The Nation Newspaper

Category: Saturday

Dramatising and politicising presidency’s reportorial lines

AT the close of a two-day retreat organised for ministers, and at their inauguration a day later, President Muhammadu Buhari told them they must go through the Chief of Staff, Abba Kyari, to schedule meetings with the president, and through the Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF) in matters relating to the Federal Executive Council (FEC). It’s a quaint dichotomy. But the directive, which is merely a restatement of the practice during the president’s first term, triggered an uproar that lasted many days. The president had said: “In terms of coordination, kindly ensure that all submissions for my attention or meeting requests be channelled through the Chief of Staff (CoS), while all Federal Executive Council matters be coordinated through the Secretary to the Government of the Federation.” Repeating the directive a day after he first enunciated it was probably an indication that the president was completely unfazed by public remonstrances.

If the president’s directive indicated no deviation from the practice in his first term, public uproar may in fact be a consequence of their experiences under Mr Kyari whom many regard, rightly or wrongly, as overbearing or paralysingly slow. Indeed, to a significant number of commentators, the CoS, rather than inspire fluidity in the presidency, has created and reinforced gridlock. The president himself did not quarrel with the conclusion that he was slow in his first term, only that the slowness was in fact a sign of his respect for deliberateness. Could the presidency run much faster than it has done, and far more efficiently? Yes, said critics. But that is unlikely to ever happen, they argue, as long as Mr Kyari sieves the president’s actions and policies through his unhurried idiosyncratic administrative style. This may account for the frustration voiced by the public, especially critics impatient with the president’s dawdling style.

But despite the president’s intransigence on how he wants his administration organised, the uproar over his directive finally elicited some trite explanations by his staff, principally by one of his spokesmen, Garba Shehu. Said Mr Shehu: “In the traditional presidential system, it is a primary function of a Chief of Staff, which may vary according to the needs and desires of each President, to supervise key State House Staff, control access to the office and the person of the President, manage communications and information flow and this includes that which binds the relationship with the two other arms of government. During the President’s first term those were the responsibilities of the Chief of Staff, and they remain the same responsibilities today. There is no change.”

He then added: “When President Buhari explained to ministers that they would be expected to communicate with him and arrange scheduling to meet with him primarily via the Chief of Staff, he did so as many of the Buhari’s ministerial appointments are new and cannot therefore be expected to know how matters of liaising with the President operate. This is to stress that access to the President is open to ministers. It is not true that this is denied them in the Second Term. The Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF) on the other hand is responsible for ensuring the effective coordination and monitoring of the implementation of government policies and programmes. All cabinet matters must go through him.”

The criticism against the president’s excessive reliance on Mr Kyari’s sieving function is a total misreading of both the president and the presidential system of government. It is true that the president is at liberty to modify Nigeria’s borrowed American model, but he can legally choose to stick to it. In this case, and in some significant ways, he has largely adhered to that borrowed model. What the public may not be aware of is that while the reigning style in the presidency shows no significant deviation from the American system, not to talk of from the practice in his first term, it nonetheless masks a greater and more disturbing habit of abdicating virtually everything in the presidency to the CoS. It is hard to quarrel with the president’s style, as stultifying as it may seem, but it is less hard to revile it.

Most critics and opposition parties which joined issues with the president over his directive accused the president of abdicating his office to an unelected official, and of displaying insensitivity to the wailings of the public. Nothing will come out of their remonstration. In his first term, the president was similarly accused of abdication. Not only did he ignore the accusations, he mocked his critics with his characteristic inflexibility. It was clear that his presidency was not running as smoothly and efficiently as the country demanded, but there was no moving or stampeding him. After all, in his first term, the accusations came to nothing. The public should have learnt their lessons. And as the president has indicated regarding how the presidency would operate in his second term, it is useless criticising him or pining for a change of style. There will be no change, not even the slightest hint of modification.

By criticising the president, it is clear that the opposition and other critics fail to understand that what is at play is far more fundamental and consequential than they imagine. Policy, administrative acumen, ideology, and philosophy, among other great virtues, are not the president’s forte. It takes someone adequately equipped with these virtues to take charge of his administration, especially in a complex and heterogeneous society. Public expectation may not be misplaced; but they are dealing with a president who lacks surefootedness in modern ideas, especially their complicated interplay, and great administrative and management styles. Coupled with his lethargy, which is probably induced by his constant health challenges, the president has little choice but to cede control to someone else in the complex and challenging issues of modern governance.

If the president is aware of the political paradox of ceding control of his administration to unelected officials, he has not indicated it, and may never indicate it. He will make occasional interventions, and now and again even overrule the CoS and presidency officials, but he will be incapable of doing anything revolutionary in terms of reshuffling staff and remoulding policies whose import escape him and his staff. His ideology will remain obfuscatory, given the manner he has trapped himself in the numbing obscurantism that plagues African governments; and so it will be asking for the impossible to expect the kind of initiatives and changes he and his party have so elegantly but futilely voiced and propagandised in the past few years.

President Buhari is no policy or ideology buff. He will continue to rely on Mr Kyari, egged on of course by the fact that he is doing nothing to offend both the spirit and letter of the constitution as well as the presidential system. The president’s shortcomings would not have been so exposed had Mr Kyari himself displayed the energy needed for the times and demonstrated the alacrity indispensable for a smooth and efficient running of the presidency.

As it is, the country and grieving critics will have to manage both the president and his CoS for the next four years. Mercifully, despite their harshest policies and obtruding style, the Buhari administration will become less and less relevant after the next two years. The country will look forward to another change, either of persons or of political party. And despite his projection of tough measures sometimes, and not being a politician and nationalist of the first rank, the president is unlikely to deeply and substantially affect the direction of politics expected shortly before the end of or after his tenure. In addition, for a government already out of its depth, the stasis that will be created as a result of the president’s excessive formalisation of power and office will make many ministers stand longer in the queue, bite their tongues in order not to create offence, genuflect before the new potentates, or resign to frustration.

But for now, and regardless of whatever anyone thinks, the president will reign somnolent, and his CoS will wield unquantifiable influence over the affairs of the country, even sometimes serving as alternate president. If any revolutionary change is to occur in governance, it will be purely serendipitous rather than by design, or an act of God. However, these fail-safes seldom happen in real life. So, instead of railing against Mr Kyari or abusing the president, thus attracting the labels of terrorists and treasonable felons that the government casually throws at critics, the public should calmly weather the paralysing pace of governance and endure the lack of real or substantial change in policy, including the reshuffling of administration and security chiefs.

August 31, 2019
Leadership, expectations and democracy

Democracy largely is an ideology of great expectations of leadership by the electorate who elected leaders into power in the hope that promises made during campaigns will   be met. When elected leaders meet such expectations or even part of it, the pendulum of   satisfaction   and   fulfillment swings   up and down. When expectations are not met at all there is at first indignation, leading to despondency then the anger of betrayal makes the political arena tense and at times violent. It follows therefore that it is better and even safer that elected leaders keep their election promises so that they can gain the confidence and support of the electorate and keep their power and the perquisites of office deservedly instead of attracting the hostility, distrust and contempt of those who elected them by not keeping their election promises. Today I look at the ways and means that some leaders in some nations are using to ensure that they do not lose the confidence of their people because they elected them into office in good faith to keep election promises and make life better and comfortable for them.

