The Nation Newspaper

Category: Saturday

  • Culture, impunity and politics

    We  live in a fast changing  world  and environment  and some events  and happenings   come so fast that we need  to nudge ourselves that we are not hallucinating. I   take on a few of such  unbelievable melo dramas and scenarios  today  and I am  sure you will  find them  not only fascinating  but   also  revealing about  the changes in our  world. The  events  I have picked  hover around the concepts in today’s headline and affect  our values, our  restraints and self control  as a  nation and a  people  and of course  our lack of  these simple virtues  too.

    At  an event  to mark  our Democracy Day the man  who  conducted  our  last  presidential  elections told an audience  made up richly of the results and products of  the   2015 elections   that  our National  Assembly  is made up of   bribe  taking Committees  Chairman and  federal  law makers who took  bribe with impunity  in the guise of  doing committee work. Prof Attahiru  Jega   former   INEC   Chairman  lamented and wondered what  the security  and investigative  authorities  were  doing  on the   matter.  The  following day   it was reported that the Senate  President  in the Senate  asked Prof  Jega   to  name the Committee  Chairmen  involved. That  reaction  from  the Senate  President  to me is a confirmation  that   a  culture of  corruption with impunity rules  the entire  Nigerian  political  system  and that is what Jega,  a professor of political science  was   trying  to point out at the  Democracy   Day  Lecture  titled ‘  Peace Building   and Good  Governance  for  Development  in  Nigeria. ‘

    I  have  not read  Jega’s  paper  but from  his observation  as well  as the reaction of   a  product  of   the election he   conducted  in  2015, he is not only  distancing the quality  of that election from its products  in the National  Assembly. He is also  saying that peace and sustainable development  in Nigeria are not possible under such a corrupt  political  culture which  thrives on the malfeseance  of  bribe  taking  by  legislators who  treat  such  deleterious behavior   with  levity      and   unworthy   of their attention   since    that  is their  political   norm  or  set  way  of life,  in making laws for Nigeria.

    Just  this week  a former  Minister  of  Finance  in  the last   Administration  Mrs   Ngozi   Okonjo  Iweala  revealed  at  a book  launch,  a huge amount  added  to the budget  for  legislators constituency  funding  before  the budget  for one year   could  be passed.  Yet   the legislators  in that legislature at that  time  have not found it appropriate  to  resign or  deny such financial misdemeanor. Which  also confirms the culture of corruption with impunity   as stated earlier.

    However,  as  a seasoned political scientist  and university trade unionist Prof Jega  cannot claim to be a novice on   the workings of the Nigerian presidential  system  and politics. Indeed  last  week  his former boss  the last president accused  him of irresponsibility  in wanting to go on with the   2015  presidential  elections  and assuring the security  chiefs that he could go on with the elections when  about 40%  of the electorate were  yet to  have voters  card,   which    would  have disenfranchised almost  half  of the electorate. That  was a true  accusation and I know because I was one of such potential  voters  in my area in Lagos state. That is a charge that the former  INEC  boss  must  live with  or explain forever.  In  addition  Jega  cannot  just  wonder  why  the investigative authorities   seem  powerless  in calling legislative bribe takers  to  order. The constitution has tied the  hands of the security  apparatus in making their leadership  confirmation  of appointment  a legislative   duty.  For  now the boss of the EFCC is  unconfirmed  because of  his role in   probing legislators  and the Inspector  General  of  Police has  been  proclaimed unfit  for office  because  he delegated a  function of appearing before  the Senate  which is his  legitimate  right.

    Anyway  since Jega  himself  is a professor  and the last  presidential election had professors  as INEC state Chairmen  I  want  to remind the former  INEC Chairman  of the highly  suspicious  demeanor of some of these   otherwise brilliant  egg  heads  on presenting their state  results before the INEC Chairman in the 2015 presidential  elections. Especially that of  Rivers  and Kano. The professor for  Rivers  was shivering  as if he stole something  and was being probed  by the INEC  boss.  The  Prof   for Kano  surprised  even  Jega when  he  answered  by    vigorously   shaking his head   in the affirmative,  Jega’s  incredulous  question  that there were  no spoilt  ballot  in the total  massive  votes  announced  for  Kano. Of  course  Jega  believed  that the university  system  have the best  brains but by now  he must  have known disciplinary   or   professional  excellence is not necessarily the best for counting of votes and the attendant honesty  and integrity  that go  with  it. That  should  have  been in his  Democracy  Day  lecture  which  I admit  I have not read.

    Let  me round off  with a story  from another university  environment  in the USA  to show that  a culture  of corruption  and  lack  of ethics  is not limited  to  the  Nigerian politicians and legislators.  In  the University  of Southern California [ USC ], Faculty  members  have signed a petition for the University president to resign  because  he did nothing to a University Gynaecologist  who  served for 30  years  and retired  in 2017  after messing up  with  female  students and patients in the University. The randy  gynaecologist  Dr George  Tyndall was accused of inappropriate   conduct  between  1990  and 2016  in the treatment of 52  women  who have  made  reports  to the police.

    Dr  Tyndall  was accused of doing pelvic examination without  gloves with his fingersand using racist and   in appropriate   sexual  language during consultations. He made comments  ‘about  patients bodies  and their sex lives and   the  tightness of their vaginal  muscles and touched  patients inappropriately during breast examinations’.  Appropriately  though the USC President  C L Max Nikias  stepped  down  this week  after  demonstrations by thousands of students and  alumni  signed a petition  asking for  his resignation.

