls in the region. In the APC-controlled Imo State, the party won 25 of the 27 state legislative seats. In Ebonyi, it installed an additional governor, three senators, including Governor Dave Umahi, and won majority in the House of Assembly.

    These feats never dwarfed the performance of APC in neighbouring Southsouth where the party installed two senators in Edo, Senator Godswill Akpabio in Akwa Ibom, a senator in Delta, a governor in Cross River and the overwhelming votes at presidential election in Rivers.

    If the Senate President is zoned to the Southeast or Southsouth, then, the House Speaker should go to the North, comprising the Northwest with seven states and the Northcentral with six states.

    If the North will retain the Senate President, then, the Speaker will be retained by the South. In that wise, the Southwest should be excluded, being the base of the President-elect.

    Vocal voices from the Northwest keep reminding everyone that the APC got the highest number of votes from the region. Therefore, their demand for either of the two positions seems to have a justification. The claim that a Muslim Senate President from the North is impossible does not hold water. Majority of Northwesterners who voted for APC were Muslims.

    It is better to resolve the zoning hurdle by announcing a comprehensive and all-encompassing conventional zoning formula at the level of National Caucus of the party. The way to go about it is to distribute the remaining top three positions of the Senate President, the Speaker and the Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF) to three zones, excluding the three zones that have produced the President, the Vice President and the APC national chairman. This will be in tandem with the old PDP formula of zoning the six positions to six different zones.

    Following the equitable distribution of positions in the party, other principal offices of the National Assembly could also be shared, with the additional promise to also equitably distribute ministerial appointments among the six regions or the 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT).

    While zoning is essential, it should be borne in mind that the option is not superior to constitutional provisions which allow any member from all the zones to declare interest. What the party should do is to appeal, persuade and convince the contestants to toe the party line and elevate group interest over personal agenda.

    But, beyond zoning is the factor of competence. A competent Senate President will be in a position to drive the Upper Chamber to make law for the resolution of challenges confronting the country. At a time President Muhammadu Buhari has set the ball rolling for restructuring and devolution of power, Nigeria looks forward to the choice of a reform-driven chairman of the National Assembly who will be disposed to the resolution of the lingering National Question.

    Related to the factor of competence is credibility. The next Chairman of the National Assembly should be a man of honour and integrity. He should be without blemish, to a large extent. He should be someone with a record of firm loyalty to the party, the constitution and the country.

    The mismanagement of the contest in the past was costly. The Executive and Legislature never enjoyed harmony but were locked in antithetical relationship; they were always at loggerheads, to the extent that the last budget presentation by the president during his first time was almost disrupted by aggrieved legislators.

    A repeat of the 2015 scenario, where, in desperation, APC lawmakers sought an unauthorised alliance with the opposition, thereby conceding the Deputy Senate President to the PDP, should be avoided.

    The ruling party should learn from past mistakes and put its house in order. All the contenders need to imbibe the spirit of sportsmanship: let the winners be magnanimous in victory and the losers gallant in defeat.

    The incoming dispensation should be a commendable departure from past experiences which largely hallmarked the fight over ego and self-centredness in place of sacrifices for national interests and progress.

    The leadership of the 10th National Assembly should practicalise the zeal for national healing and the rebirth of a more progressive administration. This way, all citizens, irrespective of ethnic, religious, and political affiliations, will be proud to call this country their fatherland. This is the summation of the yearnings of Nigerians, young and old. The calibre of people who preside over both chambers of this arm of government should drive this renewed hope for a new Nigeria.

  • Obasanjo’s electoral legacies

    Obasanjo’s electoral legacies

    THE Ebora Owu is on the prowl again. He is firing salvos from right, left, and centre. He has sharpened his arrows, aiming at hitting his target. But this time around, he missed the point.

    Since the day after the last presidential election, it appeared the Ota farmer had not been at ease with the gradual process of the poll. Of all Nigerians – and even hundreds of global polls observers – he was the first to find fault with the conduct of the election. The former leader did not merely criticise the process of the conduct but immediately called for the cancellation of the entire poll. The whole country was taken aback by Obasanjo’s rash pronouncement.

    It became evident that he had a mindset, and a target. Unlike all other former leaders, he had publicly told the world his choice of candidate, and Nigerians had accorded him the honour for his choice. But his hasty pronouncement on the outcome of the poll did not only unsettle most Nigerians, it put a question mark on Obasanjo’s position on the Nigerian project. Does the former President have a personal agenda he wants to foist upon over 200 million citizens?

    Why attempt to throw away the baby with the bath water? What was Obasanjo’s target? Perhaps his target was a frontline contender in the race to Aso Rock who the former leader did not like.

    But the apparent target had described himself to his political foes as ‘Dagunro,’ a leafy vegetable the Yoruba avoid with trepid phobia because of its puissant poison. In the last electioneering, the contender had transmogrified from ‘tete,’ the scrumptious vegetable and house wives’ delight, into venomous edible.

    Obasanjo’s call for another election annulment was a wakeup call to wary Nigerians. It signposted the slippery path the nation took some thirty years ago, no thanks to those who foisted an inglorious interim government on Nigeria in the aftermath of the June 12, 1993 presidential poll, the nation’s freest and fairest election.

    Gone are the days when the words of the Lords of Manor were law. It is now more difficult to manipulate public opinion to suit personal ends. Unknown to the proponents of an annulment, they are peddling a fading influence.