It is always better here that charity should start at home in Nigeria where a new cabinet was sworn in this week with fanfare in the capital in Abuja. We shall examine the level of expectations in the land on the new cabinet more so that the government is a re elected one that has a score card already on its performance in office in the first term from 2015 to 2019. That certainly creates a spring board on the quality of expectations or hope of Nigerians on what is in the offing for them in the next four years.

We go to Italy too where a leader of a coalition government has literally broken the coalition and brought the government down because he feels that the electorate is in tune with his kept promises and he thinks it   would be propitious     for him    to call    for an   election for now so   that   he can   win and do away with his coalition partners. We look at the two leaders of the Western world, namely Britain and the US as they cope with political situations and unique leaders that have divided their stable governments sharply if not wildly in a way that even they are shocked at how and why they got to the messy impasse they have found themselves. Brexit is rocking Britain with Boris Johnson behaving as if he is the Messiah to make Britain great again when EU leaders have told him bluntly that they   are ready for the specter of No Deal   he has used to get into power as PM. Donald Trump, the maverick US President has boasted always that he has kept his campaign promises but now that the economy is shaky he is not fazed as he even joked that as President of the US in these unusual times, he is the ‘chosen one ‘.

We go back again to Nigeria where a new government is in place   with many of the old Ministers still on board. The fresh faces too are not that new as   some    have been governors before. In terms of expectations the old hands could search their conscience on their last performance and beat their chests if they think they have satisfied Nigerians in terms of expectations or bow their heads in shame if they know they have not. Generally expectations are low of this new cabinet in the nation. There is a saying that you do not change a winning team but this was not one in the last four years and there is no need to mention names or portfolios. The issues of insecurity, terrorism, banditry, herdsmen and farmers are still untouched in terms of their savagery and pervasiveness in Nigeria.   The   fact that at the time the Ministers were being sworn Nigeria’s borders   were closed   to check    the influx and   menace of illegal   immigrants threatening our collective security is ominously symbolic. That   really is a big challenge   for   the new Minister   of Interior   former Osun State Governor Rauf Aregbesola. Indeed there is a saying that it does not matter how the snake is killed as long as it is   killed and its menace removed. Unfortunately the ‘snake’ marauding our citizenry is wildly alive and well. Our hope is that the new government will   kill it permanently so that Nigerians can pray and clap for government and its ministers as they go into the government’s second term, hopefully to meet the expectations of the Nigerian nation, this    time   around.

In Italy the Interior Minister Matteo Salvini who has become popular with the implementation of Italy’s anti Immigrants policy became opportunistic   to become PM by precipitating a crisis that forced the PM Guisseppe Conte to resign and for his coalition partner to seek new coalition partners. What interests us here is that Salvini is savouring the joy   and strength of living up to the expectations of the electorate and is cashing on that to get   even more power. That really is how a democracy should run. The fuel   of a vibrant democracy should   be the realization of election promises by those elected into office and Salvini is gambling on that right now in Italy and I wish him luck and   hope that his huge democratic gambit does not back fire as a bird in hand is worth two in the bush.

With regard to Britain and the US and the menace of Brexit and a Trump presidency I see the two leaders as two sides of the same coin. Trump even before Boris Johnson came to power was in favour of Brexit saying loud and clear that the US would make a better trade deal with Britain such that it would never regret leaving the EU. Boris Johnson on the other hand is holding the British electorate by the jugular that it voted to leave the EU   referendum and that it cannot change its mind and would leave by October this year deal or no Deal. That too is living up to the expectation of the British people inherent in the referendum result,   no matter   how   close. The fact that the implementation of Brexit is difficult does not invalidate the expectation of the British people in such a way that a second referendum would be required. That again shows that democracy is not always a bed of roses as the British electorate wrestles tirelessly with its own Brexit decision and expectations.

Similarly, the US President Donald Trump should be commended, no matter    how grudgingly for living up to his election promises on Immigration and a buoyant economy. He has also brought China to its   knees   to respect intellectual property and control piracy in its economy and   internationally. Trump has been his government’s most vocal trumpet and talking drum of his government’s achievements and he has been helped immensely by the technology of tweeter which has helped him a lot to take on both domestic and foreign enemies and detractors alike. Regardless of his offensive utterances there is something to be admired in a leader like Donald Trump   who brags about his fulfillment of the campaign promises he made before coming to power. That really is the essence of leadership in a democracy anywhere in the world. Once again long live the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

August 24, 2019
Revolutionary pressures in Nigeria(2)

There are schools of thought that believe that the extant 1999 constitution, which provides the legal pedestal on which this democratic dispensation stands, is incurably defective, utterly irredeemable and thus deserving of being wholly cast aside and another constitution crafted de novo. Those who are of this persuasion advocate a thorough going root and branch restructuring of the Nigerian polity even though there are as many conceptions of what a restructured Nigeria should like as there are believers in the idea. In a way, they are like Mr. Omoyele Sowore and his #RevolutionNow fellow travelers who seek to arouse Nigerians to revolutionary action without giving any clear idea of their vision of a post-revolutionary Nigeria.

Sowore seeks to utilize the constitution’s guarantee of the individual’s human rights, including the rights to free speech, movement and association to mobilize Nigerians to overthrow the same constitution. For, that in essence is what a revolution means. On their part, the proponents of restructuring want the state organs, parties and individuals that are the products and beneficiaries of the extant constitutional structure to, as it were, pull the rug from under their own feet by effecting radical constitutional changes that transcend the purview of the periodic incremental and perfunctory amendments that the constitution provides for. This can, of course, only be achieved through a referendum, which the constitution makes no provision for!

The realistic thing to do, therefore, is to work within the framework of the constitution to continuously nudge Nigeria slowly but steadily in the direction of increasingly deepening the practice of democracy and adherence to the rule of law , strengthening the federal elements of the constitution and actualizing its immense potentials to help enhance the socio-economic wellbeing of the Nigerian people. In this regard, for instance, Chapter II of the 1999 constitution, which states what are the ‘Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy’ makes extensive provisions for promoting and protecting the socio-economic rights of Nigerians. The provisions of this chapter as well as its near revolutionary socio-economic, political and legal potentials have been exhaustively examined by radical human rights lawyer, Mr. Femi Falana (SAN), in his book titled ‘Nigerian Law on Socioeconomic Rights’published in 2017.

According to Mr. Falana in his prefatory comments to the book, “The provisions of the Fundamental Objectives cover socio-economic rights such as the right to security and welfare, right to political participation, right to education, right to health, right to environment, right to secure adequate means of livelihhod including suitable and adequate shelter, suitable and adequate food, reasonable minimum living wages, old age care and pensions, unemployment or sick benefits and welfare of the disabled and other vulnerable people”. In over 300 pages and across twelve chapters, Mr. Falana explicates and critiques the various laws, agencies and programmes that have been enacted, established and initiated towards the realization of these objectives in the last two decades.

Is it that members of the Nigerian ruling class love Nigerians so much that such lofty and ennobling welfare provisions were enshrined in the constitution? Not necessarily. True, Falana writes that this section clearly states that “In order to guarantee national prosperity the state is obligated to promote a planned and balanced economic development and harness the resources of the nation”. He, however, points out, and this is the crux of the matter, that “…the ruling class has ensured that while civil and political rights guaranteed in chapter 4 of the constitution, are justiciable, the jurisdiction of the courts is completely ousted with respect to the enforcement of socio-economic rights. This idea of non-justiciability has limited the access of victims of socio economic rights abuse to effective remedies”.