    The  lesson  to learn in this  USC gyni  case  of  unethical  behavior  is that power  corrupts  and absolute  power  corrupts  absolutely and professors  and doctors who wield  technical  knowledge  and power  are not immune  to temptation to misuse  and abuse  their power  and the trust  of their  patients. What is important however is that those around them  should  be bold  to expose  their  excesses. In the USC  case  nurses  who stayed  with the randy  gynaecologist  were  said  to have looked away  when  innocent   and worried patients  smelt  a rat  in the way the doctor was using his fingers on them.  Such  nurses  are being summoned  by their professional  bodies  for  severe  breach  of ethics .  In  addition  the fact  that the University  president was asked  to resign  means that those  who  put him in power  have asked him   to  bear responsibility  for  playing  Nero  while  Rome burns in the  randy   gynaecologist’s    clinic  and examination room  for  30  years in USC. There may  such  Neros in our universities  and teaching hospitals  and   indeed   globally. It  is the duty of society  to show  them that  they  are not god  because of  their knowledge  and  must  obey  the ethics of their profession and the morals of  cultured  society.  Once again, long live the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

     

     

  • Bring on Three Lions

    Wembley Stadium is a cathedral of sort for professional soccer players, with many eager to run onto the pitch to play a game. As the Super Eagles file out against their English counterparts today, what will be uppermost on the minds of the hosts is to beat the Nigerians to reassure their nationals that they are ready for the Russia 2018 World Cup. For this writer, today’s game is another testy tie for Eagles, especially as Coach Gernot Rohr will field a better set of players unlike what he paraded against DR Congo inside the Adokie Amiesimaka Stadium in Port Harcourt last Monday.

    On paper, the English team are a better side in terms of their personnel, playing style, culture and tradition for such high stake games. But that is where their advantage lies as they are in tandem with the Nigerians in physical play and direct approach to matches. What may count for Eagles today is the fact that most of our players have played at the top level in England. They also know the mentality of the English, which is all that the Nigerians need to create the upset that will be the talking point of the international friendly games ahead of the Russia 2018 World Cup which, begins on June 14.

    Indeed, the Three Lions and the Eagles will be at the Mundial with the youngest set of players, which presupposes that both nations are looking ahead of the biggest football festival in the world. They will be playing young boys who may be playing together for the first time. The question is, why did the English agree to play the Nigerians? Simple – they are pitched against Tunisians in the World Cup group. Any country desirous of doing very well against an African side should play against Nigeria, Ghana, Cameroon, Ivory Coast, Egypt, Tunisia and Morocco. These countries have a rich history of the game even with their different playing styles. North Africans, including Tunisians, play more of the European fluid soccer. But, Nigeria, Cameroon, Ghana and Cote d’Ivoire spice theirs with gritty tackles, which is what the English really need to outmuscle the Tunisians when they meet.

    For Nigeria, the game against England is more for points to climb up FIFA’s ranking, which a win would guarantee. This mission looks far-fetched, given the fact that the Three Lions hardly get beaten  at Wembley. Eagles’ quartet of Victor Moses, Alex Iwobi, Kelechi Iheanacho and Wilfred Ndidi will provide the tips to unsettle the English in what is clearly a prestige game. John Mikel Obi played for Chelsea, ditto Kenneth Omeruo and Aina. Odion Ighalo played for Watford until he left for the Chinese League, like Mikel. Ahmed Musa, who is on the payroll of Leicester like Iheanacho and Ndidi. Almost all members of the squad have imbibed the English football philosophy. Gareth Southgate’s side will then move on to Elland Road in Leeds to take on Costa Rica on 7 June in the last of their warm-up friendlies. The Three Lions’ next match will be against Tunisia in the first of their World Cup match of Group G. They will thereafter face Panama and group favourites Belgium in a bid to reach the knock-out stages.

    The outcome of the game isn’t as important as how key players blend with the new lads to increase their confidence ahead of the country’s opening game against Croatia on June 16. We need to see how Rohr will re-organise the defence to play better than what we saw against DR Congo. The Congolese ran our defenders ragged and showed that they were not sprinters culminating in the penalty which Chelsea’s loanee Ola Aina gave, although the blame ought to have gone to Oghenkaro Etebo who didn’t know what to do with the ball until it was taken off him for the goal-bound move.

    Eagles’ flank defenders will continue to be a problem because our big men upfront don’t fall back to mark when they lose the ball. In fact, the midfielders are worse as they walk sluggishly like Etebo did on Monday in Port Harcourt. Only Ogenyi Onazi remembers to fight for the ball when he loses it. I hope that Rohr can get the boys to mark as soon as they lose the ball. A team’s goalkeeper is as good as its defence. Only the ball goes into the net, making it imperative for the players to strive to keep it and utilise it to our advantage.

    Eagles couldn’t match the Congolese in ball possession, although a few would argue that they were playing safe to avoid injuries. Eagles’ attack lacked the spark until Ahmed Musa and Iwobi were introduced. Musa gave the Congolese problems. Nigeria could only have scored a winner through Musa’s direct approach which could make the visitors commit errors. Otherwise, Eagles played as if nothing was at stake. They were poor against the Congolese. Simy Nwankwo flapped to deceive, especially in the second half as he barely troubled the Congolese, except for the header from a long throw by Aina in the second half.

