The Nation Newspaper

Category: Saturday

  • Oshiomhole’s coronation runs true to form

    WITH the withdrawal of both Osarheimen Osunbor and Clement Ebri, both former governors of Edo and Cross River States respectively, from the All Progressives Congress (APC) chairmanship contest, the stage seems set today for the coronation of another former Edo State governor, Adams Oshiomhole, regarded since the last two months or more as the ruling party’s putative chairman. The chairmanship position is being vacated by John Odigie-Oyegun, himself a former Edo State governor. Chief Odigie-Oyegun is departing in a blaze of controversy, with the president and party leaders declining to allow his tenure extended, regardless of both the effluxion of time, a nifty but controversial term coined by Ondo State governor Rotimi Akeredolu, and the fear of acrimony overtaking the simple exercise of elective convention. At the end of today’s convention, and notwithstanding whatever hitches and hiccups accompany it, Mr Oshiomhole will become the party’s national chairman, in law and in fact.

    Chief Odigie-Oyegun was not always what he was cracked up to be. He showed a lot of promise when he was elected as the first chairman of the party in June 2014. Some two or three years down the line, he seemed to have lost the spark, became deeply divisive, embraced very contentious partisan and unpopular positions even within the party, and fiddled while the party burned. After failing to rouse party leaders and governors unanimously to his side in the effort to get his tenure extended, ostensibly to avert acrimony and fractiousness within the party as the next general elections loomed, he eventually bowed out and consented to an elective convention. But it took President Muhammadu Buhari’s unequivocal stand against tenure extension to dismantle Chief Odigie-Oyegun’s circus, a presidential intervention that has robbed the party of the chance to set a precedence of running a party not dictated to by one powerful individual, be he the president or not.

    The moment President Buhari disavowed Chief Odigie-Oyegun and endorsed Mr Oshiomhole, every attempt to create the impression of internal democracy in the APC began to sound hollow. Despite the initial huffing and puffing by loyalists of the outgoing chairman, by early May it had become quite clear that any opposition to the new reality was hopeless and potentially costly. Soon the governors began to line up behind Mr Oshiomhole, who easily became recognisable as the president’s candidate, and everyone who was anybody began goose-stepping behind the new man. Mr Oshiomhole, unable to restrain himself in the best and mildest of times, given his natural impetuousness and feistiness, also began to speak alternately like the chairman of the party or the in-coming chairman. And he spoke forcefully, magisterially, and as usual with the flourish and fecundity he constantly, if sometimes irritatingly, ascribed to his past as a union leader.

    Even though Chief Odigie-Oyegun is all of 78 years old, and does not look it or act it, it was clear his leadership of the party had come to end even before the president weighed in with an imperial diktat. The outgoing chairman retained his strength and lived by his wits; but he no longer wielded the imagination and virtue, not to say the circumspection, needed to run the ruling but soulless APC. The younger and boisterous Mr Oshiomhole, who thinks like a strapping 66-year-old and looks confident and vibrant, seemed the perfect counterpoise the bewildered APC needed. They will have him, all of him, and hope that their self-made internal schisms, not to talk of their engaging amateurishness and incompetence, will answer to his talisman. It was never a great idea that the party circumvented elective convention, basing its fears on the supposition that the congresses and convention could turn ugly and fissiparous, especially with the nPDP already gnawing at its innards. But whether by accident or design, the party has finally and sensibly overcome its fears and pushed itself through the democratic process of holding congresses and convention as indicated by its own guidelines and the country’s constitution. It has discovered that despite some controversies here and there, the heavens have not fallen, and the party has not quite imploded as many speculate it would. If it would implode, it would not be because of the congresses and the convention. It would be because it had failed from the beginning to manage its unexpected success with the adroitness expected of its innovative leaders, and closed its ears to the grievances of the nPDP, a faction it has approached with indifference, haughtiness, stubbornness and disdain.

    The APC may by this convention manage to overcome its demons, but it has managed in the same breath to let loose a number of fierce goblins capable of wreaking havoc on both the country’s body politic and the intricate and sensitive tapestries of party organisations. In the foreseeable future, Nigerian presidents will continue to hold the ace in party chairmanship elections. No chairman will emerge without the overweening input of the president. It would not matter whether that chairman had demonstrated capacity and uncanny insight into the workings of the party and the system. What will matter is that the chairman of the party will remain both subservient and submissive to the powerful president. In any case, even where the president is apathetical to the chairmanship position, his aides will egg him on in the direction of establishing relentless control over the party.

    Chief Odigie-Oyegun did little to control a party that was spinning out of order, especially in the last two years. But it is safe to assume that Mr Oshiomhole has learnt a number of lessons from his outgoing predecessor’s nonchalance and connivance. As he has promised, he will exert control right from the beginning of his tenure, and deploy labour union negotiating tools to rein in party rebels. More, he asserts, he will bring to bear an uncommon sagacity and imaginativeness in running the party in order to build it into the best party in Africa. His enthusiasm cannot be faulted. But Mr Oshiomhole wrongly assumes, like his predecessor’s critics, that the problem with the APC is essentially one of low capacity, interest, and style of the party chairman. But the ruling party’s problems far transcend the symptomatic quarrels convulsing its organs and playing off one interest group against another. If Mr Oshiomhole does not carry out a proper diagnosis of the party’s problems, he will find himself administering the wrong medicines: painkillers for oncogenic problems, and placebos for diseases of unknown aetiology.

    There was no problem posed by the nPDP, for instance, that a conciliating president could not have resolved. But having yielded ground to cabals and caucuses of different backgrounds and goals, it was a question of time before the party’s values and mantras became contorted. With those values denuded by private and group interests rather than ennobled by national and constitutional dictates, it was not surprising that the party began to promote interests and individuals that war against common sense, the constitution and the rule of law. Legal subterfuges began to inundate the polity, sectionalism took root, and desperate internal struggles were triggered within the party and within the government itself. Consequently, the party became weakened, and everyone began to look up to a strangely immobilised presidency for interventions that were not forthcoming. These problems do not admit of negotiating skills; they call for the president and the party to conduct deep soul-searching and self-examination.

    No one doubts Mr Oshiomhole’s upbeat mood, or the inspiration and energy a party fresh from a successful convention can bring into the equation. Nor does anyone think that the incoming chairman’s diplomatic and negotiating prowess would not be of some value in smothering disgruntlement within the party. Nor, still, does anyone fear that his boundless enthusiasm and can-do spirit would race reprehensibly out of control. However, despite his gifts, despite his energy, despite his infectious candour, Mr Oshiomhole must both understand the roots of the discord in the APC and find a balance between his famed ability to mingle with and disarm party leaders, especially the president who shares a great part of the blame, and his sometimes unexplained proclivity to pander to the highest authority. After all, as everyone knows, Mr Oshiomhole’s glorious deeds both as governor and union leader were not undergirded by any recognisable ideology, but the simplest pragmatism. In fact, like most Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) chairmen imposed by past presidents, regardless of what they believed or did not believe, Mr Oshiomhole’s coronation runs true to form.

  • Towards a farewell to poverty

    It is remarkable that on the very day that President Muhammadu Buhari conferred the historic posthumous national honour and award of Grand Commander of the Federal Republic (GCFR) on the late Chief MKO Abiola in Abuja, a high court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja, sentenced the former governor of Plateau State, Senator Joshua Dariye, to 14 years imprisonment for betrayal of trust and misappropriation of N1.162 billion of public funds during his tenure. Earlier on June 1, the same court, presided over by Justice Adebukola Banjoko, had found former governor of Taraba State, Reverend Jolly Nyame, guilty of misappropriating N1.64 billion from the coffers of the state perpetrated, largely, through the award of shady stationery contracts.