The far-reaching welfarist provisions of chapter II of the Nigerian Constitution is a very deft and calculating but deceptive response of the Nigerian ruling class to the revolutionary pressures generated by the country’s persistently deepening crises of poverty, inequality and underdevelopment despite her enormous but grossly inequitably distributed wealth. It is a form of what Claude Ake describes as ‘defensive radicalism’. In their important book, ‘The Rise and Fall of Nigeria’s Second Republic- 1979-1984’, Professors Julius Ihnovbere and Toyin Falola, referring to this same welfarist provision in the 1979 Constitution, write that “The welfarist provisions in the constitution are fake and illusory; they are more like promises which political parties are not obliged to keep. None of the provisions is justiciable, no citizen can challenge the state in any court of law for its refusal to implement any of the provisions”.

Yet, through the relentless efforts of progressive lawyers and the pronouncements of courageous jurists, Mr. Falana demonstrates, through several cited cases that more sections of Chapter II of the constitution are increasingly being made justiciable even though there is still a long road of struggle ahead to traverse in this regard. For example, he cites the case of Olafisoye v. Federal Republic of Nigeria (2005) in which Justice Niki Tobi of the Supreme Court ruled that “…the non-justiciability of Section 6(6)c of the Constitution is neither total nor sacrosanct as the subsection provides a leeway by the use of the words ‘except as otherwise provided by this Constitution. This means that if the constitution otherwise provides in another section which makes a section of Chapter II justiciable, it will be so interpreted by the court”.

Again, Falana points out that Nigerian courts have gradually but substantially changed their stance over time on locus standi, a stance which had previously obstructed the promotion of the fundamental rights of the Nigerian people through public interest litigation. For instance, in his ruling in the case of Femi Falana v. Attorney-General of the Federation (2014), in which the plaintiff challenged the scrapping of the Peoples’ Bank by the Federal Government, Justice J. Idris of the Federal High Court held that “…a tax payer such as the applicant herein has the locus standi to approach the court to enforce the law and ensure that his tax money is utilized by the government frugally or prudently…This action in my view falls under those actions in which the Applicant is vested with locus standi to institute this action to compel the government to discharge its duty conferred by the laws of the Federation of Nigeria”.

Another factor that has broadened the horizon of the enforcement of socio-economic rights in Nigeria is the country’s being a signatory to several international treaties and agreements one of which, for instance, is the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights. Thus, Falana quotes the Supreme Court in Ogugua v. The State (1994) as holding that “Since the Charter has become part of our domestic laws, the enforcement of its provisions like all our laws fall within the judicial powers of the court as provided by the constitution and all other laws relating thereto. It is apparent from the foregoing that the human and peoples’ rights of the African Charter are enforceable by the several High Courts depending on the circumstances of each case and in accordance with the rules, practice and procedure of each court”.

Of course, while continuing to explore every opportunity to expand the socio-economic rights of the people through the legal process, Mr. Falana is under no illusion that the struggle for the socio-economic emancipation of the Nigerian people can be achieved on the legal terrain alone since, in his words, “It should, however, be pointed out that judicial pronouncements in favour of social justice can be conveniently ignored by a government that is administered by an army of neo-liberal ideologues who are committed to the defence of market fundamentalism” and that “To reclaim the welfare state from its obstinate opponents in government, the Nigerian people have to be mobilized to ensure compliance with the various welfare laws and intensify the campaign for the full justiciability of the provisions of the socioeconomic rights set out in Chapter 2 of the Constitution”.

Sowore’s not unimpressive outing in the last election in which he contested for the country’s presidency, despite his fragile political structure and lean resources, shows that radical and progressive young political actors can make an impact on the political scene if they summon the requisite will, focus and discipline towards the attainment of their objectives. It should, however, not be about personal ambition and bloated egos but about settling down to the hard work of joining others to build viable, grassroots based political organizations that can effectively enlighten and mobilize the vast majority of Nigeria’s suffering masses to become a potent electoral force. 2023 is just around the corner. Every minute that Sowore spends in an utterly avoidable detention, he is recklessly squandering valuable revolutionary time in which he should be busy on the field working with like minds to enlighten, mobilize and organize the Nigerian people for self-emancipation in the next electoral cycle.

August 24, 2019
Double losses for APC stalwarts in Zamfara

IT is no longer news that the All Progressives Congress (APC) in Zamfara State lost all the polls conducted in the state during the recently concluded general elections to the rival Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). Not on the strength of the latter’s popularity but on account of internal wrangling that resulted in the victories the APC recorded at the polls reversed by the Supreme Court in favour of the PDP.

A few days after the elections were conducted and won by the APC almost in a landslide, the Supreme Court delivered a shocking judgment nullifying the elections of all the candidates of the APC from state assembly to governorship and National Assembly.

The unanimous judgment of the five-man panel led by the Acting Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Tanko Muhammad, declared the first runners-up in the 2019 general elections in the state as the winners of all the elections earlier declared by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to have been won by the APC and its candidates.

Justice Paul Galinje, who read the lead judgment, had upheld the decision of the Sokoto Division of the Court of Appeal to the effect that the APC did not conduct any valid primary election and as such had no candidate for any of the elections in the state. He declared the votes polled by the APC candidates in the elections a waste.

Those who thought the APC in Zamfara had learnt a lesson from the ugly experience were wrong, as all the key political actors in the state were said to have extended their bitterness to the recent jostle for ministerial tickets.

The bickering among party stalwarts in the state was said to be so intense that President Muhammadu Buhari was left with no choice but to settle for the former Federal Commissioner, National Commission for Refugees, Migrants and Internally Displaced Persons, Hajiya Sadiya Umar, Farouk, who never lobbied to be a minister!

Hajiya Umar was said to have got a surprise call from the President a few days to the ministerial screening at the National Assembly, asking her to submit her curriculum vitae; a development that was said to have left the feuding APC stalwarts crestfallen.

August 24, 2019
How new minister survived three attempts to abort his appointment

A POPULAR bible verse quotes God as saying that He would have mercy on whom He would have mercy. Although President Muhammadu Buhari is a Muslim, he would appear to have keyed into this bible verse with respect to the appointment of one of the recently sworn-in ministers.

Like a cat with nine lives, the new minister was said to have survived three different attempts made by some power brokers to remove his name from the list of ministerial nominees because President Buhari insisted on each occasion that his name be restored on the list.

The new minister himself was said to have been surprised that his name survived on the list after the numerous attempts made by the power brokers in question to remove it.

The irony of it all is that the minister, who hails from one of the northern states, eventually played a key role helping the President to assign portfolios. So much so that those who had wanted his name removed from the ministerial list started running after him to seek favour.

A case of the stone the builder rejected becoming the head of the corner.