    Eagles’ midfield was awful all through the 90 minutes. The midfielders barely strung passes together for their mates to score goals. The only goal came from an intelligent free-kick which caught the Congolese off guard. The trio of Onazi, Joel Obi and Etebo were anonymous. Onazi’s weight didn’t allow him to rove in the midfield. Rohr, the tactician kept Etebo on the pitch for 90 minutes, which counted for nothing in terms of his contributions to the team beyond his aimless kicks.

    Eagles missed Mikel’s steel in the midfield. The team wobbled without Victor Moses. Ndidi’s absence was felt as he does the dirty jobs (marking dangerous players and covering the two central defenders) in the midfield. Little wonder Leon Balogun got tired so easily, necessitating his substitution (rightly so) in the second half.

    Back to the England game, which is perhaps the Eagles’s biggest. It should further expose the players’ weaknesses for the coaches to correct. This is the essence of playing such matches, although with an eye for victory. It was good the players visited President Muhammadu Buhari, whose words would have lifted their spirits.

    Buhari told the boys on Wednesday: “You are going to represent us in Russia. You must bear in mind that you are not just going for a tournament. With each game you must remember that you are carrying the passions, emotions and feelings of over 180 million people. Play fair and clean but demonstrate the gallant spirit which Nigerians are known for.

    “Nothing unites Nigerians more than football and nothing will gladden the people of Nigeria than for you to acquit yourself honourably by winning in Russia. You are the youngest team in the tournament which means you are likely the most inexperienced team, a fact that will not be lost on your opponents. But it is also something that you can use to your advantage.

    “You have the full support and the blessings of all Nigerians who will look up to you for as long as the tournament  last. This is our time, we look up to you to make us proud. All Nigerians join me in saying to you, best of luck. Thank you and God be with you all.”

    England has three new goalkeepers going to the Mundial – Jack Butland, Jordan Pickford and Nick Pope. This has thrown into the trash bin fears in Nigeria about the propriety of fielding Francis Uzoho for the Eagles, ahead of experienced goalkeepers, such as Vincent Enyeama, who sadly isn’t playing regularly in Europe, Austin Ejide and Dele Aiyenugba, who both play in the Israeli league.

    The lesson from England’s choice of goalkeepers is that they were picked on club performance, which is what Rohr used in selecting Uzoho, Ikechukwu Ezenwa and Daniel Akpeyi. Nigerians should learn how to project into the future, which is one of the hallmarks of competent but ambitious foreign coaches. We should stop our fixations about how the Eagles should look. Otherwise, the young ones at the grassroots won’t find places in our national teams. Is this not why most young Nigerians change nationality?

    England chose defenders Danny Ross, Gary Cahill, Phil Jones, who sadly is out of today’s game due to injury, John Stones, Ashley Young, Kyle Walker, Kevin Tripier, Harry Maguire and Jordan Henderson. Others include Eric Dier, Loftus-Cheek, Fabien Delph, Dele Alli, Raheem Sterling,  Jese Lingard, Danny Welbeck, Jamie Vardy, Marcus Rashford and Harry Kane.

    Can Eagles beat the Three Lions? Yes, but it isn’t the reason for today’s game. It will pay the Eagles more if the English expose their flaws. The coaches need to have a well knit side to confront the Croatians on June 16. So, what if England beat Nigeria?

  • Sequence of elections

    By placing the National Assembly elections first in its now apparently botched and ill advised attempt to reorder the sequence of next year’s election, the legislators opened themselves to legitimate charges of making an essentially self-serving law to promote personal rather than the national interest. Of course, the sequence of elections is less important than and has little bearing on the integrity and credibility of the polls, which are the most critical things for the country’s democratic development.

    The increasing and systematic improvement in the conduct of elections at various levels since the inception of this dispensation in 1999 culminating in the landmark 2015 election, which saw a party in control of the centre losing to the opposition for the first time in the country’s history, is one indication of the steady deepening of Nigeria’s democracy. Apart from increasing the number of elections from two to three without considering the economic implications, the decision to seek to ensure the holding of the National Assembly elections first was arbitrary and devoid of logic. The legislators thus created the impression that the law was targeted at President Buhari whose election would have been held last had the President not vetoed the bill as argued by supporters of the President in the Senate.

    Ordinarily a good case could be made for reordering the sequence of the elections and regulating this by law rather than leaving it to the discretion of an Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) completely beholden to the executive. It is not always that we will be lucky to have a Chairman of INEC with the integrity, competence and strength of character of a Professor Attahiru Jega. Indeed, President Buhari unaccountably departed from the commendable and desirable precedent of an incumbent President not choosing a Chairman of INEC from his own part of the country. In this regard, Dr. Goodluck Jonathan deserves plaudits for not only choosing a northerner as Chairman of INEC but one with the radical pedigree and antecedents of Professor Jega. That is why not only strengthening the independence of the electoral body but also removing its discretion to order the sequence of elections are necessary conditions for strengthening the country’s electoral processes and, by implication, her democracy.  The frequent changes in the sequence of elections since 1999 are unhealthy and follow neither rhyme nor reason.