    For General Obasanjo, it is obvious he savours being constantly in the news since his blissful retirement. But remaining in the limelight by stoking the flames of controversy should not be the pastime of a national leader. This is why his messages are now being taken with caution. How can those who brought Nigeria to this sorry state claim to have answers to the problems they created while in power?

    While credible election observers have, in their reports, adjudged the February 25 presidential election to be free and fair, Obasanjo has disagreed with the popular verdict.

    In the last one month, he has sought to discredit the outcome of the exercise, which clearly did not favour his preferred candidate. His position is that the poll fell below expectation; in particular, it never met his personal standard.

    At every public function, the former leader has tried to whip up sentiments and play to the gallery. But the resolution of the current political issue is beyond his control. In vain, he insists on the cancellation of the election result when Nigeria is already warming up for the May 29 inauguration. It is an exercise in futility.

    The reasons for his line of thought are not far-fetched. Since he left power in 2007, Obasanjo has always tried to position himself as a godfather of sort. He believes he towers above everyone else in the polity. But many do not see him as a role model, despite being a military Head of State for three years and civilian president for eight years.

    Obasanjo had somewhat insisted that his successors must be his product, cast in his own image, and should be ready to take his instructions.

    As far as this year’s poll is concerned, OBJ, as fondly called by admirers, is not a happy man. Two democrats, who had in the past challenged him to a duel, dominated the election. Little did he guess that one of them would soon preside over the Council of State, of which he is a member, in his lifetime.

    Obasanjo’s erstwhile deputy, former Vice President Atiku Abubakar of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), fell out with him, shortly after they won their second term election in 2003. The Turakin Adamawa was subsequently rendered redundant for the last four years of the administration. To abort his presidential bid, his big boss erected roadblocks on his path. Atiku challenged the impediments in court. Six times he won.

    In his book, titled: My Watch, Obasanjo sought to liquidate his deputy but without success. He is a soldier. Yet, the best of military tricks may not succeed in a civilian dispensation where tyranny and dictatorship simmer down for constituionality. He has guns, but politically, they are in a state of misfire. It is no wonder the former leader has resorted to undemocratic tactics.

    He embraced letter writing as pastime and tool for pulling down his perceived enemies. In doing so, he tries, on some occasions, to gauge public opinion. Generally, his letters, aimed at stopping or de-marketing targeted presidential candidates, only throw up avoidable controversies with obvious bile.

    Obasanjo’s second headache is President-elect Bola Tinubu, the standard bearer of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC).

    For eight years, OBJ mounted a virulent attack on Tinubu of Lagos without justification. It was not new. In his controversial book, titled: Not My Will, the General exhibited the trait of someone who had an axe to grind with the revered former Western Region Premier, the great Obafemi Awolowo.

    Former Governor Tinubu’s offence, among others, included the creation of additional local council development areas (LCDAs) in the Centre of Excellence through the House of Assembly for ease of administration at the grassroots; the Eron power project; and insistence on federal principle for the purpose of unity in diversity.

    The councils were never listed in the constitution by the Obasanjo-led Federal Government. Nevertheless, they have continued to function, to the General’s surprise. What the Lagos experience has shown is that the distant Federal Government should not dabble into such local matters. They are within the jurisdiction of states.

    Also, the state’s public-private initiative on power was frustrated. If it had survived, epileptic power supply would have drastically reduced. Many states would have copied the Lagos model.

    But President Obasanjo, who did not want to examine the merits in Tinubu’s projects, turned the heat on Lagos. The allocations to the councils were withheld for more than three years.

    Necessity, they say, is the mother of invention. The tough times made Tinubu to adorn his thinking cap. The result was creative financial engineering. Under the former governor, Lagos witnessed giant strides which puzzled other states that received full allocations.

    Ahead of 2003, Obasanjo came up with a trick, urging Southwest governors to collaborate with him. Tinubu deliberately played along while at the same time fortifying his base. When the political earthquake swept across the Southwest, only the then Lagos governor survived the onslaught. Tinubu became the last man standing, to the chagrin of OBJ. Today, the General sees Tinubu as his rival in Yoruba land. Now, he ultimately rivals him in fame and stature at the national level.

    Since Atiku and Tinubu can never be puppets, Obasanjo turned towards another direction. OBJ’s bet is the Labour Party (LP) candidate, Peter Obi, a presidential upstart leaning on the pillars of ethnicity and religion; a contender who could not fly despite the endless propaganda in the social media by his “Obidients” that operated outside the structure-less LP.

    Since Obi was not declared winner, Obasanjo believes that the poll was null and void, and a new election should be held. While other statesmen genuinely advised those who were dissatisfied with the results to go to court, OBJ recommended cancellation. It was akin to the occasions when the Ekerin Egba and Balogun Owu tore the sheet of paper when he wanted to make way for his preferred candidate for the prestigious stool of Olowu of Owu.

    After elections, the Nigerian law permits the aggrieved to seek redress. Instead of advising his anointed candidate to take the legal route, Obi and his supporters, who are in the minority, have been threatening the majority who made their choice on February 25.

    The desperation of the LP crowd is worrisome.

    Obasanjo has a strange bedfellow in the unfolding drama. Afenifere’s deputy leader, Chief Ayo Adebanjo, an Awoist who has forgotten the late Chief Awolowo’s advice to his followers at the 1982 Yola conference of the defunct Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN) to distance themselves from the enemy, appears to be on the same eccentric position with OBJ.

    When the precious advice of the late sage was ignored back then, tragedy had hit the Awoist camp. In this dispensation, the two disciples who disobeyed the wise counsel of the indomitable leader suffered the consequences. Both Chief Bola Ige and Chief Sunday Afolabi who, against Awo’s advice, joined Obasanjo’s government, never returned alive.