August 24, 2019
Buhari and the population explosion ogre

PRESIDENT Muhammadu Buhari has finally spoken emphatically on the subject of population explosion which so many commentators have warned could upend the country or even sound its death knell. His emphatic statement may be coming a little late, but Nigerians will hope that rather than just describe it as a frightening issue, it would spur him to enunciate concrete ideas about the problem and then go ahead to tackle it in a manner that will make the country grateful to him for a very long time. The president spoke on the issue during a two-day retreat for ministers-designate in Abuja early in the week. According to him, “By average estimates, our population is close to 200 million today. By 2050, UN (United Nations) estimates show that Nigeria will be third globally, behind only India and China with a projected population of 411 million. This is a frightening prospect but only if we sit idly by and expect handouts from so-called development partners. The solution to our problems lies within us.”

If he intends to present policy initiatives to tackle the danger, he did not mention it in his speech. Perhaps the occasion was inappropriate for such a delicate and unusual subject. However, it is hoped that soon, unlike in his first term when the issue received no significant mention or consideration, he will give full attention to a matter that threatens to unravel the country. During the same retreat, he had spoken about three other issues that arrested his attention before he assumed the presidency, to wit, security, economy and corruption, and indicated just how far his government went in handling them. He had said: “None but the most partisan will dispute that we have made headway in all three areas. First, we have rolled back the frontiers of terrorism; we are actively addressing other challenges such as kidnappings, farmer-herder violence, improving the safety of our roads, railways, air traffic and fire control capacities. Second, we are steadily turning the economy round through investment in agriculture and manufacturing, shoring up our foreign reserves, curbing inflation and improving the country’s infrastructure. Third, we have recovered hundreds of billions of stolen assets and are actively pursuing control measures to tackle leakages in public resources. We will not let up in fighting corruption.”

If the president could gloat over his achievements, especially concerning the three main objectives he set for himself at the inception of his first term, surely he would want to make future similar boasts regarding an issue he has rightly described as frightening, an issue that requires the most intensive and rigorous effort to control or retune into a productive and positive asset. He did not make reference to statistical facts, but he was right to suggest that something must be done urgently about the problem. Indeed, the facts and figures surrounding the problem are truly frightening. With a population growth rate hovering around 2.6 percent, a little down from about 3.5 percent some years earlier, Nigeria has become a tinderbox mainly on account of climatic and desertification challenges, poor economic management and unstable financial policies, and unimaginative political and governmental structures that produced a unitary system and constrain productivity.

Nigeria’s population figure is believed to be about 200 million, and given the unmanageable growth rate with which it is expanding, is calculated to double every 22 years. Compounding the crisis is the rather ironic improvement in life expectancy to about 51 years at birth in 2015. Some unconfirmed estimates even put it at about 60 years in 2018. Economic growth has either been slow, less than two percent, or sometimes even managing to slip into recession, such as the country witnessed a few years ago shortly after careless economic policies caused a needless downturn. With economic growth trailing badly behind rapid population growth, Nigeria, which is the seventh most populous country in the world and the most populous in Africa, appears to be heading for disaster. In all this, over the decades, and lured by insanely cheap money, the government has been spectacularly remiss in its duties. Poor financial management policies, corruption, and profligacy have all combined to expose the country to a precarious future.

President Buhari has drawn attention to what is probably the most pressing issue the country must contend with in the coming years. But beyond drawing attention to it, it is not certain that much else will be done to arrest the drift or mitigate the effects of the looming crisis. The population catastrophe he alludes to has been brewing for years. Neither the president in his first term nor any of his predecessors had done anything significant about it. They seemed helpless, or were uninterested in grappling with a nuisance they felt was sensitive and incurable. President Buhari says it is a frightening problem. That is an understatement. No one is sure that Nigeria has the luxury of a few more years to put a lid on the problem, as the president seems to imply. The crisis is urgent, if it is not already too late. Such an urgent crisis requires very drastic solutions, solutions that call on leaders to think outside the box and to reflect on novel panaceas or embrace structured and unorthodox ideas.

If disaster is to be staved off, the government must take a very hard look at its financial management orthodoxies. This goes beyond fighting corruption or catching a few thieves. The government must strike at the root of the problems that engender inefficiency. The first step is to restructure the country away from huge spending on needless items such as bloated bureaucracies and bogus political institutions. Parliamentary spending has become uncontrollable partly because the parliament is unwieldy and costly, and partly because the country’s political structure itself commits everyone to a centralised rather than a federal system. In addition, the configurations of states is more than the country needs or can sustain, and bureaucracies are unwisely and needlessly replicated. Funds that should be allocated to capital and infrastructural needs are senselessly spent on recurrent and unproductive needs. In fact most states are not viable and have become a national and unbearable burden.

But in addition to tightening Nigeria’s fiscal supports and restructuring the polity, it is also urgent for the government to jettison its parochial predilections and seek out policies and programmes that would not in turn produce future crises. Land and grazing policies, for instance, must reflect modernisation trends, away from backward, ancient, crisis-ridden and ethnic-inspired policies. Climate change is real and unrelenting. The government must find practicable and lasting solutions to desertification. Israel did it; others have done it; Nigeria can also do it. Instead of conniving at ethnic-inspired seizure of lands under the aegis of grazing policies, the government must face the reality of the moment and think of the future. But can they?

Population growth cannot be arrested overnight, especially with the subtle hints by some analysts that larger population figures are an electoral asset. After all, the initial failure of the polio immunisation programme in some parts of Nigeria was attributed to suspicion that the programme was designed to reduce or limit population increases in certain states. But in the long run, something major must be done to check the crippling expansion of population growth and to take more and better cognisance of economic growth policies. Checking population expansion must also go hand-in-hand with other social, political and economic policies to ensure sound financial management, sensible and efficient bureaucracies, and a far better political cum economic structure designed to take care of the needs of the future. What is not tenable is to make noise over the issue, label it as frightening, and end up doing nothing about it. If nothing significant is done now, the country must prepare for apocalypse.

August 24, 2019
Soccer as a business

Soccer in Nigeria will soar if we tailor it to business, not the patronage to lackeys that currently is across the country.The advantages Nigeria will derive from running soccer like the business that it is (the way saner countries have been doing for decades), are endless.

For instance, a 2019 report by EY’s Economic and Social Impact Assessment said the English Premier League and its clubs supported close to 100,000 jobs and contributed £7.6 billion to the United Kingdom (UK)’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP).

In 2009, the rugby series between the Springboks and the British & Irish Lions boosted the South Africa economy by almost R1.5billion, a study commissioned by SA Rugby revealed.

This converts to nearly N36billion. In just one sport alone. The public interest in the ten-match series, and the impact of the arrival of 37 000 visitors from Britain and Ireland, generated R1,47bn in direct and indirect value to the travel and tourism gross domestic product (GDP) of South Africa.

The six-week tour produced close to a tenth (8,95%) of South Africa’s annual tourism GDP (based on 2008 figures) said the survey prepared by Octagon Marketing in conjunction with Kamilla-SA Sport and Tourism Consultancy and Umcebisi Business Advisors.

10 years on, why can’t Nigeria, with Africa’s biggest economy and population replicate this success in, football, the king of sports?

Why, for instance, isn’t any of our clubs listed on the Nigerian Stock Exchange?

If we organise ourselves and run our soccer in a transparent, business-minded way, it will thrive enough to attract juicy corporate sponsorships. Then those firms whose sponsorship offers don’t hit the mark with soccer, could be enticed to sponsor other sports such as basketball, athletics, badminton, tennis, table tennis, to mention a few, which are also money spinners in other climes.