    Of course, it can be argued that too much ado is being made about the sequence of elections. After all, in spite of the presidential and National Assembly elections holding first in 2015, the incumbent President still lost. However, the tussle between the executive and the legislature as regards the sequence of the elections shows that both arms of government believe that there is some advantage to be reaped from the order in which elections are held. Unfortunately, the National Assembly spoilt what would have been a good and valid case for reordering the elections by law because of the evident and undisguised self-interest that underlined its motive. If it had held a stakeholders forum with a view to generating public debate and input on the matter, it may well have made it impossible for the President to veto the amended Electoral Act.

    The truth of the matter is that the so called bandwagon effect that is the underlying cause behind the politics of reordering the sequence of elections is a real factor in the country’s elections and can even detract from the efficacy of the country’s democracy. There is no doubt, for instance, that the All Progressives Congress (APC) reaped bountifully from President Buhari’s victory in the subsequent elections. It can, of course, be argued that the bandwagon effect can cut both ways no matter the sequence of elections. However, given the immense power and influence of Nigeria’s presidency, the bandwagon effect will most likely be more potent and work in favour of a party that wins the presidency in the first election. There is thus the likelihood that a not insubstantial number of voters will be swayed not necessarily by the merit of candidates in subsequent elections but by the fear of voting for candidates or parties in opposition to the all powerful presidency. Holding the presidential election first would thus further strengthen the presidency with negative implications for the country’s democracy.

    Rather than the National Assembly’s bid to have three sets of elections or, most ridiculously, having the legislators’ election first, however, it could more logically have proposed holding the governorship and state House of Assembly elections first and the Presidential and National Assembly elections second. That way the elections would hold from the grassroots to the centre and not from the top to the bottom as INEC has decided for the 2019 elections. This would at least partially help to address the problem of the over centralization of our polity and deepen the country’s federal practice. It is certainly not too late for a more thorough and rigorous debate to be held on the sequence of elections with a view to correcting the demerits of the current arbitrary situation where the electoral body fixes the order of elections according to its whims and fancies.

     

    Integrity factor and national development

    In his path breaking tome on development economics titled: ‘The Challenge of Poverty in Africa’ and published in 2000, Professor Emmanuel J. Nwosu, identifies what he calls the ‘integrity factor’ as a distinctive factor of production which “is the next highly critical and the next highly indispensable factor in production and in the economic growth and development processes after labour (human resource) itself”. He depicts  this as the ‘moral/immoral or ethical/unethical dimension’ that are critical to development. In his words: “We have found that the integrity factor determines the direction the application of labour ultimately takes, i.e. whether labour-power is used positively to overall advantage, interest and good of the collective, or whether it is used negatively to ruin the collective interests, hopes and aspirations. Before now, and to our knowledge, sufficient explanation has not formally been made in development economics to distinguish between these two divergent directions of the application of labour power.”

    All too often the narrative on Nigeria’s development travails and challenges has focused on the negative particularly the phenomenon of grand corruption as well as inept and visionless leadership. This past week has, however, witnessed the landmark birthdays of icons of integrity – Mr. Femi Falana (SAN), distinguished human rights lawyer, Mr. Kunle Ajibade, outstanding man of letters and ideas, Professor Ayo Olukotun, distinguished political scientist and columnist as well as Professor Kayode Soremekun, expert on the politics of oil, international relations scholar and Vice Chancellor of the Federal University, Oye Ekiti (FUOYE). All of these men are characterized by the highest standards of integrity, character and commitment to the best interest of Nigeria. They are the salt of the Nigerian earth. There is certainly hope for our country.

  • Military and Amnesty International’s rich pickings in Nigeria

    BY now, after many years of depressing interactions with their security agencies, Nigerians are either indifferent to or conversant with the controversies surrounding every Amnesty International (AI) report that questions the rights abuse perpetrated by the military and the police. Last Thursday’s damning report by the global rights watchdog entitled “They Betrayed Us” is no less poignant. While the cases investigated and reported by AI have been quite heartrending and serve as a reminder to just how far the Nigerian security agencies have allegedly strayed from their rules of engagement, the response of the military has been predictable, defiant and perfunctory.

    In the report, AI painted gory details of sickening rights abuse committed, apparently without any checks, by the military and their civilian militia counterparts (Civilian JTF) in the Internally Displaced Persons (IDP) camps in the Northeast. It involved the double victimisation of mostly women displaced by the fighting in the region but subjected to rape and torture by the security forces in exchange for sundry favours, including food and medicine. It painted images of wives and girls separated from their husbands and families, stigmatised, pejoratively labelled as Boko Haram wives because of the circumstances of their rescue, and then coerced into offering sex to avert hunger, disease and, worse, death. It also spoke of the rampant tragedy of avoidable deaths in the camps and the mismanagement or refusal by the authorities to take responsibility for the sufferings of hundreds, if not thousands, of victims.

    In the words of Osai Ojigho, Director of Amnesty International Nigeria, here is how AI paints the tragedy in some of the camps: “Scores of women described how soldiers and Civilian JTF members have used force and threats to rape women in satellite camps, including by taking advantage of hunger to coerce women to become their “girlfriends”, which involved being available for sex on an ongoing basis. Five women told Amnesty International that they were raped in late 2015 and early 2016 in Bama Hospital camp as famine-like conditions prevailed. Ama (not her real name), 20, said: ‘They will give you food but in the night they will come back around 5pm or 6pm and they will tell you to come with them… One [Civilian JTF] man came and brought food to me. The next day he said I should take water from his place [and I went]. He then closed the tent door behind me and raped me. He said I gave you these things, if you want them we have to be husband and wife’. Ten others in the same camp said that they were also coerced into becoming ‘girlfriends’ of security officials to save themselves from starvation.”