    What legacy of credible election did President Obasanjo leave behind? It is a legacy of electoral terrorism. The 2007 poll, which was conducted by erstwhile INEC Chairman, Prof. Maurice Iwu, remains the worst in the history of the country. It was the best example of how not to conduct an election. Winners became losers and losers received certificates of returns.

    Obasanjo stood on the way of free and fair election when he described the poll as a war; a do-or-die affair. There was uproar in Ekiti, Ondo, Osun, Edo, Kogi and Anambra states. That is why off-season governorship elections are held in those days till today.

    The chief beneficiary of the rot at the national level was the late President Umaru Yar’Adua, who humbly confessed that he rode to power on the back of a flawed election. Immediately, he tried to clear the mess by setting up the Uwais Electoral Reforms Panel to dissect the problems and make recommendations.

    Obasanjo and his co-travellers need to embrace the reality. The presidential election has been won and lost. The battle has shifted from the ballot box to the court. Whatever the court says will be final.

    Those who despise the constitutional path of honour for our electoral system would be given a long chapter in our history book as purveyors of national chaos. Most Nigerians would not accord such people the glory to achieve their selfish aims.

  • Daydreaming about an interim government

    Daydreaming about an interim government

    There is desperation in the polity. The mentality of most politicians has been the same: “If it is not me, it should not be another person.”; “If it is not the person I supported, the winner should forfeit his mandate.”

    Such is the cogitative level of anti-democratic elements pushing vigorously for an interim government in our dear country, following a transparent and credible presidential election that has produced a clear winner.

    The agitation for such a government is akin to a coup d’état or an unconstitutional change of government. It is alien to the 1999 Constitution. It is not a problem-solving device. It is outdated. It is old-fashioned. It lacks basis. It is reckless. It is a highly inflammatory plot. It is not in national interest. It is the proposal of some desperados looking for the realisation of their diabolical entry into power for personal aggrandizement. 

    An election is a festival of choice, change and affirmation of leadership. There is no alternative to voting in democracy. Votes are counted and protected. The results are announced by the umpire. It is up to candidates and political parties to accept or reject the outcome.

    The Electoral Act makes provisions for ventilation of electoral grievances. Any other measure outside the legal framework is a nullity, a sheer waste of time and effort.

    Pompous contestants have been jolted out of their delusion. Ethnic tricks, religious manipulations and social media pranks have failed to achieve the intended goals. There is illusion of hope, followed by dejection. Politically, there is gnashing of teeth. The ballot box judgment was profound. It has separated contenders from pretenders, the strong from the weak, and the strategist from the garrulous.

    After months of bravado, they failed to secure the majority vote. Their morale is understandably at the lowest ebb. The genesis of their electoral misfortune is their lack of realistic self-appraisal. They pushed themselves on the pedestal they lacked the wherewithal to stand on. In their delusion, they overrated their political value to the electorate. While they relied on propaganda and undemocratic channels to access power, the focused one continuously built avenues that expanded the frontiers of trust, commitment, and reliability.

    It is, therefore, clear that the overinflated ego has now been deflated due to the huge gap between their expectations and reality. In post-election period, they visit their frustration on the victor. Their gimmick is to regress to propaganda, peddle lies and discredit a poll that has been adjudged credible by foreign and local election observers.

    The 2023 presidential election made all the difference. It was a wide departure from previous polls. Mighty men of power fell in their states. There was a sort of electoral revolution. But, while the sore losers were happy with the in-roads they had made, they lack the courage to accept that they never really measured up.

    Put succinctly, their votes, more or less, were regional-based. Having set for themselves unrealistic political goals, they could not come to terms with their abysmal failure. They indulge in evading reality and whipping up sentiments.

    Their first attempt at waging a post-election war collapsed. They demonstrated at INEC head office in Abuja, threatening fire and brimstone. But, they could no longer manipulate public opinion about the poll. How can the minority threaten the majority? Can the strong bow before the weak? Can noise-making pave the way for a reverberating victory? Is power served a la carte?

    It takes courage and humility to accept one’s fate and concede glaring defeat. It is the baseline for political maturity. It is not the number of years in politics that matters. It is adherence to the constitution and rules of decency that constitute the making of a mature leader.

    After a contest, the only window of opportunity for further contest is the court. However, in the ensuing drama, two losers are laying claim to the mandate of the winner. This is the puzzle that the discerning cannot discountenance. They are in court, after their brief parley and suspicious post-election romance. This is the lawful thing to do; the court, being the final arbiter. Also, if overzealous supporters storm the streets for protests, no law is violated.

    But when they press for a shortcut to power through an unelected interim gang-up, the rational can perceive an obvious invitation to chaos. It will surely lead to nowhere. It is a step being taken backwardness. But it is still avoidable, if those concerned retrace their missteps.

    Many have dismissed it as a rumour, a mere speculation, a figment of hyperactive imagination. But, early this week, the Department of State Services (DFSS) said the plot was real.

    Certain misguided elements, as hinted by DSS, are planning to intensify sponsored mass protests, sometimes violent, to prevent orderly transfer of power, derail democracy and retard national development by calling for an amoebic government.

    Indeed, as their history shows, those urging them to go through the dubious route are obsessive with the interim regime, having orchestrated one 30 years ago after the criminal annulment of the most credible June 12, 1993 presidential election won by the late business mogul, Chief Moshood Kasimaawo Olawale (MKO) Abiola of the defunct Social Democratic Party (SDP).