Running our soccer across the country through the prism of marketing will only be possible if those entrusted with leadership positions will be accountable. Business enterprises are no charitable homes. They are in business to make profit and be accountable to the shareholders periodically at Annual General Meetings (AGMs).

To achieve some of these targets, we need to identify what we want to achieve and build on it. Most countries’ football growth is stemmed on grassroots communities such that when new talents are discovered, it is easy to know where it all started because each community will celebrate its own. Simply put, sports, not just soccer, grows its stem from the catchment areas from ages four to six, where the kids can be taught the rudiments of the game. Since such schemes pervade all the communities, blue-chip firms can identify with sports of their choices – most times soccer because of its immense followership. What the communities provide are platforms to discover, nurture and expose their young ones to games that they like.

These nurseries won’t be sustained if they don’t have academies and coaching clinics where trainers, coaches and others affiliated to the sport are trained and retrained on the new tricks of the games. The beauty of these academies is that they prepare kids in a few sports that they know their wards have comparative advantage over others.

These academies are regulated to avert sharp practices and to ensure that everything is done in sync with what operates at all levels of the sports. This way, once an athlete or footballer is incapacitated or injured, the coaches don’t need to scratch their heads. A phone call to the injured person’s replacement comes from the senior team’s manager after discussions with the age grade coaches. Such a player will definitely perform despite the short notice since all the national teams use the same template.

What these academies do is to provide the nurseries for younger players to emerge. This also guarantees that each of them is tracked throughout his career. Interestingly, it is at the academy level that the relevant data of the players are collated and processed in the course of the athlete/ footballer’s career. This system checkmates fraudulent acts such as the fielding of age-cheats during competitions. It corrects the Nigerian practice where camps are thrown open to all comers whose data is drawn from the information the person provides – most times manipulated.

With this flawed process, our age grade teams don’t eventually serve the purpose others use them for – nurseries to replace ageing, retired and injured players.

The essential ingredient in these academies overseas is that they introduce kids to the concept of combining education (school work) and sports with flexible curriculum. This way, the kids are taught how to prepare for their future and what to do in lieu of retirement. This seamless transition encourages others to embrace the academies, having seen what those before them achieved and what they are doing in retirement.

These European countries’ data are accessible on their websites at the press of a button, aside guiding them in their quest to track anyone who goes offline. Since these federations have all the players’ data, they protect them from signing Shylock contracts and help them when they have issues with the careers.

With this setting, the corporate world can identify with the nurseries, knowing that when these kids excel, their products and services will form the bedrock of rave reviews for such stars. The look and feel of brands’ outfits and other insignia on international platforms are immeasurable. This trend is sustained because accountability is like second nature – not negotiable.

All these novel incentives of the academies won’t happen without good playgrounds and facilities, which are usually provided by the government with enabling legislations to ensure that the grounds, stadia and facilities are not used for such nebulous activities as political rallies as is often the case in Nigeria.

It is a travesty that the National Stadium in Surulere, Lagos, which has hosted many major sporting events, is derelict.

Sportscity hosted the All Africa Games in 1973. Recent heads of the sports ministry have paid lip service to revamping the facility. Politics has scuttled moves to acquire the SportsCity, especially by the Lagos State Government under former Governor Akinwunmi Ambode, which sought to lease the place over a period. It is close to one year since the Lagos move, yet Sportscity remains an eyesore and a terrible citation on the way we allow edifices decay, as if we didn’t spend a fortune to build them.

We hosted the All Africa Games in 2003, using the competition to modernise our sporting facilities, which are now rustic due to poor vision of our sports administrators. If we had a maintenance culture, CAF would have asked us to host the competition, given our passion for football, our players’ exploits and the population to fill all the stadia during matches.

How would anyone ask for N60 million to plant grass on the Abuja National Stadium’s (now MKO Abiola stadium) pitch? Isn’t this the reason the place is decaying? Do we not have horticulturists to do the job? Don’t they know that horticulturists nurture grass before planting? After all, grass is everywhere in the country. Must we always siphon cash for every job? Why would the ministry demand N60 million from NFF to plant grass, yet they are talking about probity? If the ministry don’t know what to do with the place, they should lease it out and see how it will be a befitting edifice under a proper management.

Countries measure their growth in soccer by the number of domestic league players in the teams. The ripple effect of this is that the domestic league matches are watched by mammoth crowd weekly, invariably increasing that revenue of the domestic clubs. Our league games won’t attract foreigners like we had in the past, if we play on almost empty stadium and can’t offer good money to lure them here. It isn’t enough for government to fund clubs. The governors should ensure that credible people manage the teams.

They should be given targets and time lines to deliver on mandates given, otherwise they are asked to go. One of the targets governors should give to those who administer clubs is to ensure they are listed at the Stock Exchange. It is laughable that none of the clubs’ value is public knowledge. How then do they expect the blue-chip firms to do business with them?

August 24, 2019
Revolutionary pressures in Nigeria (2)

THERE are schools of thought that believe that the extant 1999 constitution, which provides the legal pedestal on which this democratic dispensation stands, is incurably defective, utterly irredeemable and thus deserving of being wholly cast aside and another constitution crafted de novo. Those who are of this persuasion advocate a thorough going root and branch restructuring of the Nigerian polity even though there are as many conceptions of what a restructured Nigeria should like as there are believers in the idea. In a way, they are like Mr. Omoyele Sowore and his #RevolutionNow fellow travelers who seek to arouse Nigerians to revolutionary action without giving any clear idea of their vision of a post-revolutionary Nigeria.

Sowore seeks to utilize the constitution’s guarantee of the individual’s human rights, including the rights to free speech, movement and association to mobilize Nigerians to overthrow the same constitution. For, that in essence is what a revolution means. On their part, the proponents of restructuring want the state organs, parties and individuals that are the products and beneficiaries of the extant constitutional structure to, as it were, pull the rug from under their own feet by effecting radical constitutional changes that transcend the purview of the periodic incremental and perfunctory amendments that the constitution provides for. This can, of course, only be achieved through a referendum, which the constitution makes no provision for!

The realistic thing to do, therefore, is to work within the framework of the constitution to continuously nudge Nigeria slowly but steadily in the direction of increasingly deepening the practice of democracy and adherence to the rule of law , strengthening the federal elements of the constitution and actualizing its immense potentials to help enhance the socio-economic wellbeing of the Nigerian people. In this regard, for instance, Chapter II of the 1999 constitution, which states what are the ‘Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy’ makes extensive provisions for promoting and protecting the socio-economic rights of Nigerians. The provisions of this chapter as well as its near revolutionary socio-economic, political and legal potentials have been exhaustively examined by radical human rights lawyer, Mr. Femi Falana (SAN), in his book titled ‘Nigerian Law on Socioeconomic Rights’published in 2017.

According to Mr. Falana in his prefatory comments to the book, “The provisions of the Fundamental Objectives cover socio-economic rights such as the right to security and welfare, right to political participation, right to education, right to health, right to environment, right to secure adequate means of livelihhod including suitable and adequate shelter, suitable and adequate food, reasonable minimum living wages, old age care and pensions, unemployment or sick benefits and welfare of the disabled and other vulnerable people”. In over 300 pages and across twelve chapters, Mr. Falana explicates and critiques the various laws, agencies and programmes that have been enacted, established and initiated towards the realization of these objectives in the last two decades.