    He continues: “Most of these women had already lost children or other relatives due to lack of food, water and healthcare in the camp. The sexual exploitation continues at an alarming level as women remain desperate to access sufficient food and livelihood opportunities. Women said the sexual exploitation follows an organized system, with soldiers openly coming into the camp for sex and Civilian JTF members choosing the “very beautiful” women and girls to take to the soldiers outside. Women reported they were too afraid to refuse demands for sex. Sex in these highly coercive circumstances is always rape, even when physical force is not used, and Nigerian soldiers and Civilian JTF members have been getting away it. They act like they don’t risk sanction, but the perpetrators and their superiors who have allowed this to go unchallenged have committed crimes under international law and must be held to account…”

    But responding to the horrifying expose, the military, through one of their spokesmen, John Agim, a brigadier-general, decried the sinister motive of the rights group and dismissed the report as fictitious and a  calculated attempt to smear and discredit the military and its efforts to rein in insurgency in the Northeast. The AI report, he says, is full of falsehood and propaganda, and is designed to demoralise the troops sacrificing their lives to protect the country’s territorial integrity. In the light of past experiences, it is not clear just what weight of credibility should be given to the military’s denials. Indeed, in August last year, following a similar outcry against the military’s reluctance to abide by their rules of engagement, Vice President Yemi Osinbajo, a law professor himself, set up a presidential review panel to review the military’s countervailing claim of adherence to human rights obligations in their operations. The report was submitted to President Muhammadu Buhari in February. So far, no action has been taken, nor is it even clear that the military was indicted.

    The Nigerian military’s Northeast counterinsurgency operations have been shrouded in controversies, a clear departure from the fairly professional manner they had conducted difficult but probably similar operations in the distant past. Whether this departure is a reflection of the decline in professionalism of the armed services or an indication of the revolution in information technology that makes it more difficult to hide anything, is hard to say. But what is obvious is that right from the beginning of the insurgency, when the leader of Boko Haram himself, Mohammed Yusuf, was extrajudicially murdered, the military has not seemed to be able to put one foot right in terms of sustaining a good image for Nigeria’s fighting force. Whether in Baga, Borno State, where a whole community was reportedly razed to the ground in 2013 during a clash between soldiers and Boko Haram insurgents, or in Maiduguri where the military allegedly supervised extrajudicial executions of captured insurgents in 2014, or Bama where extrajudicial killings took place allegedly orchestrated by some officers in 2013, the military has reeled from one controversy to another, trailed by Amnesty  International reports now described as hostile and offensive.

    The Nigerian government may find the Donald Trump presidency more amenable to their war efforts, but that does not neutralise the reservations held against them by the Barack Obama presidency which, to protest rampant human rights violations, cancelled the visas of a number of Nigerian officers accused of war crimes and refused the sale of desperately needed weapons. Regardless of the positive and unquestioning attitude of the Trump presidency to Nigeria, it is unhelpful that the Nigerian military either instinctively dismisses allegations of heavy-handedness or even potential war crimes, or stubbornly refuses to order investigations against troops blamed for atrocities. Because impunity has become apparently ingrained in the security forces, and misconduct continues to be entrenched, even transmuting from heavy-handedness against insurgents to alleged rape and torture against displaced persons, there is no telling what depths would be plumbed next.

    Impunity among the country’s security and fighting forces will not end until the authorities, both political and military, show zero tolerance against rights abuses. Given the stress of war and the brutality of insurgents, it must be acknowledged that the military may not always be able to prosecute a text-book war. Occasional lapses are bound to occur, whether orchestrated or accidental. For the sake of their image as a disciplined fighting force and the image of the country as a whole, it is critical that the military must be able to draw a line between honest mistakes and friendly fire on the one hand, and deliberate acts of impunity and war crimes on the other hand. The military must not assume that exposing war criminals from among their ranks is tantamount to denigrating the entire military force.

    It is also unhelpful when the government takes all of six months to review allegations of rights abuses against the military in their Northeast operations only for the report ordered by the vice president in 2017 to be put in the cooler for more than three months. The government does not seem persuaded to undertake the review in the first instance. And with the United States becoming more amenable to selling weapons to Nigeria without seeking guarantees, the restraint and discomfort hitherto shown by the Nigerian government may no longer be necessary. This, plus the desire to portray a positive, even if contrived, image of the armed forces may explain why the military quickly reviewed the allegations by a former army chief, Gen. T.Y Danjuma, against the army and dismissed as unfounded stories of military collusion with herdsmen. If care is not taken, impunity will continue to breed more impunity.

    If the Muhammadu Buhari presidency chooses to believe that the image of the country’s security forces is intact and that there is no urgent need to order a holistic review and purge, the government may inadvertently be fostering upon the country a situation of might is right. The inescapable fact on the ground, it is clear, is that the image of the security agencies in Nigeria is at its lowest ebb. Pretending that everything is alright will not automatically transform the country into a stable and united entity when the country’s leaders have demonstrated that they lack the will and understanding to validate the idiom that a stitch in time saves nine. Everything is not alright with the country, not the least the freedoms and happiness of Nigerians, and they know it.