    These two high profile convictions within a time frame of approximately two weeks no doubt do great credit not only to President Muhammadu Buhari’s anti-corruption war but significantly boosts the image of the judiciary. The trials both lasted over a decade, no thanks to the antics of senior lawyers, who exploited their legal dexterity to ensure that the cases dragged on interminably with numerous diversionary trips on frivolous grounds from the Appeal Courts to the Supreme Court and back to Justice Banjoko’s court for continuation of trial. This gives a glimmer of hope that, no matter how long it is delayed, justice will be done to the exploited and pauperized masses of Nigeria, whose fragile and impoverished existence cannot be divorced from the industrial scale and criminal ‘privatization’ of public resources by members of the political elite put in positions of trust either as elected or appointed public officers.

    In conferring the posthumous award of Grand Commander of the Order of the Niger (GCON) on the legendary human rights lawyer and pro democracy crusader, Chief Gani Fawehinmi (SAN), President Buhari in his historic Executive Order of June 6 stated that this was in recognition of his role as a “tireless fighter for human rights and the actualization of the June 12 elections indeed for democracy in general”. There has been the absolutely needless debate on whether had he been alive, Chief Gani Fawehinmi would have accepted the award or not. Those who contend that the legal icon would have rejected the award refer to his turning down of the award of Officer of the Federal Republic (OFR) conferred on him by the administration of the late President Umaru Yar’Adua in December, 2008.

    Chief Fawehinmi, in rejecting the offer of honour by the Yar’Adua presidency declared unequivocally that “In addition to my rejection of the award of Officer of the Federal Republic (OFR) on the grounds of the Federal Government’s conscious war against anticorruption war, the decadent socio-economic situation does not engender the well being of ordinary people and there is no hope in sight. In view of the foregoing, I reject the award of the Order of the Federal Republic (OFR)”. Referring specifically to the obvious persecution and ultimate removal of Mr. Nuhu Ribadu as chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) by the Yar’Adua administration, Fawehinmi in his rejection letter declared “In the light of the above, I cannot accept the ‘honour’ of Officer of the Federal Republic (OFR). Whether now or in the life beyond, how can I wake up in the morning and look at the insignia of honour bestowed on me under a government that persecutes anticorruption efforts, particularly those of Nuhu Ribadu?”

    The debilitating poverty that maintains a stranglehold on the lives of millions of Nigerians, despite the huge natural and mineral resources with which the country is endowed, was another reason why Gani rejected the award. In his words: “Nobody can contest or dispute the fact that poverty in Nigeria today is more pervasive, humiliating, dehumanizing than 43 years ago despite our mounting and skyrocketing billions upon billions of dollars of oil and gas exploration. In this respect, the nation has failed to use the resources to abolish poverty. This is an indictment against all governments in Nigeria including the present government that awarded the honour of the Order of the Federal Republic (OFR) to me”. Chief Fawehinmi also condemned all governments including that of Yar’Adua, which sought to honour him, for ignoring and dispensing with “all the relevant sections of the Constitution that will promote the welfare and wellbeing of the people of Nigeria”.

    Unlike the Yar’Adua administration that hounded Nuhu Ribadu out of office apparently for stepping on powerful toes in his zealous prosecution of the anticorruption war, the PMB administration has steadfastly stood by the present acting chairman of the EFCC, Mr. Ibrahim Magu, despite the fierce determination of reactionary elements to get the EFCC Czar removed from office. Gani would certainly be pleased with that.

    Again, it is true that the economic hardships and mass poverty Gani cited for rejecting the Yar’Adua national honour offer, still persist. As the late MKO’s daughter, Hafsat Abiola, noted at the investiture ceremony in honour of her father, that poverty is even more pervasive today than when MKO launched his ‘Farewell to Poverty’ campaign in 1993. But the gross poverty from which the PMB administration is striving to liberate the country is partly a function of the unprecedented looting of the national treasury witnessed particularly under the immediate past administration of Dr. Goodluck Jonathan. This week, a federal High Court in Lagos ordered the interim forfeiture of cash and physical assets worth over N2.4 billion and $115,000 believed to be the proceeds of criminal acts of misappropriation by a former Chief of Air Staff, Air Marshall Amosu (retd), and his accomplices. Gani would certainly have been most pleased by this and the recovery of humongous amounts of stolen funds and other illegally acquired assets by prominent members of the immediate past administration.

    Yes, the PMB administration can be accused of a disturbing lethargy, even complacency, in its handling of various aspects of governance including the management of the economy. It’s inexplicable and inexcusable delay in appointing ministers after being sworn in on May 29, 2015, for instance, no doubt contributed to the economy slipping into the recession from which it has fragilely emerged.  But what cannot be denied is that it has stopped the massive haemorrhaging of the economy through the phenomenal corruption that characterized public governance in the preceding administration.

    It has thus been able to channel resources to its social welfare programmes including its conditional cash transfer to the poorest and most vulnerable Nigerians and school feeding programme while also posting an above average performance in the improvement in electricity supply, diversification of the economy particularly through enhanced agricultural productivity as well as the ongoing work on the completion of long abandoned critical roads and bridges across the country.

    Yet, the Buhari administration has not even begun to touch the fringes of the huge and truly terrifying poverty and inequality challenge confronting the country. In his address delivered at the recent 60th birthday colloquium in honour of the accomplished journalist, author and pro-democracy activist, Mr. Kunle Ajibade, the human rights lawyer and activist, Mr. Femi Falana (SAN), just like Gani before him, decried the non-implementation till date of the near revolutionary provisions of Chapter 2 of the 1999 Constitution, which unambiguously state what must be the fundamental objectives and directive principles of state policy. The liberating potentials of this section of the Constitution have been left untapped by all governments in this dispensation including the current APC administration, Mr. Falana avers.

    During the forthcoming campaigns for the 2019 elections, Mr. Falana enjoined journalists and indeed all Nigerians to “extract commitment from the political class to implement the fundamental objectives enshrined in Chapter 2 of the Constitution. Section 14 thereof provides that the security and welfare of the people shall be the primary purpose of government. To achieve that purpose, it is stated in Section 16 that the economy shall be planned and managed by the government to promote national prosperity and happiness. Furthermore, it is stated that that the government shall control the commanding heights of the economy and ensure that the wealth of the nation shall not be concentrated in a few hands. It is illegal and unjust to lease oil blocks to a few people who are turned to multi billionaires after subleasing them to foreign investors”.

    The senior lawyer points out further that “The constitution has provided that the socio-economic rights of the people to education, health, housing, living minimum wage, pension, unemployment benefits are guaranteed while the government shall provide for the aged and physically challenged citizens”. Although the constitution makes the provisions of this section non-justiceable and thus legally non enforceable, Mr. Falana in his book, ‘Nigerian Law on Socioeconomic Rights’, published last year provides details on how many aspects of Chapter 2 of the Constitution have become justiceable through the unceasing legal advocacy of pro-people lawyers, the decisions of courageous judges over time in specific cases and the fact that Nigeria is a signatory to such international legal instruments as the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights as well as the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which enshrine the socio-economic rights of the people and have been enacted into law by the National Assembly.

    Most importantly, in the Kunle Ajibade colloquium address, Falana established a link between fully implementing the social welfare provisions stipulated in Section 2 of the constitution and the war to eradicate corruption in Nigeria. In his words: “Other welfare laws on housing, health insurance, pension and minimum wage among others are being breached with impunity. Yet, if we insist and ensure that the welfare laws are enforced by the governments, there will be no money left to be stolen by unpatriotic public officers”.