    Then, the proposal by few political principals and principalities in Nigeria was foisted on the bewildered polity. Nigerians attempted to resist but rather feebly.

    At that time, the citizens were pursuing two objectives – an end to military rule and the installation of a democratic government.

    The key to the realisation of the motives was election. The result of the election was arrested by the military ruler who wanted to extend his inglorious rule. Having failed, he had to step aside in ignominy. He was forced out by Nigerians.

    His departure did not pave the way for the winner to be sworn it. Thus, an interim government was imposed on the country. It was immediately rationalised as the only way out of the June 12 debacle. Those who insisted on the arrangement said it was painful, but understandable.

    The difference between 1993 and 2023 is that while the result of the 1993 was annulled, the 2023 result produced a President-elect.

    Three months after the ING came on board, a courageous judge, Justice Dolapo Akinsanya, dismantled the strange structure, describing it as interim contraption. There was confusion. The illegal government was shoved aside by the military without firing a shot.

    Even, before its demise, the ING was lifeless, visionless, dull and problematic, and uninspiring. It was the greatest fraud of the aborted Third Republic. It was designed to fail by the masterminds and their collaborators – military lackeys and confederate.

    Is it not confounding, therefore, that bad losers are pushing for the exhumation of a failed idea in a bid to derail popular rule in the Fourth Republic?

    There are other puzzles: what are the likely elements of the interim administration being proposed in hush tones? Would it affect only the structure of the Executive organ of government or extend to the National Assembly?

    Nigerians have voted for a President-elect to run their affairs for four years. What will now happen to the people’s mandate? What will happen to the votes cast on February 25?

    What is the duration of the inexplicable interim dictatorship? What law would be in operation during the interim period? What would be the scope of its assignment? Who will head it? Can it pass the test of legality and legitimacy?

    A lot of financial and emotional investment has been sunk into the electioneering by those angling for huge returns on their political labour at the expense of the nation. Therefore, they cannot imagine or anticipate a May 29 when the baton of leadership will pass from President Muhammadu Buhari to President-elect Bola Tinubu, the most criticised politician in Nigeria; their more qualified rival.

    But, do they have an alternative now?

    The solution: away with the evil plot. Let the legal process run its full course.

    This is better than calling for an interim government that is unknown to law. Nigerians have spoken with their votes and elected their President to run the affairs of the country. Anything else is an aberration that will collapse on the heads of those proposing it.

  • Southwest: Significance of 1951 and 2023

    Southwest: Significance of 1951 and 2023

    GOVERNOR Babajide Sanwo-Olu has achieved for Lagos State what the late Premier of defunct Western Region, Chief Obafemi Awolowo, achieved for the Yoruba 72 years ago.

    Politically speaking, the governor has protected the interest of Lagos the same way Awo protected the interest of the entire Southwest in the last years of colonialism.

    In 1951, Nigeria was gazing at independence. Under the Macpherson Constitution, a pseudo-autonomy was granted to the three regions to elect representatives at the Houses of Assembly under the Westminster model.

    The late Dr. Nnamidi Azikiwe, a vocal journalist, nationalist and politician, was elected by Lagosians to represent Surulere/Mainland Constituency in the Western Regional House of Assembly. The Yoruba of Lagos bestowed the honour on him as a lieutenant of the departed father of nationalism and Lagos political icon, Herbert Macauley, though Zik was an Ibo.

    Zik had many admirers and supporters in Yoruba land. Prominent among them were Chief Theophilus Benson, Chief Adeniran Ogunsanya, Chief Odeleye Fadahunsi, Chief Babatunde Olowofoyeku, Chief Olu Akinfosile, Alhaji Ishawu Adio Sanni (I.A.S)  Adewale (The Boy Is Good), Ibiyinka Olorunnimbe, Adeleke Adedoyin, H.P. Adebola and the strongman of Ibadan politics, Adegoke Adelabu.

    Many Yoruba youths adored Zik. They flooded the Zikist Movement, eager to drink from his fountain of knowledge.

    So hugely popular was Zik that he aspired to become the Leader of Government Business/ Premier at Ibadan. But there was a big challenge.

    In the North, Sir Ahmadu Bello (Sardauna of Sokoto) and leader of the Northern Peoples Congress (NPC) was set to become the Leader of Government Business.

    Also, Eyo Ita Eyo from the Eastern Region had become the Leader of Government Business in the Eastern Region.

    The Yoruba in NCNC and Action Group (AG) were agitated in those days of primordial sentiments. Their belief was that since the Northern Region had produced a Hausa/Fulani Premier for the region and someone from a Southeastern ethnic group had assumed the reins in the Eastern Region, the Western Region should produce a Yoruba as Premier.

    Despite the admiration for Zik, his followers, especially in Yoruba land, were realistic. They, therefore, pleaded with him to nominate a Yoruba lawmaker as Leader of Government Business, in the interest of national ethnic balancing. Adelabu and Adisa Akinloye were suggested since their party or association, Ibadan Mabolaje, tended to have sympathy for the NCNC.

     But Zik, the NCNC leader and Western Regional parliamentarian, refused, in utter insensitivity to the strong ethnic factor.

     His rigidity provided an opportunity for the AG leader, Awo, who was also an elected member from Remo, to woo the undecided legislators to team up with his party to secure a majority in the House.

     Back then, majority of parliamentarians were elected into the House on the platforms of township associations. For example, Oduola Osuntokun, vice principal of Christian School, Ado-Ekiti  and a fan of Zik, was sponsored by Ekiti Descendants Association, led by High Chief Johnson Anisulowo. Also, the member from Ondo, F. O. Awosika, ran on the platform of Ondo Improvement Union.