  • Spartan fighting spirit

    Tuesday’s international friendly between Europa League champions Athletico Madrid of Spain and Nigeria’s likely U-23 side to the Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games was going to be a no brainer in terms of predicting its outcome. Pundits tipped the European champions to pierce through the Nigerian side with goals like hot knife through butter. It never happened.

    Walking into the stadium to behold capacity filled terraces underscored how well Nigerians follow the European game, more so when a new champion was billed to showcase its talents. It was clear that the biggest player was Fernando Torres. It was expected after his exploits with Liverpool, leading to his controversial move to Chelsea FC in London. Torres anchored his move on the need to win European club competitions. He achieved the feats, winning the UEFA Champions League diadem and the Europa Cup, playing for Chelsea.

    Nigerians love Chelsea. There was grumbling when Atletico filed out for the game without Torres. You needed to witness the applause that greeted Torres’ inclusion in the second half. You would have thought that Nigeria scored a goal when Torres’ nifty header beat goalkeeper Olufemi Thomas for the Spaniards’ second goal. Even the radio commentators acknowledged this misnomer. But would you blame the fans, knowing that such goals were the trademark of Torres.

    Again, Nigerians showed that it didn’t matter if the Nigerian side lost. What mattered was how the boys fared against the better exposed side. Nigerians are discerning. They throng the pitch to show their appreciation at the end of a game. They were pleased with the result, with many clapping over a bright future for the country after the Mundial. That is the spirit, folks.

    Nigeria’s two goals were marvellous, but it was the audacious manner in which former Dream Team star Mohammed Usman outwitted the Spaniards in the defence before kicking the ball into the yawning net that was the talk of the town at dusk.

    Kelechi Nwakali’s rocket shot was a stunner, especially as it scored against one of the best goalkeepers in the world. Jan Oblak in goal is world class. He is one of the goalkeepers expected to make a record transfer next season, the other being David Dea Gea of Manchester United. In fact, when an overlapping right back Musa Mohammed ran down their lines, no one foresaw a goal. But Musa dropped his shoulder as if he wanted to continue the run on the flank. The defender was tricked as Musa knocked the ball to Usman, who quickly returned the pass that released Musa towards the 18-metre box.

    Musa and Usman struck a telepathic understanding which awed the Spaniards, such that when the ball got to Usman deep in the penalty box, he chose to dribble his way out of the compact defensive arrangement which Atletico are known for.

    This swift movement between Musa and Usman didn’t look a goal-bound move until Usman started dribbling the defenders as if he brought them onto the field. The murmuring from the fans was for Usman to either pass the ball or shoot it into the net. But he did what Austin Okocha did to Bayern Munich’s goalkeeper Oliver Khan while playing for Eintracht Frankfurt FC during a German Bundesliga match against Karlsruhe in 1993. A goal which Khan reveals still makes him dizzy.

    The difference between the two goals is that whereas Okocha can easily re-enact his dribbling move, I have serious doubts if Usman can repeat this move in subsequent matches. No disregard to the beauty of the goal, dear Usman.

    In fact, if Nigeria’s No 17, Destiny Ashadi, who plays for Katsina United, was a scorer, the game would have ended 2-1 in Nigeria’s favour at half time. What shocked most fans at the Nest of Champions Stadium in Uyo were the closeness of the game and the Nigeria side’s Spartan fighting spirit. Besides, the Nigerian side paraded products of the World Cup-winning Golden Eaglets’ squad, who had been ‘forgotten’, no thanks to the fixation of most Nigerian coaches who have handled age-grade teams in 2013, when Nigeria won the U-17 World Cup again and retained it in 2015. In other football climes, the 44 young boys from the two squads between 2013 and 2015, would have been the nucleus of such countries to the Russia 2018 World Cup.

    Not so for Nigeria, where our local coaches see such established young men as being unavailable to be mentored. They would rather dump these gold winning squads to pick their boys instead of allowing the new boys to compete with the World Cup winners. Sadly, the Nigeria Football Federation (NFF) is left with the short end of the stick, when Nigeria fails to match its feats in subsequent years. In 2007, Dele Ajiboye was adjudged the best cadet (U-17) goalkeeper in the world, ahead of Spain’s David De Gea, who plays for Manchester United in England.

    Today, De Gea, can safely be described as one of the best goalkeepers in the world whereas Ajiboye will be lucky to be among Nigeria’s best three goalkeepers to be picked for the Mundial. De Gea’s geometric improvement in goalkeeping rests with the fact that he was allowed to grow through the ranks to the top. Indeed, Ajiboye’s stunted growth as a goalkeeper can be traced to a systemic problem anchored on the nepotic, mercantile and parochial thoughts of Nigerian coaches and sports administrators to replicate systems which others have perfected to make football, nay sports, a business, not just ‘play play’ as the former Edo State Governor Adams Oshiomhole described sports in Nigeria. Will you blame Oshiomhole? No.