Is it that members of the Nigerian ruling class love Nigerians so much that such lofty and ennobling welfare provisions were enshrined in the constitution? Not necessarily. True, Falana writes that this section clearly states that “In order to guarantee national prosperity the state is obligated to promote a planned and balanced economic development and harness the resources of the nation”. He, however, points out, and this is the crux of the matter, that “…the ruling class has ensured that while civil and political rights guaranteed in chapter 4 of the constitution, are justiciable, the jurisdiction of the courts is completely ousted with respect to the enforcement of socio-economic rights. This idea of non-justiciability has limited the access of victims of socio economic rights abuse to effective remedies”.

The far-reaching welfarist provisions of chapter II of the Nigerian Constitution is a very deft and calculating but deceptive response of the Nigerian ruling class to the revolutionary pressures generated by the country’s persistently deepening crises of poverty, inequality and underdevelopment despite her enormous but grossly inequitably distributed wealth. It is a form of what Claude Ake describes as ‘defensive radicalism’. In their important book, ‘The Rise and Fall of Nigeria’s Second Republic- 1979-1984’, Professors Julius Ihnovbere and Toyin Falola, referring to this same welfarist provision in the 1979 Constitution, write that “The welfarist provisions in the constitution are fake and illusory; they are more like promises which political parties are not obliged to keep. None of the provisions is justiciable, no citizen can challenge the state in any court of law for its refusal to implement any of the provisions”.

Yet, through the relentless efforts of progressive lawyers and the pronouncements of courageous jurists, Mr. Falana demonstrates, through several cited cases that more sections of Chapter II of the constitution are increasingly being made justiciable even though there is still a long road of struggle ahead to traverse in this regard. For example, he cites the case of Olafisoye v. Federal Republic of Nigeria (2005) in which Justice Niki Tobi of the Supreme Court ruled that “…the non-justiciability of Section 6(6)c of the Constitution is neither total nor sacrosanct as the subsection provides a leeway by the use of the words ‘except as otherwise provided by this Constitution. This means that if the constitution otherwise provides in another section which makes a section of Chapter II justiciable, it will be so interpreted by the court”.

Again, Falana points out that Nigerian courts have gradually but substantially changed their stance over time on locus standi, a stance which had previously obstructed the promotion of the fundamental rights of the Nigerian people through public interest litigation. For instance, in his ruling in the case of Femi Falana v. Attorney-General of the Federation (2014), in which the plaintiff challenged the scrapping of the Peoples’ Bank by the Federal Government, Justice J. Idris of the Federal High Court held that “…a tax payer such as the applicant herein has the locus standi to approach the court to enforce the law and ensure that his tax money is utilized by the government frugally or prudently…This action in my view falls under those actions in which the Applicant is vested with locus standi to institute this action to compel the government to discharge its duty conferred by the laws of the Federation of Nigeria”.

Another factor that has broadened the horizon of the enforcement of socio-economic rights in Nigeria is the country’s being a signatory to several international treaties and agreements one of which, for instance, is the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights. Thus, Falana quotes the Supreme Court in Ogugua v. The State (1994) as holding that “Since the Charter has become part of our domestic laws, the enforcement of its provisions like all our laws fall within the judicial powers of the court as provided by the constitution and all other laws relating thereto. It is apparent from the foregoing that the human and peoples’ rights of the African Charter are enforceable by the several High Courts depending on the circumstances of each case and in accordance with the rules, practice and procedure of each court”.

Of course, while continuing to explore every opportunity to expand the socio-economic rights of the people through the legal process, Mr. Falana is under no illusion that the struggle for the socio-economic emancipation of the Nigerian people can be achieved on the legal terrain alone since, in his words, “It should, however, be pointed out that judicial pronouncements in favour of social justice can be conveniently ignored by a government that is administered by an army of neo-liberal ideologues who are committed to the defence of market fundamentalism” and that “To reclaim the welfare state from its obstinate opponents in government, the Nigerian people have to be mobilized to ensure compliance with the various welfare laws and intensify the campaign for the full justiciability of the provisions of the socioeconomic rights set out in Chapter 2 of the Constitution”.

Sowore’s not unimpressive outing in the last election in which he contested for the country’s presidency, despite his fragile political structure and lean resources, shows that radical and progressive young political actors can make an impact on the political scene if they summon the requisite will, focus and discipline towards the attainment of their objectives. It should, however, not be about personal ambition and bloated egos but about settling down to the hard work of joining others to build viable, grassroots based political organizations that can effectively enlighten and mobilize the vast majority of Nigeria’s suffering masses to become a potent electoral force. 2023 is just around the corner. Every minute that Sowore spends in an utterly avoidable detention, he is recklessly squandering valuable revolutionary time in which he should be busy on the field working with like minds to enlighten, mobilize and organize the Nigerian people for self-emancipation in the next electoral cycle.

August 24, 2019
Letter to Gernot Rohr

Gernot Rohr’s mien puts you off at first contact, although his wiry look suggests that he thinks round the clock about his job. Rohr isn’t scared to talk about his job. He listens and waits to answer questions, showing his depth and willingness to improve on his work ethics.

He comes across as a man who is determined to meet his targets, except those set for him by his employers, Nigeria Football Federation (NFF), given the potential of our players. NFF’s mandate to Rohr showed gross misunderstanding of the brand that they had.

Otherwise, how do you task Rohr with a semi-final mandate at the 2019 Africa Cup of Nations, where 99 per cent (Only goalkeeper Ikechukwu Ezenwa plays in the domestic league) of his boys play in Europe. The argument that Nigeria had missed the last two editions is laughable and can the likened to doubting the predatory instincts of the lion simply because it had been ill. Nigeria, given the abundance of talents in the country’s 774 Local government areas should win the continent’s biggest soccer diadem in default – it should be our birthright.

The 2019 Africa Cup of Nations is over with Nigeria belittling herself with a bronze medal, largely because we make our players look like they are indispensable. Little wonder they are easily provoked and ready to upset the applecart for lucre. They pour odium on the country over things they dare not do in their European clubs. The best way to stop this show of shame is for both the NFF and Rohr to drop the ringleaders. Besides, those who have spent close to six years in the team should be eased off, if we are sincere in our quest to excel at the 2022 World Cup in Qatar.

It isn’t enough to bask in the fact that Nigeria fields the youngest set of players at competitions, like Rohr always says. It will be worth celebrating, if these young lads qualify Nigeria for the Qatar 2022 World Cup final. Such a feat will open new vistas for the players and persuade foreign scouts to visit Nigeria in search for budding talents. The invasion of the country with foreigners will elicit good business deals which will invariably rub off on the quality of our domestic leagues and competitions.

The spiral effects of attending big soccer tournaments have been lost on us because our mentality of perpetually rebuilding our teams after every failed adventure. Winners of tournaments are built from generations (at least two) of previous appearances), hence the fluidity in their games. The growth pattern is such that engages the good players in their age grade teams when a vacuum exists. This transition is possible because coaches at the age grade levels are integrated into the senior from when the country’s playing style evolves.

Nobody can fault this NFF board in terms of getting quality matches for the Super Eagles. Unlike in the past when such Grade A games are played mostly on the pages of the newspapers, this new NFF get their friendly games confirmed by the opponents to throw into the dustbin any thoughts of it being fake news.