    The AG reached out to all of them. Five of the Ibadan Peoples Party legislators – Akinloye, Daniel Akinbiyi (later Olubadan of Ibadan), Moyosore Aboderin, Akinyemi and S. O. Lanlehin – queued behind Awo in the Parliament; only Adelabu refused to team up with the AG leader.

     When the British Speaker of the Western Regional House asked the two parties to exhibit their numerical strength on the floor, AG carried the day and Awo became the Leader of Government Business and, later, the Premier.

    A section of non-Yoruba Southern elements bragged that the Western Region was for all, irrespective of ethnic backgrounds of the residents. The indomitable Awo disagreed. He was labelled a tribal bigot. But he secured for his ethnic group a place under the sun, erecting the foundation of the Western Region on a strong pillar through his path-finding, developmental policies and programmes, which made the region a model in Africa.

    The fact of authentic history, which Awo left as an instruction, guidance and legacy, was borne out of two experiences.

    The first was the collective Yoruba reaction to the boasting that the god of the Igbo had predestined the children of the Southeasterners to dominate the people of Africa.

    The 1951 battle for supremacy inside the hallowed chambers at Ibadan reflected the push for the realisation of Zik’s dream for domination of political power and the ultimate resistance to subjugation by the natives.

    Yet, earlier, Awo, who had opted for federalism as far back as 1947, as documented in his book, titled: Path to Nigeria’s Freedom, as against Zik’s inexplicable disposition towards unitarianism before he later reluctantly changed his mind, had offered a veritable enlightenment on the sheer value of cultural nationalism, identity protection and unity in diversity.

    With a benefit of hindsight, he emphasised the utility, unity and oneness of a nation as a component unit in a federation of nation-state, with his acclaimed heroic and patriotic statement that in a diverse country like Nigeria, whoever aspired to be a good citizen of Nigeria must, and using himself as an example, first of all, be a good indigene of Ikenne, then Remo, Yoruba/Western Region, and finally, Nigeria.

    The step Awo took in 1951 paid off. If he had not assumed the reins as Premier, how would an Igbo-born Premier at Ibadan understand the challenges, needs, yearnings and of the people of Awori, Oyo, Egba, Ijebu, Remo, Ekiti, Akoko, Ilaje, Ijesa, Agbadarigi, Itsekiri, among others, for development?

    It, therefore, meant that Liberty Stadium, Ikeja industrial estate, farm settlements, schools, Cocoa House, free education programme and first television in Africa would not have happened.

    Instructively, after Zik relocated to the Eastern Region where he displaced Eyo Ita as Leader of Government Business, he could not sustain free education in the region beyond two years.

    The 2023 governorship battle in Lagos State partly mirrored the 1951 struggle. The same mistake was averted. Even, in the distant pre-colonial days, Orowusi (Baale of Ibadan), whom Rev. Samuel Johnson described as a “far-seeing man” and a leader with sound judgment, had implored the natives to rely more on the children of the soil for governance than strangers. He must have come to the reality that strangers may not have any emotional attachment to the land beyond the economic benefits they were targeting. The Yoruba capture the situation in two popular proverbs: “Igi da, eye fo” (The perching bird vamooses when the tree snaps) and “Ti idi ba baje, t’onidi lo nda.” (When the genitalia is diseased, the person concerned bears the brunt alone).

    Reminiscent of the pre-First Republic era, few men of irritable political temper recently conspired, for selfish reasons, to sell Lagos, unarguably Southwest’s fortress, to strangers, out of bile, ego and disdain for a colossus they cannot match, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu.

    They built castles in the air, projecting an upstart from the blue, concocting falsehoods and sharpening an ethnic arrow, in preparation for an electoral war against indigenes on their God-given land.

    They came up, once again, with the vexatious slogan: ‘Lagos is no man’s land.’ In fact, they invented a more corrosive anthem, which they chorused: ‘We own Lagos.’ Like Awo of 1951, Sanwo-Olu disagreed. Again, truth prevailed and the desperados have been gaping in the dark with their tails dangling between their shapeless legs.

    But the lessons of this season’s political braggadocio should remain instructive. If the owners of the house sleep on guard, if the inheritors of invaluable assets fail to protect them, strangers will stage an invasion and freeborn would be subjected to the status of slaves on their soil.

    The attempts to snatch the Centre of Excellence by envious, covetous settlers are more likely to continue through various designs, as the years past have shown. It is up to the land owners to stave off the political invaders to save the land from further incursions.

  • Battle for Lagos (2)

    Battle for Lagos (2)

    TODAY is another Election Day in 28 states across Nigeria. Of the 36 states of the federation, the following states will not go to the poll to elect new governors. They are: Anambra, Bayelsa, Edo, Ekiti, Imo, Kogi, Osun and Ondo.

    They have become states with off-season elections. The development arose from protracted disputes over the winners of governorship elections in past polls.

    After weeks of rigorous electioneering, campaigns have ended. Governorship and Houses of Assembly candidates are now on popularity scale. There are the contenders, and there are the pretenders. This has thrown up so much anxiety and suspense among the candidates and their supporters. Not many of the first-term governors can conveniently go to sleep with assured victory today.

    The situation is even dicier for freshers. It is only in states where a political party is very popular that its candidate can exude the confidence of victory.

    In few hours, the contest will be over. The judgment of the people will manifest in the results of the polls. The verdict will demarcate the political class into winners and losers. But this is the beauty of democracy.