    I digress. Whereas Spanish football administrators didn’t flinch in graduating Iker Casillas to the senior team, after Spain won the FIFA U-20 Championship hosted by Nigeria in 1999, beating Japan 2-0 in the final, Nigeria coaches and administrators were still toying with the pre-modial thoughts of taking an experienced goalkeeper to the World Cup, not minding if such a goalkeeper has kept up to 12 matches in the last 30 months. The hue and cry on this experienced goalkeeper going to Russia only abated when Gernot Rohr picked the country’s provisional 30-man squad. Even at that, those picked will be haunted by the total condemnation of the abilities to man the goal post at the Mundial, if they slip during matches. I ask, who doesn’t make mistakes? Is it not from such mistakes that we learn how to correct them? Can anyone garner experience without being given a chance to prove his/her mettle? When Modakeke chief Adegboye Onigbinde gambled, as many described it in 2002 in Japan on this experienced goalkeepers, he was scolded, but Onigbinde knew his onions by fielding the hitherto inexperienced goalkeeper against awesome David Beckham, Paul Scholes et al of England and came out unscathed.

    Nigeria drew goalless against England. Yes, football is like biscuit; no one knows if it would crack. Back to the Athletico Madrid game, where the Nwakali brothers, Chidiebere and Kelechi, stood out as the talents for the future. Interestingly, they chose Tuesday night’s game to reassure Nigerians that they could effectively replace John Mikel Obi and Ogenyi Onazi in the Super Eagles midfield department – in offensive and defensive roles. Indeed, the younger Nwakali’s opening goal was a masterpiece. It underscored why he captained the Golden Eaglets side that won the FIFA U-17 World Cup for Nigeria in 2015. No prize for guessing right that his elder brother, Chidiebere, spotting jersey No. 10, was also a member of another gold winning Golden Eaglets side in 2015.

    So, why are they just coming to national prominence? That is the way we are. Until we suck the orange to its bare back, we don’t look for another one. It is good to know that the Eagles can play with two brothers again after the furore associated with the exclusion of the Uche brothers (Ikechukwu and Kalu). Watching Nwakali brothers play reminded me of the Atuegbu brothers of yore. Indeed, Andrew and Alloy (block-buster) played in the midfield like the Nwakalis, except that they were stronger unlike the latter who are a beauty to watch based on their sublime ball skills, which kept fans on the edge of their seats on Tuesday night. The biggest fillip in the game was the display by prominent Eaglets of yore, making it imperative on the NFF and the coaches to comb Europe for most of them. I was excited with the return of the former Eaglets captain Musa Mohammed, who was the skipper of the day. Mohammed’s darting runs on the right flank troubled the Spaniards.  My only hope is for Rohr to succeed in Russia. Otherwise, all his rebuilding efforts would be thrown into the ocean by the next NFF board, if Pinnick doesn’t return. Ordinarily, the Pinnick-led board deserves a second term, based on their marketing initiatives that have yielded $2.8 million for the team to prosecute its campaign.

  • Legislators on the cross

    You may revile them. You may deplore them. You may despise them. You may abhor them. And there is indeed just cause for a substantial number of Nigerians to be utterly disgusted with members of the 8th National Assembly.  The humongous illegitimate allowances of N13.5 million monthly in addition to the legitimate earnings of N700,000 received by each legislator is simply outrageous. And the pecuniary racket that the constituency projects have allegedly become is condemnable. No less irritating to many Nigerians is the seeming sleight of hand that characterized the emergence of the current National Assembly’s leadership.

    No matter the revulsion that the gross ethical deficits of the National Assembly evokes, however, it is still important that the sanctity and institutional integrity of the legislature as an arm of government is respected and preserved. Attempts to demonize, demean, devalue and irredeemably discredit this critical arm of government for its shortcomings are shortsighted and ill advised. I find it alarming when highly respected opinion moulders and public analysts give the impression that they would not mind if the National Assembly is disbanded altogether presumably for the puritanical executive to govern unencumbered. Nothing could be more dangerous.

    For all its weaknesses and failings, the National Assembly has served as an important check on the excesses of the executive in this dispensation. In some ways, the National Assembly has been the saving grace of our democracy particularly under the administration of President Muhammadu Buhari. Let me explain. Buhari is restrained, mature, cautious and hesitant in the use of power as well as abstemious and ascetic in his disposition to material acquisition. Not so many members of his trusted inner circle.

    Many of them have exhibited traits of incurable avariciousness. This is why we have had such embarrassing and avoidable incidents as Mainagate, the Babachir Lawal grass cutting contract scam, the mysterious and still unexplained discovery of humongous amounts of money that led to the removal of the former DG of the NIA, Ambassador Ayo Oke and the controversial reinstatement of the Executive Secretary of the National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS), Professor Yusuf Usman, in inexplicable circumstances to name a few. None of these grievous matters with serious ethical implications have been brought to closure.

    And even worse, some members of the President’s inner circle have shown a capacity for ruthless deployment of power and total disregard for due process and the rule of law. In this context, it would have been a great tragedy indeed if the relationship between the legislature and the executive at the national level had been one of servility and supineness as is the case in most states of the federation.

    In any case, in their justified umbrage and obsessive preoccupation with the perceived excesses of the current National Assembly, many analysts are distracted from discerning the more fundamental dimensions of the problem of primitive accumulation confronting the polity.  The difference in reality between the 8th National Assembly and the preceding ones since 1999 has been one of degree and not of kind. The present crop of legislators is not necessarily any more corrupt than previous sets; it is only that the magnitude of largesse at their disposal has grown more humongous. This is less a function of a supposed virulent strain of greed peculiar to the legislators than it is a manifestation of the deepening problem of corruption in the society, President Buhari’s best efforts notwithstanding in this season of presumed change.