  • Kick out busybodies

    Super Eagles’ players have a date with history today as they file out against Croatia in one of the Group D qualification matches. There is one objective – beat the Croatians groggy with goals and ignite the Russia 2018 World Cup with rave reviews of the game.

    The Croatians are pundits’ favourites to progress into the Round of 16 with Argentina, based on their pedigree in the competition, including their players’ stature in world soccer.

    The history of the Mundial is replete with such permutations based on current form and players’ pedigree. But the beauty of the game once the centre referee sounds his opening whistle is that only 22 players will be on the pitch, with the eventual victor being the side with a stronger hunger for victory.

    The players’ sublime skills  and the team’s unity of purpose do play important roles in deciding matches, but it is the side that scores goals the most that wins. This is the basis for the unpredictable outcome of matches, with fans ready to celebrate with the winners.

    There are always fairytale teams in big tournaments and it won’t be out of place to tip Nigeria to be one of them, given the presence of Argentina and Croatia in the country’s group. We have the players, who are young and ply their trade in Europe.

    Most of our players play weekly against some of the big names at the Mundial. So, they won’t be suffering from any form of inferiority complex. Our players’ exposure will make them conquer stage fright.

    When teams win matches, a motley crowd is expected, not before the game as is seen when Nigerian sides participate in such big tournaments. These busybodies come in flowing robes, peddling influence before the players, making unthinkable promises, stoking embers of bitterness around the team for selfish purposes and meddling with the team’s operations, if it loses its first game.

    Pushed to the background are the technical officials who coupled the team together and are trained on what to tell the players, having watched the first half from the sidelines. In fact, some disgruntled officials use this platform to incite the players against the federation and encourage mafia groupings among them. Such broken setting affects team unity, which is the edge the real contenders for the trophy have over outsiders, such as African countries and developing nations, at the Mundial.

    In fact, video footages of most Nigeria matches reveal a crowded dressing room at half time. This raises the confusion within the team, especially when it is trailing. It is worrisome also when the team is leading, as these busybodies make unnecessary and distracting promises. Examples of some of the things they say to the players to further confuse them include promises of giving them $5,000 per goal or $50,000 for victory. Of course, the promise of $5,000 encourages selfishness , particularly by the strikers and it rubs off on the team’s cohesion.

    The regulations allow for 15 minutes interval to give room for the players to rest their limbs. It is during this period that the coaches evaluate the game and plot counter strategies based on what they saw in the first. But with the invasion by these interlopers, the coaches and players hardly have enough time to think through their game plans and seek other ways of dislodging the opponents.

    Modern day technology makes it possible for president Muhammadu Buhari to talk to the team via Skype before and after matches. Government delegation members do not have to read out his message inside the dressing room. All promises, especially presidential ones, should be made days before the game, not on match days. The team needs 100 per cent concentration, largely because the task before them is more or less a war that abhors distractions.

    We have seen teams lose the first game yet qualified for the semi-finals, ahead of teams which didn’t lose a game in the group stage, a case in point being Nigeria’s 3-0 whiplash of Bulgaria in the first game at the USA’94 World Cup. Bulgaria went on to win the bronze medal at the Yankee Mundial. Nigeria exited in the second round. We need to rally behind the players, irrespective of the result. At the Brazil 2014 event, we drew on a barren note to minnows at the Mundial, Iran, yet we qualified for the Round of 16.

    Those who don’t have anything to do with the team must be stopped from getting close to the players. Thank goodness, we don’t have Presidential Task Force (PTF) members, who would force their way to see the players. Visits to the players on match days could be counter-productive. Psyching up the players should be left to the coaches and psychologists – if the Eagles have them. Players give their best when the vibrations from the people are positive. Many critics don’t understand the damage they do to the players with derogatory comments. The world is a global village. The players read these comments which demoralise them. They don’t make mistakes deliberately. They know what they miss when they falter, especially those who need new deals for the 2018/2019 European season, which begins at the end of the Mundial.

    The Mundial is the platform to showcase excellence not the podium to celebrate mediocrity. Hence coaches pick the best. Of course, coaches who excel at the Mundial get new suitors who will dangle irresistible deals to recruit them to new teams.

    Interestingly, on Monday, Etebo signed for demoted English Premier League side, Stoke City, which the club’s Chief Executive Tony Scholes acknowledged.

    “I’m particularly pleased that he took the time to look beyond our current league status and understand who we are as a club before choosing us ahead of current Premier League and Bundesliga club,” Scholes is quoted as saying by the official Stoke City website.

    Similarly, manager Gary Rowett is delighted at the acquisition of a player with the potential to blossom at the bet365 Stadium.

    “We’re really excited to have got the deal over the line for Etebo. I’m looking forward to seeing him in a Stoke City shirt as I’m sure our supporters are too,” Rowett noted.

    Only last month, Leon Balogun joined Brighton FC in the Barclays English Premier League for next season. Austin Okocha dazzled the world at the France ’98 World Cup. His reward was a mouth-watering offer from Paris Saint Germain (PSG) in the French Lique Un. It is a win-win situation for coaches and players who excel at the Mundial.

    The Mundial throws up a lot of advantages, some of which Edo State Governor Godwin Obaseki highlighted at a forum in Benin City on Monday. He said: “The World Cup has become a very strong tool for diplomacy and image refresh. I urge our players to appreciate the bigger picture and comport themselves in a manner that befits the new Nigeria that we are working hard to build.

    “I am confident that the Nigerian spirit, coupled with the strict adherence to instructions by their technical team, will take our Eagles to victory.”

    “The team has our support and we are hopeful that we will make it to the final and win the trophy. All that is required of the players is to keep their eyes on the trophy and approach each match with a high sense of commitment to national duty,” he said.

    Well said, Obaseki. Our players should be educated about the opportunities that participating at the Mundial offers our people, which they shouldn’t flunk with selfish displays. The least they can do for Nigerians will be to go down fighting instead of losing matches with ignominy.

    For the Super Eagles, everything stops in the country when the team plays. Eagles’ players are icons. They play for some of the best teams in the world. Their popularity is awesome. You marvel watching other nationals show so much excitement towards any Nigerian on match day with many calling them Nwankwo Kanu, Austin Okocha, Peter Rufai etc. Even the exploits of our departed stars, such as the late Rashidi Yekini’s, are celebrated. You see more of the excitement on the faces of our hosts in foreign lands. Talking to Nigerians on the streets, at hotels, malls and at airport lounges brings a lot of fulfilment to these foreigners that you imagine how they would conduct themselves when they eventually see our stars, such as Kanu. Such a spectacle is better imagined than expressed in words.  Such is the popularity of the beautiful game, which knows no bound, creed and tribe.

    Come on Eagles, beat Croatia; let’s celebrate. Up Super Eagles. Up Nigeria!

  • Denuclearisation, trade  and justice

    Three  events ricocheted into  the three  – in –one  headline  of  today.
    These  were the historic Trump  -Kim Denuclearisation   talks in Singapore on  June 12, the  G7 Meeting last week in Canada  and  the spat  between  the US  and  G7  nations   over  tariffs  and the aftermath  of the declaration of  June 12  as Nigeria’s Democracy  Day  by  incumbent President Muhammadu  Buhari. The  three  events as  we shall  see   here  show  clearly  that the world order  is changing in terms of the prospects  of peace  and  the emergence  of a new  world  order. They   also  show in strange unison that  in not only international  relations and diplomacy  but also in Nigerian  politics there  are  no permanent enemies  but  permanent  interests . Furthermore   the  events  show  that sovereign  and political  alignments and alliances  are  not cast  in stone and that  such  relationships are  renewable  and recyclable.   Just  like the new energy  sources we are dancing around to replace fossil  energy  in  the quest  to  make our environment    cleaner   in line with  the support    for  the  global   climate change  effort. I will  illustrate my comments with  good  examples of what  happened  on the world stage  this week  on these issues.