The September 10 international friendly between Nigeria and Ukraine in Dnipro is a superb test for the Eagles since the Ukrainians are presently ranked 25th in the world unlike Nigeria which is 33rd. Yet, this game provides the best test for our goalkeepers comprising Francis Uzoho (Anorthosis Famagusta, Cyprus); Ikechukwu Ezenwa (Heartland FC) and Emil Maduka Okoye (Fortuna Dusseldorf, Germany). Not a few Nigerians have celebrated the exit of Daniel Akpeyi, with a few others pleading that he shouldn’t return to the team, if the coach knows his onions.

This latter group are not raising the alarm over nothing since we have this tendency of unearthing forgotten stars under the guise of trying to tap from their experience. I always ask when the younger ones will garner such experience when they are benched by older but ageing stars?

I can’t fault Rohr’s preference for Emil Maduka Okoye (Fortuna Dusseldorf, Germany) because we watch him weekly where he has distinguished himself in matches. I wish we had a more vibrant domestic league administered by people who can be challenged to ensure that Super Eagles is populated by home-grown players by 2022, not those who remember the league exists, only when the season begins.

Goalkeeping has been Eagles’ bane. Rohr needs to recruit a renowned goalkeeper’s trainer to drill those invited, although his Nigerian assistants were goalkeepers for the same team. Clemens Westerhof did that for the Eagles and it worked perfectly. It is laughable that our goalkeepers at the Africa Cup of Nations set a defensive wall, yet they stood behind it, leaving sufficient gap for the strikers to score the goals. If Rohr feels comfortable with his assistants, then he should insist on inviting only those who play regularly in Europe.

One of the problematic areas of the Eagles at the 32nd africa Cup of Nations was its defence. Our defenders were slow to react to passes and lacked the pace to outrun the strikers. I thought Rohr would address this problem. Yet, Rohr re-invited Leon Balogun for the September 10 international game against Ukraine, even as he hasn’t played a game for Brighton this season. The coach invited the same defenders, giving the impression that they are indispensable.

These defenders wouldn’t feel challenged to improve, if they are selected regularly. What beats most pundits hollow about Rohr’s choices, is that he has repeatedly stated that he will overhaul the team’s defence. Is this how he wants to do it? Rohr’s employers should remind him that he should develop the domestic game, which can only happen if he lives with us. He can’t be defining his job schedule when we know that the bulk of players he is banking on began their game here. They would never have played for Nigeria, if the coaches who discovered them relied entirely on foreign-based players.

Rohr insulted our sensibilities by sticking with these leaking defence comprising of Olaoluwa Aina (Torino FC, Italy); Tyronne Ebuehi (FC Benfica, Portugal); Chidozie Awaziem (FC Porto, Portugal); William Ekong (Udinese FC, Italy); Leon Balogun (Brighton & Hove Albion, England); Kenneth Omeruo (CD Leganes, Spain); Jamilu Collins (SC Padeborn 07, Germany); Oluwasemilogo Ajayi (Rotherham United, England). Only Ajayi and Collins are playing active soccer, while the others are either torn between getting new clubs and training for the new season.

No prize for predicting that Ukraine will beat Nigeria. It’s the reason Rohr should take risk on some of the good defenders in the domestic game. The argument that it is always difficult to get them entry visas is weak since these logistic details should be embedded in the contract signing documents for such international friendly games. It is true that our foreign legion can easily storm Dnipro in Ukraine. But it doesn’t foreclose the need to impress it on countries willing to pay against Nigeria to consider our domestic league players. I would rather home-based players accompany the team to Ukraine than the litany of Agbada-wearing administrators who have not added value to the game’s growth. The time to plan for the Qatar 2022 World Cup is now, using the qualifiers for the 2021 Africa Cup of Nations and the Mundial.

No changes in the midfield except for Joe Aribo who plays for Glasgow Rangers in Scotland. I’ve my reservation for his choice even though I’m not a coach. The Scottish isn’t competitive. the only plus here is that they are in this year’s UEFA Champions League. Only Rohr can explain Aribo’s choice because not many of us watch the Scottish league. I sincerely hope that his choice is spot-on.

The midfielders picked such as Alexander Iwobi (Everton FC, England); Wilfred Ndidi (Leicester City, England); Oghenekaro Etebo (Stoke City FC, England); Kelechi Iheanacho (Leicester City, England) and Joe Aribo (Glasgow Rangers, Scotland) are good. My worry is the placement of Iheanacho as a midfielder. Coaches who have worked with Iheanacho have identified him as the straight-jacket central striker, who cannot function elsewhere but as the traditional number 9. Perhaps, Rohr has something in Iheanacho which others haven’t. But it is important that he plays in the position he trains weekly for his club. The trio of Ndidi, Iwobi and Etebo did well in Egypt. But Rohr needs bigger players in that department, although our smaller ones are good battlers for the ball. My other worry will be their predictable style, which many countries can exploit. We need better players to give them good competition and increase our options during matches.

At the Africa Cup of Nations, Eagles struggled with high balls and couldn’t handle situation in between the defence and the midfield. It accounted for the free kicks taken against them. Perhaps, Rohr needs a defensive midfielder to literally sit in front of the two central defenders to plug the holes created by ball dropped behind the midfielders.

Rohr has picked strikers who on their day could win matches for the country provided they get good passes released to them early from the midfield.

Forwards such as Ahmed Musa (Al Nassar FC, Saudi Arabia); Victor Osimhen (Lille OSC, France); Moses Simon (Levante FC, Spain); Henry Onyekuru (AS Monaco, France); Samuel Kalu (Girondins Bordeaux, France); Paul Onuachu (FC Midtjyland, Denmark) and Samuel Chukwueze (Villarreal FC, Spain) are coaches’ best bets to wreak havoc on any opposition. They are good runners, dribble well but their last touch on the ball, most times are faulty.

Rohr would need to place more emphasis on how our boys redouble their efforts when they get towards the opposition’s defence. Only enterprising teams can outrun closely knit defences. Such tact to unlock such defences come with a lot practice coupled with the resilience of the attackers. Our players should be taught how to be selfless and give the players in the best positions to score the goal the ball. goals count in matches not missed chances.

Beating Ukraine in Dnipro is achievable but will require a lot of tact and zeal to win by our players, because they are a very good team.

August 17, 2019
Revolutionary pressures in Nigeria (1)

The title of this piece is evidently not original. It is an adaptation of the title the characteristically profound yet highly controversial book, ‘Revolutionary Pressures in Africa’ published in 1978 by the immortal preeminent political economist, Professor Claude Ake. The reason for my referring to this book in this column today is pretty obvious. Former radical students’ union leader, media entrepreneur turned politician and now convener of the #RevolutionNow protests, Omoyele Sowore, has made revolution, a popular buzzword in Nigeria once again.

Of course, the state has responded in a predictably high handed manner to what may have most likely ended up as nothing but a futile exercise in unproductive political masturbation. For, as respected columnist, Professor Ayo Olukotun put it in his column of Friday, August 9, in The Punch, “You cannot have a revolution without a revolutionary agenda, revolutionary personality, a vanguard, a rearguard and minimal capacity to enforce the revolutionary script”. By obtaining a court order to detain him for 45 days, in the first instance, the Nigerian state has simply lionized Sowore needlessly. It has demonstrated a nervousness that only a fragile and insecure state should exhibit when confronted with a political pygmy like Sowore.