    In Lagos State, the outcome of today’s governorship election will determine the direction the electorate has chosen for the state: progress or regress. If they vote wisely, the future of the state will be secured. But if they vote otherwise, the multiplier effects will negatively affect the other five Southwest states and beyond. The impact of wrong choice will even be felt in the Yoruba-speaking states of Kwara and Kogi.

    Lagos, a Yoruba state, is the Southwest’s fortress and jewel. This is why the regional attention is on the Centre of Excellence.

    How was the battle fought, won, and lost in the Lagos of old?

    Politics, back then, was not an occupation. It was a vocation. The actors had a sense of community. They resided with the masses. Wealth and material possessions were not strong factors.

    Ideology was in vogue. Only men of honour and integrity were given their parties’ tickets. The conditions for eligibility included community participation, service to the party, hierarchy and loyalty to the platform.

    Primaries were not among the basic issues with the parties of yesteryears. The platforms were guarded jealously by their leaderships. Party leaders were disposed to selection by consensus. The fear of hijack by moneybags was prevalent. There were party supremacy and discipline. It was an era characterised by the predominance of the party caucus.

    Also, performance was key. Campaign promises were made to be fulfilled. Parties were sustained by dues paid by members and supporters.

    Rigging was a core issue in manual voting and collation of results, back in the day. It often led to large-scale violence, killings and destruction of properties.

    In the pre-independence era and during the First Republic, the dominant political parties lacked national outlook. Voting was influenced by ethnicity, religion and primordial sentiments in varying degrees.

    The main element of regional politics was the election into the Western Regional House of Assembly under the Westminster model. From there, the Leader of Government Business, and later, the Premier, was chosen from the party that won the majority seats in the Parliament. The inaugural partisan battle was between Action Group (AG), led by the late sage, Chief Obafemi Awolowo, and the National Council of Nigerian Citizens (NCNC), led by Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe.

    Both were elected into the regional assembly at Ibadan. Since AG commanded the majority, Awo became Premier. Naturally, Zik became the Leader of Opposition. Irked by the outcome, he declined to play the role and hurriedly left for the Eastern Region to displace Prof. Eyo Ita Eyo as Leader of Government Business, yielding his position at Ibadan to Chief Adegoke Adelabu, fondly called Penkelemeesi (the city’s dialectical pronunciation of “Peculiar Mess”).

    Another contest that shook Western Region was the one between Chief Samuel Akintola, the rejected Premier, and Chief Dauda Adegbenro, who was Premier for just one day. Leaning on federal might, Akintola was restored as Premier after the six-month emergency period.

    The Parliamentary system being practiced then ran into turbulence. The chaotic regional election in the “Wild Wild West” made the military, which also coveted power, to sack civilian authorities. The region thus went up in flames. The volatile politics of the Western Region took its toll on every other thing in the region and far beyond.

    For another 13 years, the military held sway. When democracy was restored in 1979 under the presidential system, Lagos elected a new government. The battle was not tough. Alhaji Lateef Jakande of the defunct Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN) defeated Chief Adeniran Ogunsanya of the Nigerian Peoples Party (NPP) and Prince Sultan Ladega Adeniji-Adele of the National Party of Nigeria (NPN).

    In 1983, Jakande was re-elected, defeating Alhaji Abdulakeem Abdulraheem of the NPN. Three months into the second term, soldiers came back and displaced legitimate democratic authorities.

    In the Third Republic, Nigeria experimented with a two-party system during the transition programme midwifed by the military regime. Chief Yomi Edu, who ran on the platform of the defunct Social Democratic Party (SDP), was defeated by the less politically popular Chief Michael Otedola of the National Republican Convention (NRC). The SDP went to the poll as a divided platform. The Jakande group (Ase) was at loggerheads with Primrose, led Chief Dapo Sarumi. The party won majority seats in the House of Assembly. But it crashed during the governorship poll.

    Reminiscent of 1966 and 1983, the military later sacked the governors during the interim contraption headed by the late Chief Ernest Shonekan.

    From 1999 to date, Nigeria has enjoyed political stability. Asiwaju Bola Tinubu of Action for Democracy (AD) defeated Sarumi of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). In 2003, he defeated the late Funso Williams, also of the PDP.

    In 2007, Tinubu handed over to Babatunde Fashola (SAN) of the Action Congress (AC), who defeated Senator MusiliuObanikoro of PDP, Jimi Agbaje of the Democratic Peoples Alliance (DPA), and Olufemi Pedro of the Labour Party. On poll day, the candidate of the All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP), resurfaced as the AC agent at the INEC office.

    In 2011, Fashola retained power on the platform of the Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN). His rivals were Dr. Ade Dosunmu of PDP and Chief J. K. Randle of the Social Democratic Mega Party (SDMP).

    Fashola handed over power in 2015 to Akinwunmi Ambode of the All Progressives Congress (APC). He defeated Agbaje. Four years later, Babajide Sanwo-Olu of APC, who succeeded Ambode, also defeated the eminent pharmacist on the platform of the PDP.

    In today’s poll, three candidates – Sanwo-Olu of the ruling APC; Gbadebo Rhodes-Vivour of the Labour Party (LP); and Jide Adediran (Jandor) of the PDP – are locking horns. The exercise has generated much interest. Religion, as a factor, is a leveller. But there is a resurgence of ethnic nationalism.

    Previous elections in Lagos were won by progressive parties. Poll outcomes, unlike now, could be easily predicted. It is lamentable these days that governors who have performed excellently are not insulated from threats of displacement. It is dangerous to sleep on guard.