    The  Trump – Kim  Talks  have  come  and gone like  a fairy  tale on  denuclearization  but the hard unbelievable facts that the world  has  moved away  from a cliff  of nuclear  war are there  for all  to see. Kim  Jong  Un    the  North Korean    leader  signed  a statement committing his regime to  denuclearization  and US  President  Donald  Trump  has pledged  to stop the  provocative   Joint  Military Exercises  with Allies in the Korean  Peninsular. Later  the Americans clarified  that sanctions will  not be  stopped  against  NK until  Denuclearisation  is in place.  In    effect  the  two strong leaders simply  made  a difficult  and dangerous  issue  of  war  mongering and threat  of nuclear  annihilation to  vamoose  into thin air. As  if  we  are  talking  about  an  advertisement presentation by an agency  to  a willing client.  Yet  the  conclusion  was  not  always   that obvious  as  it happened and  such  a statement by the two  leaders  was just  unthinkable  a few  months back. It  is easy  now to compare  the June 12  Singapore  Talks  with the annual   G7  meeting  of the richest nations on earth where these  nations converge to entrench their  monopoly  and control  of world trade and finance. Except  that this time  around  the US  president  threw a bomb  at  the G7  by  introducing tariffs  as weapons of fair  trade  on  his way  to the G7  meeting.  He  did not stop at that , he  made clear  to the   G7  nations that he had  more important things to address  in  Singapore  than  the lamentations and hand  wringing of old US  trade  partners  he accused  of  stealing from the piggy  bank  they   have turned the US into, through   their    underhand    and unfair  trade  practices. Which  is a crucial   denunciation  of trade  partners  in any  language.

    That  development  leads  us to the assertion we made earlier that  alliances  and trade  agreements are  not cast in stone. The  US is  showing  that to the G 7 nations  generally  and the EU led  by its most opulent  leader  Germany  under Angela  Merkel. Trump  has not minced  words in condemning Merkel  for  allowing 1m migrants into Germany and forcing  literally  the rest of EU  to  follow  suit  or face cuts in EU  funds . Hungary, Poland, Slovak  and Czech Republics  are resisting  that for  now. Now  Trump  or the US  has  promised  to put tariffs on  German car  products because  Germany  he  said buys one car from the US for every 3 sold to the Americans.  Trump  is showing the EU  and G7  nations that  the economic equation has changed and they cannot eat  their cake and still  have it with the US on trade  at least  during his presidency.  It  remains  to be seen  how Europe  will  react to redeem itself  and continental  ego  in the face of  a leader of an alliance it belongs to  who  has no aversion to washing dirty linen of  all  members in public. Yet  Trump  took the wind out of the sail of his European  accusers in Canada  by calling on them to use tariffs  to achieve fair  trade for all which  is what they  are accusing him  of not  doing by slamming tariffs  on them. But  really  between  the G7  and  Trump’s America  who  can really  boast  of having a clean  hand  when it comes to  equity in trade? That  is the million dollar  question begging for an answer.

    In  Nigeria  the debate  is on,  on  the appropriateness or legality  of making the new  Democracy Day, June  12. To  me the president should  not lose any sleep  over those  questioning his motive. It is election time  and people  especially  opponents see ulterior  motive  in even the most salutary acts of government. That  is the nature of politics. The president  should take solace  that majority of  Nigerians  see his  action positively because of the ultimate sacrifice  made by MKO Abiola, the major  victim  and martyr  of the June  12  Election  and  injustice. Whether  that translates  to electoral  capital  in 2019  or  not    for   the  incumbent  president  is not the issue. But  then  it should, all  things  remaining equal  like  the Economists  would  say. Whether it is belated like the sage Pa Ayo  Adebanjo  has averred  is yet  to be seen. Yet    its potential  of  dampening  the horrors, pain  and disappointment  of  the June 12 Election cancellation are enormous  and   that can translate into  political  empathy and electoral  capital  for the Nigerian president  in the 2019  elections. To  me therefore the return of June 12  as Democracy Day  by the present government is a national  atonement  by a nation that  has  struggled with the compunction of cancellation  of its freest election while it keeps on calling itself a democracy  on blatantly rigged  subsequent  elections. June  12 Democracy Day  is like a restoration of justice in the direction  of a better  attempt  at a cleaner  democracy  and a promise  to make a clean break with election  rigging   henceforth. It is not too much to have such hope. Even in our Nigeria. Once again, long live the Federal  Republic of Nigeria.

  • Rivers LG Polls: We are on standby – Army

    The Nigerian Army on Friday said soldiers would be on standby to forestall possible violence in Saturday’s council elections in Rivers.

    Col. Aminu Iliyasu, Spokesman of the Nigerian Army 6 Division, Port Harcourt, told our reporters that  soldiers would be deployed at strategic points several kilometres away from polling centres.

    He explained that the army was adopting that position because “we are not directly involved in the election and no soldier is going to be deployed for any election duty’’.

    Read Also: Army re-strategising to end insecurity, says Buratai

    According to Iliyasu, it is only the Police and Department of State Security that have the constitutional responsibility to provide security in the election.

    “However, we are always on alert whenever there is election. We will only be on standby at the periphery in case our services are needed,” he said.

    Iliyasu said that soldiers were banned from going into polling centres and escort polling materials to the centres.

    The Rivers State Independent Electoral Commission (RSIEC) will conduct the elections in the 23 local government areas of the state.

    NAN

  • Democracy, leaders  and power

    Every  dog  has  its  day ‘ is a fine saying   to  oneself   urging restraint  when your  opponents get  the better  of you    on  any   issue ,  no  matter  how momentarily. It   is  a statement  that  is both consolatory and hopeful  that a different  solution to the  matter  at hand  may still  emerge  even  as the victors  of the moment  savor their  victory.   That  mood and attitude  had been  the mood  of  most  Nigerians since former Head of State  retired Gen Olusegun Obasanjo  in   1999   made    May  29, Democracy  Day   when    he was elected a civilian  president  of Nigeria, 20  years after he left office as a military  dictator  and handed  over government  to a democratically  elected government  of  Shehu  Shagari.  Nigerians  were tramautised  by that  use  of presidential  power as most thought that  June 12,  the date   of  the   June  12  election  that  brought in MKO Abiola  as president ‘ of the freest election in Nigeria’  should  without  doubt  have been  Nigeria’s  undoubted  Democracy  Day  given  the struggle  the Nigerian people embarked on with the Abacha  military  regime to  have the winner  of the election sworn  in as president to claim his mandate. Every  dog  had its day  for the Obasanjo’s  thinking  and   use  or  abuse   of  power  till  this week  when  Nigeria’s President Muhammadu  Buhari  used the same power  to annul  May  29  as  Nigeria’s  Democacy  Day  and install  June 12  as the new Democracy  Day  and Public Holiday  in  Nigeria.  Again,  you  can  bring  in  another  fine saying for  the occasion.  That  is the wise  saying  that  –  the mills  of justice may grind slowly  but they  grind exceedingly fine.  You  may  even   round that up  by  joining me in  doffing my  hat  to  our  president  and sage  indeed  on this matter    for  making  a reality  the wishes  of  millions  of  Nigerians  for  a long  time.  A  wish  deliberately  and contemptuously  ignored  with  impunity  by  the creator  of  May   29  Democracy  Day. A  leader   who  sees  himself   and no  other  as Nigeria’s   chosen  Messiah  even  though fate  gave  him  ample opportunity  to  turn  Nigeria  round so that  we have light at the end  of  the tunnel  of  Democracy. But  he blew  up  the rare  chance  of being our president twice and is  still  unrepentantly  blaming every  one but himself  for  the  sick  democracy   we  are  all  learning to  live with  today.  Even  as we do not know whether  or when  to cry  or  laugh     as  we  somewhat,     in very    vain   hope  await  the elusive  mirage  of  the dividends  of  democracy.