What Ake refers to as ‘revolutionary pressures’ have existed in Nigeria ever since I became politically conscious as a youth. Yet, we have never succeeded in creating a cadre of revolutionaries to take effective and maximum advantage of such situations to successfully mobilize the masses to overthrow an indisputably unjust, exploitative and inequitable socio-economic and political system. At best we have had ultimately ineffectual mass protests, military coups that produced largely reactionary, repressive and regressive regimes or elections in which people mostly vote without choosing (apologies once again to Claude Ake) and elected governments come to power promising fundamental change that forever remain elusive.

Explicating on Ake’s theorization of ‘revolutionary pressures’, a reviewer, Lawal Abdulmutha, posits that “In accounting for the instability of present-day African political systems, Professor Claude Ake argues that there are revolutionary pressures against the existing exploitative class relations, and thus against the very survival of the ruling elite and the state. He attributes these pressures to, first, the desperate poverty of African workers; second, the huge economic and social discrepancy between rich and poor; third, rising expectations due to modernization; fourth, the enticing models provided by the developed countries made even more piquant by their portrayals in the media and by the limited penetration of consumer goods and retail firms into African markets; and fifth, the politicization of the African peoples through their frustrating colonial and post-colonial experiences”.

The late renowned development economist, Dudley Seers, famously noted in the 60s that the three most critical questions to ask in order to ascertain whether or not a country was developing are: ‘What is happening to poverty? What is happening to inequality? What is happening to unemployment?’ These three indices have undeniably worsened over the last two decades indicating that we are yet to begin to perceive and utilize democracy as a handmaiden of development. Despite President Muhammadu Buhari’s best efforts and personal example of modesty and rectitude, the country remains trapped in a huge corruption cesspit that continues to inhibit the possibility of extricating the vast majority of our people from dehumanizing poverty.

Another economist, Edgar Owens, contends that development takes place when there is development of people and liberation of the human potential rather than the development of things. What have we seen in most cases over the last two decades of unbroken democracy? There is an overconcentration on huge infrastructural projects in urban centers mostly for their exhibitionist value as well aspresumably a source of fantastic kickbacks from overinflated contract awards by a larcenous political class. Again, the democratic process itself – the humongous cost of organizing and managing elections or the no less outrageous cost of maintaining elected and appointive public officers – diverts resources from meeting the pressing existential needs of the vast majority of the people including providing potable water, solving the power supply conundrum, undertaking meaningful rural development, eliminating avoidable diseases, providing effective, affordable and qualitative healthcare and educational services among others.

In calling for his #RevolutionNow campaign, Sowore is, therefore, right that the inexcusable level of poverty in Nigeria today is unacceptable against the background of the country’s abundant resources and the obscene profligacy of a minuscule proportion of the population. But then, does Sowore not contradict himself logically and philosophically? In contesting the last presidential election, was he not expressing his faith and confidence in the extant system? Was not that an election in which the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) lost no less than five states to the opposition Peoples Democratic Party (PDP)? Is an election credible only when you or your party wins? If Sowore had been declared winner of the election, would his government have magically solved all the country’s problems instantaneously? Would he then have initiated a #RevolutionNow campaign against his own government or tolerated others launching such a campaign?

Beyond this, Sowore and his collaborators seems oblivious of the fact that Nigeria is already caught in the midst of an ever deepening revolution of the country’s teeming and suffering masses of the underclass even if the latter have never heard of nor have any idea what the word revolution means? How else can you describe the mindless descent into ever worsening anarchy across the country on a daily basis? I have seen with my own eyes youths with blood shot eyes banging with dangerous weapons on the windows of cars caught in traffic and forcibly dispossessing occupants of such vehicles of their money and possessions. Is that not a revolt of the underclass even when they lack any class consciousness in any meaningful sense of the word?

What do you make of the senseless banditry, terrorism, religious extremism, rape, kidnapping, cultism, communal clashes or even mindless drug use by an alarmingly increasing number of youths? These are forms of revolt and rejection, even if self-destructive, against an exploitative, casino capitalist system that has totally alienated the vast majority of the citizenry and ripped them of their basic humanity and dignity. And here lies the signal failing of the likes of ideologically conscious individuals like Sowore and radical groups like the trade unions, progressive academics and change-oriented civil society groups that have abandoned the more important but back-breaking task of political education, enlightenment and mobilization of the masses of the people to effect radical political change.

A vacuum has thus been created that has been filled by ethnic entrepreneurs, religious buccaneers and anarchic separatists who consciously divide the people in order to continue to exploit them. Sowore and other young and vibrant presidential candidates in the last election contested on the platforms of parties that had no firm pan-Nigerian foundations or even easily comprehensible and widely disseminated programs capable of appealing to the electorate. Party formation, consolidation and mass mobilization are no tea party.

What then is to be done? Old style bloody revolutions that sought wholesale overthrow of extant state structures and the emergence of an ultimately elusive radically new order is not the way to go. History teaches us that such revolutions not only eventually consume their own children, they easily degenerate into even worse monsters than the systems they overthrew. Unlike countries like Libya, Syria, Egypt, Tunisia or Algeria which had to undergo the so-called Spring Revolutions to break the bonds of dictatorship but only fell into greater political crisis, Nigeria has a democratic system that, despite its flaws, has lasted 20 years without any interregnum.

It makes no sense to seek to discard the system wholesale at this stage. With all its faults, democracy has built into it a self-correcting mechanism. The cure for the lapses of democracy is continuous practice of more democracy. It is not the perhaps well-meaning but ill-conceived, poorly thought out and immaturely organized #RevolutionNow sought to be convened by Sowore in a complex and plural polity like Nigeria, which he does not appear to have studied seriously.

In his review of Ake’s ‘Revolutionary Pressures’, Lawal Abdulmuttah, writes: “Ake notes that the African people are essentially demanding two things. The first is equality, which, in effect, means the abolition of post-colonial capitalism and its privileged classes. The second is “social well-being, easing the agony of extreme want”. Ake, however, postulates that neither of these demands will be granted by African ruling elites because the very condition of underdevelopment very drastically limits the expansion of the economic surplus. Thus, the capitalists cannot react favourably to revolutionary pressures without committing class suicide, which, of course, they will not do”.

Here, I do not entirely agree with Ake. Unable to resist the persistent and vehement demands of Nigeria’s middle and underprivileged classes for a welfare state in order to democratize the benefits of Nigeria’s oil wealth, the Nigerian ruling class had no choice but to include a chapter on the Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy in the 1979 constitution and this has been retained in the 1999 constitution. Although this section that provides for far-reaching welfare services to succor the poor and vulnerable was defanged by being made non-justiciable, human rights lawyer and activist, Mr. Femi Falana (SAN), has demonstrated how this section can indeed be a basis for a revolutionary redistribution of wealth in Nigeria in his seminal book, ‘Nigerian Law on Socio-Economic Rights’, which we will re-examine in the final part of this piece next week.

But let us give the final word, once again, to Professor Ayo Olukotun who warns that, “What the Sowore outburst has to teach us, in case we are a nation that learns, is that time may be running out for the ruling class, to make desirable changes, and to walk the talk by rescuing Nigerians out of the bind in which they find themselves”.

August 17, 2019