    In whatever circumstance, it has always been painful to lose an election in Nigeria. Losers suddenly become liabilities, if not lepers. The agony of defeat exacerbates dejection and the resort to litigation. A bad blood is generated. The pain lingers. This is why the battle often shifts from the ballot box to the court.

    The investment is enormous. The presidential system, unlike the parliamentary model, is very expensive.

    How can the antics of bad losers, or their post-election venom be curtailed?

    There are two solutions: politics should not be monetised, and political actors, particularly candidates, should demonstrate maturity.

    For Lagos, today’s poll will be highly interesting, given the factors that new entrants, especially, have introduced into the politics of the state. The intrigues that certain interests brought into this year’s electioneering will remain indelible in the anal of the state’s political history. For a very long time, indigenes of this State of Aquatic Splendour will remain vigilant to the antics of some political jobbers and their crowd of opportunists who have been scheming to pocket the resources of the state for personal gains rather than for the collective progress that has made the state the envy of all and one of the strongest economies in Africa. 

    As goes the saying, the price of liberty is eternal vigilance. This should be the motto of the progressives as Lagosians go to the poll today.

  • Battle for Lagos

    Battle for Lagos

    All Nigerians – Yoruba, Igbo, Hausa/Fulani, and indeed, other 246 ethnic groups – covert Lagos, the proverbial land flowing with milk and honey.

    That has been the situation from time immemorial. The state, which has 75 per cent water and 25 per cent land, attracts people from far and near seeking real and imaginary golden fleece. The ocean economy has been the potent attraction.

    Adventurous Europeans, who thought Lokoja and Calabar were safe havens, changed their minds when they got to the Lago de Kuramo. Since their arrival for commerce, colonialisation and politics, they have not really left. When the capital was relocated to Abuja, their envoys had to relocate to the new Federal Capital Territory (FCT) but retain a nostalgic feeling for the State of Aquatic Splendour.

    It appeared every nation, even before the nation-state of Nigeria was christened by Flora, wife of Lord Fredrick Lugard, wanted a piece of cake from the Lagoon.

    So it was in the pre-colonial and colonial days. Trade was booming in coastal Lagos. People from the hinterland were migrating to take advantage of trading activities. Lagosians were swimming in the pool of profit. Therefore, Ijebu, Remo and Egba grew with envy. They asked: How can we also savour prosperity by exploiting the Lagos advantage?

    The Awujale of Ijebu land, monarch of another enterprising and trading sub-Yoruba group, devised a business method. Tolls were erected, targeting travellers from Kwara, Kogi, Ekiti, Akoko, Ijesa and the combatant people of Ibadan, an Oyo Army camp. You dared the Ijebu tax collectors to your peril. Ibadan warriors suffered from blockage at the Ijebu boundary towns when they desperately needed ‘arms and a munitions’ to prosecute the Ekiti Parapo wars.

    Emulating their rivals, rulers of Egba confederation also devised a similar method, in a bid to enjoy the opportunity offered by Lagos. They erected their toll at Isheri, conscious of the geographical continuity between their boundary and Ikorodu, then a Remo town.

    Ekiti/Ijesa warriors, led by Obanla Ogedengbe and Prince Fabunmi, also indirectly leaned on their prosperous kith and kin resident in Lagos, particularly Gugere and Haastrup, who later became Owa of Ijesa land, for supply of weapons of war, when Ibadan forces turned the heat on them on the battlefield.

    Earlier, rulers of Benin Kingdom had invaded Lagos with their forces, led by Ashipa. Was Ashipa an Awori or Bini? It is up to historians. After him came King Ado and, subse quently, his descendants have continued to rule Lagos, indisputably a core Yoruba town.

    As Lagos became the capital of colonial Nigeria under the British interlopers, more attention shifted to the city. It became the seat of government and economic nerve centre. The sheer bureaucracy meant limitless job opportunities. Schools sprang up. Clinics were established. The story was told of how the celebrated Ibadan merchant, who normally came monthly to Lagos for medical treatment, decided to build a house in Lagos, just because of easy access to a hospital.

    Army regiment and police constabulary were established and people trekked from remote areas for days for recruitment. Then came Western civilisation in various forms.

    The oceanic advantage meant a business boom. Population grew. Many who migrated, particularly Hausa, Nupe, Igbo and many others from Yoruba sub-ethnic groups, never returned home. They lived with indigenous Lagosians in harmony.

    Early signs of ethnic tension started in the prime city in the late 1930s and early 1940s. That was during the nationalist agitations and scramble for relevance and struggle for supremacy among political parties.

    Two factors were responsible. Nnamdi Azikiwe’s statement that the gods had destined the Igbo to dominate the children of Africa infuriated other ethnic elite. Also, Zik’s wild criticisms of the Egbe Omo Oduduwa, which was formed by Yoruba leading lights, generated bad blood. No Yoruba ever attacked Ibo State Union in those days.

     The battle shifted to the Nigeria Youth Move ment (NYM), whose leader and member of the Legislative Council, Kofo Abayomi, had resigned to pursue medical studies abroad.

    There were two aspirants for the vacancy in the Legislative Council. Zik supported Samuel Akinsanya, a Yoruba, who later became Odemo of Isara, and Awo backed Ernest Sissei Ikoli, an Ijaw journalist from the old Southeast, who won. A Yoruba supported a Southeasterner while and an Igbo supported a Yoruba. Yet, when Ikoli won, Igbo accused the Yoruba of tribalism.