    All    the same  without  taking anything  away  from  the incumbent’s  President’s   responsive and welcome creation of a new Democracy Day   in  Nigeria,  we  look  at the travails  of Democracy  as a   global system  of  government and  the claims  being made  for  it or  on its behalf  by those  who  have  power  through  elections  and  believe  democracy under  their  leadership  or  guidance  is working. One  such  view  point  is  held by  no less  a body  than  Nigeria’s National  Assembly  which  in   a joint  session  this week called  on the Nigerian  president to perform  on security  and protect  Nigerians   and    stop  molesting  opponents  or else   be ready  for the Nigerian Legislature  to invoke  its power  to  take care of  Nigerians.  Which  is a form  of impeachment  threat  which  we  shall  look  at  in the appropriate  context  today.

    We  also  take  a look  at another  June  12  event  on  De -nuclearisation  taking place  hopefully  finally  in Singapore  and  involving   the highly  charged  meeting between  US President Donald  Trump  and N Korean leader  Kim  Jong  Un. It  is  a meeting  between two  leaders with  different  concepts  of  democracy that  are  at odds in  theory  and practice . In  fact  those Americans  who  hate Trump  would  put  him in the same dictatorial  mode  as Kim  and call  them  birds  of the same feather  in their  style  of  democratic  leadership. That  however  would be open  to  a virile debate involving the evolution  and history  of their  two  very  different political  systems  and the  institutions  of political  participation  and mobilization. What  is important  is that the  two  leaders have taught    the civilized  world  a lesson that  in diplomacy  at  what ever level  and what ever  the odds,  where  there is a will    there  is always   a  way.  The two  leaders  meet  on an Island in  Singapore on  Nigeria’s  new  Democracy  Day   and Nigerians cannot  but  wish  them  the best  in their  quest  to make the world  a safer  place  for  us  all. The  meeting   was  always  on a cliff  hanger in terms of it   ever  taking place given  the volatile  nature  of the two  very  powerful  leaders    who  have shown by  now  mutual  respect  for each other in making the June 12 possible  after  mutual  recriminations , suspicion  and   mistrust  of  their agents  and nations on the Denuclearisation issue. The  lesson  for global  leaders  here  is that power  and its exercise  should  not stand  in the way  of  national  and   global  issues and  political  systems  in what ever  mode    of democracy     can  relate, interact and have  rapprochement  to make  global   peace  in our  time.

    We  can now  go back  to  the National  Assembly’s   veiled impeachment threat  to the Nigerian president and its implications. It  is apparent  that the face off   between  the inspector  general of police and the  president of the senate  that  has  mushroomed  to the Offa  robbery   accusations   and  invitation  of the Senate  President   by  the Police on the robbery has been deemed an attack  on the independence of the Nigerian  legislature  and as such  an  assault on our  democracy. The  issue  here is that impeachment and criminal  allegations  are two  different  issues  and distinct  aspects of democracy  and  the rule  of  law. The  president  is in charge of the security  of the nation  and the  ball  is always  in his court  on  that  account  on which  he is accountable  to the Nigerian  people  now   and  especially   at election time. Similarly  the legislature  and its principal  officers are  not above the law  of  the land while policing is still  under  the IGP under  the rule of  law  and no  other.  These  are  the nitty  gritty  of  the matter  and the  workings of  our  democracy  must  be allowed  to play itself out  in  the correct,  legal  and legitimate  manner,  such  that  justice  is  not only  done  but must  be seen  to  have  been  done according  to our constitution.  Once again, long live the Federal  Republic  of  Nigeria.

  • Fly, Eagles fly

    Let us tell ourselves the truth – Nigeria cannot win the Russia 2018 World Cup diadem, with the lackadaisical manner in which our players prosecuted the first half of their last three international friendly matches. That they are playing safe is an unacceptable excuse, given how other players slated to participate in the Mundial approach their countries’ games. What our last two friendly matches have shown is that Nigeria will be at the Mundial on an excursion, except something drastic happens to the players’ attitude. For now, it is despicable. Sad.

    Gernot Rohr should fix the defence. Our players are slow to react to crosses. The taller ones, particularly who wait until the ball gets to them before reacting. At the Mundial, strikers will snatch the ball by reacting first. And bang the ball or nod it into the net for goals. The flank defenders are left vulnerable because those who man the midfield and the flanks upfront never fall back when they lose the ball.

    Those who attempt to fall back to mark are slower than the millipede. It is ironic watching taller Nigerians marking shorter opponents. Are the players expecting Rohr to teach them what to do? Please, senior national team players ought not be taught this basic skill. It should come to them naturally.

    The roof top of The Nation Sportinglife’s office almost came down as Neymar riffled home Brazil’s opening goal in their 2-0 victory over Croatia at Anfield Stadium, home of Liverpool FC of England. The game was Neymar’s first since he copped an injury that almost ruined his chances of participating in the Mundial. I leapt onto my feet watching Germany’s goalkeeper Neuer show no traces of being rusty, even when he had been off the pitch for over 249 days due to an injury. Neymar and Neuer are big stars whose countries must feature those games. Neuer, in particular, is a World Cup winner. But they chose to subject themselves to scrutiny. That way others in the teams wouldn’t feel cheated.

    Super Eagles manager Gernot Rohr goofed by allowing Victor Moses a few days to celebrate his wedding anniversary instead of going to Nigeria’s World Cup camp which opened in Uyo penultimate Monday. Rohr has unwittingly created an Animal Farm setting in the Eagles. I hope it doesn’t haunt him when the chips are down in Russia. Moses is an integral part of the Eagles and should be made to play in all our friendly games, especially as Wilfred Ndidi is still recuperating.

    Moses was a shadow of himself and rightly so, because he didn’t subject himself to the training drills others had in Uyo and Port Harcourt when DR Congo held Nigeria to a 1-1 draw inside the Adokie Amiesimaka Stadium. Moses’ penchant for missing Nigeria’s friendly matches is legendary- when he isn’t injured, he is asking for days to rest or feigning injury. Yet, he gets fielded in our matches and becomes a cog in the wheel of progress.

    Moses is Nigeria’s poster boy to the Mundial and he has not applied himself to the team’s build-up matches. Moses’ conduct reminds us of John Mikel Obi’s days at Chelsea. Sadly, other nationals who play for the Blues don’t behave like the Nigerian duo with their countries? ‘’Why are we so blessed?’’

    Rohr has been fine with his selection, but his decision to field Moses ahead of Kelechi Iheanacho defied tactics as the Chelsea star was lost in the game in England. He neither marked nor provided the passes to free the strikers to score goals. Moses had only one moment, where he dribbled an English defender who fell on his knees. He lost the ball shortly, making such a dribbling, a foolish act.

    Iheanacho trained more with the team than Moses before the game against England. He even played in the first half of the game against DR Congo and was definitely in form than the latter. Perhaps, Rohr’s excuse would be that Iheanacho had a knock, yet he shouldn’t have played Moses for that long. Good player, no doubt, but he selects matches and may not be part of Nigeria’s subsequent matches, given what we saw from the boys who drilled Europa Cup champions Atletico Madrid inside the Nest of Champions Stadium in Uyo. The Spaniards won the game but they confessed that those young Nigerians stretched them to their limit.

    However, England’s game served its purpose. It has forced Rohr to adopt the 3-5-2 formation which he employed against Argentina and the English in the second half. It worked for the Eagles against the Argentines with their historic 4-2 whiplash of the former World Cup champions. But England’s manager Gareth Southgate opted to park-the-bus, like they say in coaching, by putting enough men behind the ball. This defensive net held the rampaging Nigerians after their early goal in the second half, scored by Alex Iwobi.

    Nigerians watched in awe as the Eagles wobbled against a starless Czech Republic that didn’t have former Arsenal FC of London’s ace Rosiky and goalkeeper Petr Cech. With such a team, it should be a stroll in the park for the Nigerians, given our players’ pedigree. The Czechs exploited our weakness in aerial battles to score their only goal. What stood out was the failure of our central defenders to mark their men during set pieces, such as the corner kick which resulted in the goal.

    Indeed, the most difficult balls to contend with by goalkeepers are close range headers. And it behoves on our defenders to pick the nearest free opponent during such goalmouth melee. Goalkeeper Francis Uzoho did well with the first header but the rebound fell on an unmarked Czech who riffled the ball into the net. That was a cheap goal, which could have been averted had a defender stayed with the scorer. Our players must be told that our group opponents sent spies to watch our matches. Teams wobble when the opposition attacks them at their weaknesses. I hope this won’t be our portion on June 16 against Croatia.

    Nigeria cannot afford to lose her first game, especially against the background that the Argentines will be battling newcomers Iceland in their opening game. Should the Argentines whip Iceland, the losers will pull all the stops to avert another defeat against Nigeria in the second game. A win for Nigeria over Croatia will not only be a morale booster with three points, it will also give us the impetus to beat a losing Iceland, even if they lose to Argentina.

    With six points, Nigeria would have equalled her best performance at the Mundial, leaving the last game against Argentina a mere formality. But, the permutations by iconic manager Jose Mourinho raises an interesting poser in the event that Nigeria and Argentina win their two matches in the group.

    The two countries will be fighting for the group’s leadership but the critical question will be which of the two countries will like to draw France in the second round? Argentina won’t like to play against France, ditto the French, won’t cherish a fixture against the Argentines. So, which country will love to play the French? I pray we draw Australia in the Round of 16, following Mourinho’s prediction. Nigerians would be glad to have the Aussies. If it does happen, Nigeria will join the league of African nations that have played in the quarter-finals.

    In the last edition, the French eliminated  Nigeria in the second round and didn’t look like the team to beat us. We have the players to beat France if they play to their potential. Indeed, our players spent the night leading to the French game in Brazil sharing $3.8 million cash instead of training or resting. If there wasn’t the money distraction, perhaps we would have given the French the fight of our lives, reminiscent of what we did to Brazil at the Atlanta ’96 Olympic Games, where we turned the table against the Samba Boyz in one of the semi-final matches. The Samba Boyz led us by 3-1 but the Nwankwo Kanu-led squad turned it around to 4-3. The Brazilians were sobbing like kids after the final whistle. Nigeria went on to win the Olympic Games’ gold medal, beating Argentina 3-2 in the final game.

    Rohr has challenged us not to press the panic button based on the last two losses. He took Moses, Mikel and Iwobi through the gym work while their colleagues trained. It is clear that the trio are our best. When they are not fit to compete, we are always in trouble.

    “We’ve nine days to be ready for our first match vs Croatia, as at today, we are not ready. I am not sad because of this result, the result that matters will be in Russia,” Rohr said after Wednesday’s match.

    Good to know that Ndidi is fit because he would bring steel into the defence, a quality missing in the team while Ndidi was injured. Onazi was too fat to cope with the demands of the position. He has promised to improve. Will he get a second chance? That is neither here nor there.

  • Adebayo Adedeji and Africa’s development debate (2)

    When he turned 70, another collection of essays was published in Adedeji’s honour titled ‘African Development and Governance Strategies in the 21st Century’ again edited by Professor Bade Onimode. This 256 page book is made up of 16 essays and an epilogue also written by some of the continent’s best and brightest minds. Tracing the impasse of development forty years after independence in this book’s preface, Professor Segun Odunuga, makes the point that “Adedeji’s advocacy of holistic human development is based on the concept that society can only develop with the mobilization of the people; hence his statement that Africa would need to set in motion a process that puts the individual at the very centre of a development effort that is both human and humane…” Is this not a foretaste of the lesson Bill Gates came to teach our leaders here in Nigeria 14 years after this book was written? But the definitive book on this great African is undoubtedly ‘African Development: Adebayo Adedeji’s Strategies’ written by Professor S. K. B. Asante and published in 1991.

    Covering 228 pages, Professor Asante’s book on Adebayo Adedeji’s development strategies and policy alternatives for Africa is broken into nine chapters which look at various aspects of Adedeji’s landmark contributions to the conceptualization and evolution of African development strategy. These include elements of Adedeji’s development strategy, Adedeji’s role in the establishment and development of the Economic Commission for Africa (ECA), His participation in the search for an indigenous African Development strategy in the 1970s as well as his frontline role as an active intellectual combatant in the struggle for hegemony over African Development Strategy and the concluding chapter, which examines ‘Adedeji and the Future of African Development’ with the year 2000 in mind.

    Many scholars have pointed out the utter inadequacy, indeed sheer harmfulness at times, of received western social science scholarship on Africa’s quest for socio-economic and political liberation as well as development. For instance in his monumental and path breaking but inadequately acknowledged book, ‘The Challenge of Poverty in Africa’, Professor E. J. Nwosu, the eminent development economist notes that “We should now remind African economists and students of economics of the complacency and misdirection in the treatment of development issues which Western pseudo-intellectual propaganda consistently inflicts on them. They are urged, in the name of the ‘scientific’ approach, to treat economic growth and development issues like Mathematics and even like Physics, and hence with such inhuman coldness, ‘clever technical scaffolding’ and recourse to global or aggregated economic magnitudes that push human, especially class interests, needs, aspirations and sensibilities to the sidelines of economic thought and policy action, as mere incidental categories”.

    Throughout his intellectual and professional life, Professor Adedeji was at the forefront of the struggle to liberate African development policies and strategies from the tyranny of received paradigms. Key elements of his development strategies included self-reliance and self-sustainment linked to the concept of regional co-operation and integration. These elements featured prominently in major attempts by African countries to forge alternative development policies and strategies more suited to their autochthonous and rapid development all of which had the intellectual imprimatur of Adedeji at his vantage position at the head of the Economic Commission for Africa (ECA).

    Professor Adedeji was a key initiator and participant in such major efforts to forge an autonomous and original development path for Africa such as the ECA/OAU Lagos Plan of Action (LPA), adopted by OAU Heads of State in Lagos in 1980, OAU’s ‘Africa’s Priority Programme for Economic Recovery 1986-1990 (APPER) and the United Nations Programme of Action for African Economic Recovery and Development 1986-1980 (UN-PAAERD). On the LPA, for instance, Asante writes that “The adoption of the Lagos Plan of Action – an elaboration of the ‘Monrovia Declaration’ – as advocated by Adedeji and the ECA in collaboration with OAU, was an event of historic significance. For the first time in the history of the continent, African leaders were able to commit themselves, in unambiguous terms, to a unified strategy reflecting their own understanding of the causes of their problems and their own prescription for the collective salvation of their continent”. Unfortunately, the slavishness, venality and lack of the requisite political will by African leaders blunted the efficacy of these alternative policy offensives.