    The battle graduated to that of premiership in Western Region. Yoruba voted for Zik to go to the House of Assembly at Ibadan. Later, Ebubedike, another Igbo, who later distrusted the House, represented Ajeromi/Ifelodun constituency. Few Yoruba who aspired in the East for elective positions were turned down. But, Ibiyinka Olorunmimbe, H.P Adebola, Adeniran Ogunsanya and Theophilus Benson mobilised for Zik. In those days, many newly elected Yoruba lawmakers contested on the platforms of township associations.

    Sir Ahmadu Bello was going to be premier in the North. Already, Eyo Ita Eyo was Leader of Government Business in the East. Zik and Awo competed for the same position in the West. Awo won because majority of the lawmakers aligned with the Action Group (AG) instead of the National Council of Nigerian Citizens (NCNC), founded by a Yoruba, Herbert Macauley, but later headed by Zik.

    The Igbo cried foul, accusing Awo of tribalism. That was in 1951.

    At that time also, federal parliamentarians were to be selected from the regional legislature. Zik, elected to represent Surulere Constituency, signified his intention. Adeleke Adedoyin signified his bid. Zik rushed to Sagamu, urging Oba Christopher Adedoyin, the Akarigbo of Remo land, to prevail on his son to step down. The monarch asked Zik: “Is the position you are talking about good?” Zik answered in the affirmative. Then, the king said: “If it is good, let my son go.” The message from the Kabiyesi was clear: the slot was meant for a native of Yoruba.

    Zik got the gist. He went home, wrestled the position with Eyo and won. He became the Premier of Eastern Region.

    That episode did not deter the Yoruba in Lagos from voting for seven Igbo councillors at the Lagos Town Council. But, the seven refused to vote for Oba Sir Musendiku Buraimoh Adeniji- Adele II, a councillor who vied for the council’s chairman. In his territory, the eminent oba was deprived. He resigned from the council.

    Igbo hostility mounted. In 1960, Zik preferred an alliance with Ahmadu Bello to become ceremonial president to an alliance with Awo that would have made him the prime minister.

    The Yoruba of Lagos love the Igbo. When Prof. Eni Njoku’s tenure as vice chancellor of the University of Lagos (UNILAG) expired, Yoruba youths protested and nearly killed their kinsman, Prof. Saburi Biobaku, the newly appointed vice chancellor. They pressed for Njoku to get a second term. At that time too, Dike, a great Igbo scholar, was vice chancellor of University of Ibadan. Yet, up till now, no Yoruba has served as vice chancellor of the University of Nigeria, Nsukka (UNN).

    When civil war was raging and Nigeria was in turmoil, Yoruba solidarity was not in short supply. Unlike in Port Harcourt, there was no abandoned property in Yoruba land. The people of the Southwest gave Igbo landlords their accumulated rents at the end of the war.

    Yet, political understanding between the Igbo and the Yoruba has remained illusory. In 1979 and 1983, old rivalries were exhumed and the proposed collaboration between Zik and Awo was aborted by Igbo political elite.

    In 1998/’99, the late Chief Bola Ige lamented the long standing suspicion between the two ethnic groups. Other Yoruba leaders also canvassed mutual understanding, submitting that the Igbo dream of producing a president could be actualised if they collaborated with the Yoruba and with and other ethnic groups.

    From 1999 to date, the ruling party and government of Lagos State have extended a hand of fellowship to the Igbo resident in Lagos. The state has extended a hand of political accommodation and tolerance, which the Yoruba do not enjoy in the East. The Igbo, and indeed, the Hausa/Fulani have been part and parcel of governance structures at the state and local government levels. They are absorbed into the civil, teaching, local government and judicial services. There is no iota of discrimination. They own property across the metropolis and enjoy the full compliments of citizenship without let and hindrance.

    It is, therefore, distressing that some Igbo still brag around that they must dominate and displace the indigenes, claiming that Lagos is a no man’s land. What they cannot do in the North without severe consequences is what they indulge in Lagos, whose indigenes, particularly the Awori, have overlooked the excesses of some non-natives for decades but at dire results. The reality of their failure to protect their heritage and indiscriminate sale of ancestral lands and regression to rent collection have now stared them in the face with threatening consequences.

    Lagos is part and parcel of Yoruba land and Southwest’s fortress.

    There is demographic change or shift, but respect for the host by settlers can go a long way in fostering long-lasting relationship. Arrogance and boasting that non-indigenes or strangers can continue to lay claim to imaginary numerical superiority is not just daydreaming but also an invitation of the ignoramus to chaos.

    Lagos, and indeed, Yoruba land should wake up from slumber. They can continue to show accommodation and tolerance. It is their nature. But, they should also be more circumspect and strategic.

    Lagosians and other Yoruba sub-nationalities from the other five Southwest states and their kith and kin from Kwara and Kogi should realise that a siege is being laid to their common pride. They need to come out en mass to vote the performing governor of Lagos State, Babajide Sanwo-Olu of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), on March 18 to stop the  merchants of discord who don’t seem to understand the correlation between peace and pace, disorganisation and disintegration. Lagos would not have arrived at its current state of modernity if it had embraced babel. The jester who said, rather contemptuously, that Lagos was not working should be asked to provide statistics on life in the Centre of Excellence and her ancestral state. Lagos cannot be another showcase for the entrepreneurs of pandemonium.

    By using the ballot to send the invaders back to where they belong, the children of Lagos indigenes will not end up being treated as captives in the future in the land that God has mercifully given them and nurtured by successive administrations of the progressives.