    In chapter eight of his book titled ‘The struggle for hegemony over African Development Strategy: Adedeji vs. the World Bank Mandarins’, Professor Asante vividly captures the heroic role played by Adedeji in confronting and containing the IFI’s attempt to sustain the foisting of neo-liberal, extremist free market policies on Africa through his headship of the ECA. In response to the insistence by the IFI’s that the SAPs were indeed working and positively addressing what they perceived as the roots of the African crisis, Adedeji spearheaded the publication of the African Alternative Framework-Structural Adjustment Programmes in Africa (AAF-SAP), which insisted that the crisis was indeed structural in nature and required radically different policy remedies.

    In the words of Professor Asante: “Despite the World Bank’s persistence that adjustment programmes should continue to evolve, the May 1989 Washington meeting, and especially the Bank’s November 1989 report, have gone a long way towards embracing the salient elements of Adedeji’s alternative development strategy: human-centered development, fostering self-reliance and, lately, the need for SAPs to go beyond stabilization to achieve a genuine transformation of production structures. This is indeed a consensus on which Adedeji has undoubtedly left his mark”. There can be no greater tribute to a patriotic African scholar although the political will to actualize his vision of a truly liberated and transformed Africa is still sadly lacking.

  • An enduring legacy

    When he ran for the country’s presidency in the historic presidential election of 1993 on the platform of the Social Democratic Party (SDP), the late Chief MKO Abiola’s campaign organization was christened ‘Hope ‘93’. What hope was this multi-billionaire and then Africa’s richest man, who had chosen to contest the election on the platform of the ideologically ‘little to the left’ party of military President, General Ibrahim Babangida’s convoluted and ultimately abortive transition program, promising his fellow country men and women? The answer can be found in his campaign manifesto, which incidentally was translated into Hausa and Fulfude by the late Dr. Bala Usman, and titled ‘Farewell to Poverty’.

    By massively voting for Abiola across the country in what has been described as the ‘freest and fairest’ election in the country’s history, majority of the electorate were apparently convinced that a man who pulled himself up by the bootstrap from abject poverty to become one of the wealthiest men on earth could achieve the same feat for his country and help redeem millions of his compatriots from the humiliating grip of penury. After all, in his private life for several years before venturing into politics, Abiola had been easily one of the country’s most generous philanthropists devoting a huge chunk of his wealth to charitable causes.

    Save for those in his inner circle, hardly anyone had the inkling that President Muhammadu Buhari would on Wednesday take the historic step of recognizing June 12, the day the annulled election was held as the authentic ‘democracy day’ in Nigeria. Since 1999, that dubious distinction had been enjoyed by May 29, the arbitrary date that the General Abdulsalam Abubakar regime had chosen to hand over to a democratically elected civilian administration in 1999.  Not only that, Buhari bestowed the country’s highest honour, Grand Commander of the Federal Republic (GCFR) on Abiola and that of Grand Commander of the Order of the Niger (GCON) on Alhaji Babagana Kingibe, who was Abiola’s running mate.  This in effect implies the recognition of Abiola as winner of the 1993 presidential election because the title of GCFR is reserved only for Heads of State.

    Only recently, President Buhari had made a widely criticized statement, which appeared complimentary of the late of Head of State, General Sani Abacha and his Petroleum Trust Fund (PTF) initiative. This was the dictator who not only refused to undo the injustice of IBB’s annulment of the election but jailed Abiola for insisting on the validation of his mandate leading ultimately to the President elect’s death under General Abubakar’s watch.  Buhari served as Chairman of the PTF under Abacha and had even at some point expressed doubts that Abacha had massively looted the country’s resources as widely alleged.  Does this detract in any way from the nobility and loftness of his action in recognizing the legal validity of the June 12 election and posthumously restoring Abiola to his rightful place in Nigeria’s history as insinuated by some critics? Not by any means.

    Buhari is human.  It was Abacha who rehabilitated him and restored some of his dignity after the humiliation he suffered being overthrown as Head of State in Babangida’s palace coup.  His soft spot for the former Head of State is understandable. There is something honourable about not denying a friend simply because he has fallen from grace. It is a mark of character.  In any case, even though Abiola won a Pan-Nigerian victory, the struggle to actualize the annulled mandate ultimately degenerated to an almost entirely South-West affair. A President Buhari from the North would thus have been the last person expected to do post humus justice to Abiola. And that is the grand irony as many analysts have pointed out.

    Abiola’s own kinsman, OBJ, the greatest beneficiary of MKO’s heroic struggle and ultimate martyrdom, was the imperial tenant of the Presidential Villa for eight years. Consumed by his own disproportionate sense of self righteousness, he never saw it fit to do justice by MKO. Even when the great sage, Awo, was alive, OBJ had the temerity to write in his book, ‘Not my Will’ that Nigeria’s presidency that Awolowo sought all his life, he got on a platter of gold at a young age. What utter emptiness! Yet, here is an OBJ who, beside Awo, is a moral, spiritual and intellectual Lilliputian unfit to clean the great man’s shoes. By this strategic move, PMB has dealt a well deserved death blow to OBJ’s vacuous political posturing. Perhaps the old soldier, whose obscene and grotesque hilltop mansion in Abeokuta rivals that of IBB in Minna and yet dares to question the moral credentials of a PMB who stands on an infinitely higher ethical pedestal than the duo, will now let us have some peace. The less said of him the better.

    It is noteworthy that President Buhari also awarded the late legal icon, human rights and pro-democracy activist, Chief Gani Fawehinmi (SAN), the Grand Commander of the Order of the Niger (GCON). I recall an interview granted by Fawehinmi at the height of the struggle to actualize June 12 in which the legal titan declared that there was something mystical about June 12 and that no force on earth could kill the spirit of the annulled election until justice was done. He has been proven right by the literal resurrection of the spirit of June 12 two and a half decades after it was supposedly buried by Babangida’s unjust annulment.

    Martin Luther King Jr. had expressed this same truth over six decades ago at Boston University when he wrote “All I’m trying to say is, our world hinges on moral foundations. God has made it so! God has made the universe to be based on a moral law…There is something in this universe that justifies Carlyle in saying, “No lie can live forever”. There is something in this universe that justifies William Cullen Bryant in saying, “Truth, crushed to earth, will rise again”. Nobel laureate, Professor Wole Soyinka, inscribed the same truth in the immortal words, “Justice is the first condition of humanity”.

    But then there is a great lesson in the justice done to Abiola’s memory by an improbable Buhari of all persons for those top members of this administration who exploit the huge popularity Buhari enjoys as a result of his integrity, asceticism and discipline to violate due process, assault the rule of law, undermine state institutions and perpetrate all kinds of impunity. The blood of hundreds of Shiite Muslims killed in cold blood in Kaduna and buried in a mass grave due to the use of disproportionate force cries out against them. They detain people for indefinite periods despite court rulings to the contrary. They shirk their responsibilities and look the other way when lawless herdsmen reap a harvest of innocent deaths on a daily basis. They abuse their offices and substitute loyalty to partisan and personal interests for loyalty to the constitution and the state. Let them listen to the words of Martin Luther King again: “There is something in this universe that justifies the biblical writer in saying, “You shall reap what you sow”.

    But then, what are the recognition accorded June 12 and the honour done Abiola about? Is it about winning the next elections as some insinuate? That would be hardly illegitimate. But it would be the height of pathetic and regrettable banality. Let me resort to Martin Luther King Jr. again: “The thing that we need in the world today is a group of men and women who will stand up for right and be opposed to wrong, wherever it is”. Buhari has stood up to be counted among such men and women in Nigeria through his commitment to fighting corruption. His decision on June 12, MKO Abiola and Gani Fawehinmi is a mark of great courage. When the majority of APC elected party and state officers wanted illegal tenure elongation for party officials Buhari courageously said no and insisted on due process and the rule of law. He could have thrown the weight of his office behind the continuity in office of an incompetent party leadership at the next convention of the party as many wanted. He said no.

    Buhari certainly has what it takes to look those in his administration tainted by corruption boldly in the eye and not only say ‘enough’ but make them face the law. They are making a mockery of his anti-corruption war. He has what it takes to show incompetent hands out of his administration. He has what it takes to cast out the demons of alleged nepotism that erodes his immense goodwill while compelling his security chiefs to decisively reign in armed killer gangs now on the rampage wherever they come from or quit their offices for more competent hands.

    When he begins to do that, his gesture on June 12, Abiola and Fawheinmi will not be simply about the next election, which is essentially transient and ephemeral. It will be about bequeathing to posterity an enduring legacy. Believe me, given his unbelievable absolute indifference to the crass materialism that is the bane of Nigeria’s political elite, there are few people better placed than Buhari to help lay the foundation for a new Nigeria.

  • Killer herders and full wrath of the law

    IN his Democracy Day national broadcast, President Muhammadu Buhari warned that the full wrath of the law would be brought upon culprits and sponsors involved in kidnappings and herders/farmers clashes. Contrary to how most media organisations reported that aspect of the president’s speech, he did not refer to culprits or sponsors as killer herders. That name-calling was strictly the invention of the media. In the president’s vocabulary, there is nothing like a killer herdsman. Had such a person existed, surely the president is not so unfamiliar with labelling to decline naming the culprits as the rest of the country would.

    The president was indeed quite clear what he wanted to say and how to say it, regardless of whether his opinion shows consistency with his previous position on a crisis that is dangerously tending towards religious and ethnic catastrophe. Hear him: “The unfortunate incidences of kidnappings, herdsmen and farmers’ clashes in several communities which have led to a high number of fatalities and loss of property across the country is being addressed and the identified culprits and their sponsors shall be made to face the full wrath of the law. All the three tiers of government are presently engaged with communities and religious organisations to restore peaceful co-existence among Nigerians.” The nearest the president got to referring to the so-called culprits as anything deeply reprehensible was when he described them as criminal elements.

    “I wish to assure Nigerians that we will not rest until all criminal elements and their sponsors are brought to justice,” he continued with measured detachment . “Government is boosting the capacity of our security agencies through recruitment of more personnel, training and procurement of modern equipment, enhancement of intelligence gathering as well as boosting their morale in the face of daunting challenges.” Nigerians must give President Buhari credit for sticking to his guns, remaining consistent over the difficult months that saw thousands of mostly middle belters murdered by rampaging armed men, and refusing to be drawn into any name-calling. His diagnosis of the bloody crisis in the Middle Belt of Nigeria may be unacceptable and even partial, a crisis he has managed to expand into embracing other forms of criminality like kidnapping and pure robbery and banditry, but no one will convince him that the orchestrated killings in the blighted region are anything other than unfortunate incidents. The number of deaths may be high, as he acknowledged, but it will not prompt him to dissect the problem with the skill of a surgeon, separate the herders’ menace from other forms of banditry, and find the most appropriate and effective remedies.

    Years of killings in that agrarian region have led many Nigerians and analysts to reconsider the fundamentals of the crisis. Gradually, they have shifted away from regarding the crisis as herdsmen/farmers clashes to seeing it as herdsmen invasion and attacks, irrespective of the motives. The farmers, according to the analysts, are after all sedentary and have not moved from one location to the other in search of fertile land. The herders on the other hand, they surmise, are constantly on the move in search of grazing fields, and have often ruined crops. Consequently, the crisis is no longer seen as clashes between herders and farmers, but attacks by herders. The herders have tried to justify their violence, and routinely claim responsibility for the attacks, but it is not clear to many analysts why the government insists on downplaying the confessions, or whether new and generally acceptable methods of animal husbandry would not adequately resolve the crisis.

    While many Nigerians appalled by the scale of savagery going on in the Middle Belt have started to consider alternative and sensible explanations for the crisis, the government has seemed to dither very badly or remain stuck in jaded logic. As this column has traced and reported in the past few months, the government unfortunately prefers to give the impression that its sympathies lie with the herders. Rather than separate the problem of herders attacking farmers over fodder and grazing routes from the sheer criminality of a group of people taking the law into their own hands and murdering fellow Nigerians, the government has muddled the problem and sought to justify the bellicosity of the attacking militias. Unable to separate the two issues, the government has been lethargic in finding the right multi-dimensional solutions. It was important for them to find a permanent solution to the problems caused by the restriction of grazing lands, a solution that would neither expropriate anybody’s farm lands nor leave the herders unattended to.

    And it was also urgent for them to tackle the killings by first regarding them as murders which the laws of the land do not excuse. Quite shockingly, the government has done neither. Instead, they have tried inexpertly, and sadly and ignorantly, to walk a tightrope. So far their efforts have met with abject failure. In fact, more damaging to the credibility of the government, as this column has portrayed, is their inconsistent explanations, nay justifications, for the killings. First was their argument that the farming communities were unpatriotically unwilling to accommodate their fellow countrymen who were herders. If there was no resistance, if the farming communities received the herdsmen, argued the government, peace would be restored. This argument was then swiftly modified, upon some public pressure and criticisms, to paint the attackers as stragglers from the Libyan civil war, or bandits armed with weapons hijacked from the same Maghrebian war. Then, yet again, the argument was later painted as one that had to do with herders falling into a quandary over restricted grazing lands. In the opinion of the government, the herders had no other choice but to fight for their place in the sun. Not only were the arguments of the government tragically exculpatory of herders violence, the arguments also indicated official collusion and disingenuousness.

    This strange disposition has in turn led farming communities to fear ethnic cleansing, and their religious elite to fear sectarian purges. With the crisis in danger of morphing into something more apocalyptic than the country is capable of managing, it is incomprehensible that the government has continued to pussyfoot and prevaricate. Indeed, nothing will come out of the president’s oath to bring the culprits and their sponsors to justice. To resolve the crisis, it is indispensable for the government to reach a consensus on the diagnosis of the problem. But that consensus is unlikely to be reached, for the constant waffling of the government, accentuated by the president’s own reluctance to act swiftly and firmly on the side of the law, indicates nothing to the victims but confusion among the country’s leaders, if not partiality.

    It is deeply troubling that the president sees the killings, in particular, as proceeding from a lack of “peaceful co-existence”. By talking of “peaceful co-existence”, it is clear that the president means the herdsmen issue, which he describes as a clash rather than attacks and criminality. He could not be referring to kidnappings and armed robbery, for there is nothing in these other issues and crimes for anyone to encourage peaceful co-existence. And by also talking of “peaceful co-existence”, the president seems in addition to be suggesting that the only way he is willing to contemplate a solution is to coerce the farmers and herders into unaccustomed unity. That unity and that resolution will not happen, for the root of the problem, which the government has seemed to deny or wish away, is too fundamental and too mutually antagonistic to be resolved by peace talks rather than by a restructuring and reforming of ancient animal husbandry practices.