    Indeed, if we go further back in time, we will discover that complaints as regards the excessive consumptive propensities of the National Assembly were no less vehement in the Second Republic. In their book, ‘The Rise and Fall of Nigeria’s Second Republic’, for instance, Professors Toyin Falola and Julius Ihonvbere note that “In 9 months in 1980, the members of the National Assembly (545 in all) obtained as salaries and allowances an astronomical sum of N44,309,300. This amount increased the year after”. (Page 109). It would be the height of superficiality in analysis to portray members of the 8th Assembly as some peculiarly morally defective specie irredeemably infected with the virus of venality while the rest of us are saints. In reality, how many of those who are most vocal today in condemning the outrageous allowances of the federal legislators would decline to collect their own share if they found themselves in the legislators’ ‘lucky’ shoes?

    Yes, there has been more restraint and discipline in the husbandry and utilization of public funds under Buhari. In many ways, the fear of Buhari is still the beginning of fiscal discretion and wisdom despite his own inevitable human foibles. As a result of greater transparency and accountability in the management of public funds under the All Progressives Congress (APC) federal government, many federal agencies have been remitting more funds to the Federation Account. Huge amounts of stolen funds in local and foreign currencies including myriad physical assets have been retrieved from looters of our commonwealth. Yet, it would appear that public office holders have only devised cleverer, more subtle ways of looting public funds ‘in accordance with due process and the rule of law’ (apologies to Sam Omatseye).

    Nothing proves this more than the indescribable acrimony, chaos and violence that have characterized the APC congresses across the country. Parallel congresses have been held in at least 26 of the 36 states. The struggle for the control of party structures has been vicious unrestrained and unstructured. Of course, this is because those who have the party structures in their grip will have easy access to become party candidates for state power either in the legislature or executive. All of this confirms the great political economist, Professor Claude Ake’s characterization of Nigerian politics over two decades ago as one “in which power is sought without restraint and used without restraint and the struggle for power is so intense that political competition escalates to a form of warfare”.

    But why do we have this kind of overvaluation of political power? Ake explains: “Lacking economic base, the Nigerian ruling class is thrown back on what it has, namely, political leverage. It has used political power particularly the control of state power, to amass wealth in an attempt to consolidate its material base to the extent that political power is now the established way to wealth”.  The intense and desperate struggle for control of party structures as a stepping stone to state power within the APC can certainly not be as a result of so much love for the Nigerian people. It is because access to state power still remains the easiest route to material accumulation.

    Thus, beyond flaunting Buhari’s undeniable personal integrity, retrieving stolen funds and assets from plunderer’s of the public till, undertaking the tedious prosecution of indicted persons on a tortuous judicial terrain and the episodic publishing of the list of alleged looters of Nigeria’s resources,  the APC has shown little evidence of deeply studying the problem of corruption in all its multifarious dimensions – economic, sociological, cultural, psychological, political, bureaucratic etc – with a view to meaningfully working to achieve enduring and fundamental value re-orientation and sustainable social change.

    My perceptive and cerebral colleague, Olakunle Abimbola, has been waging a valiant and relentless campaign for the electorate to vote out errant and thieving legislators at the next elections. That endeavour is certainly most patriotic and welcome. But until that is achieved, the current crop of legislators remains our legitimate representatives and the legislature as an institution should not be destroyed on account of their foibles.

     

    Who is afraid of Kayode Fayemi?

    It certainly cannot get more comical.  I refer to the attempt by some amorphous group to get the Ekiti State APC governorship candidate, Dr Kayode Fayemi’s right to contest the July 14 election judicially truncated on the basis of the report of some farcical judicial panel of inquiry set up by an obviously inquisitorial and adversarial Ayodele Fayose PDP administration deliberately bent on discrediting its predecessor in office.  If any court entertains this kind of frivolity, it would have opened the flood gates for vengeful incumbents to prevent their predecessors from ever seeking public office again.  A good example is the Nyesom Wike/Rotimi Amaechi saga in Rivers.

    Kayode Fayemi
    Fayemi

    I recall that in the second republic, Chief Obafemi Awolowo’s political foes attempted to get him disqualified from contesting for office on the basis of the spurious Coker Commission of Inquiry, which was utterly lacking in credibility. In the same vein, an attempt was made to get Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe disqualified on the ground that he did not fulfill the requisite tax obligations. Of course, such devious and manipulative legal subterfuges could not fly.  It is unwise and unlikely that the judiciary will allow itself to descend into the partisan arena in this case. The consequences could be deleterious. Let all legitimate party candidates test their popularity at the polls.  Or is somebody afraid of Kayode Fayemi?

  • Adebayo Adedeji and Africa’s development debate (1)

    It was a dramatic encounter. The forum was one of those Organization of African Unity (OAU) Heads of State summits during the regime of Nigeria’s military President, General Ibrahim Babangida, in the 1980s.  Exactly which one it was I cannot recollect now. That was a time when the hegemonic International Financial Institutions (IFIs) were imposing stringent Structural Adjustment Programmes (SAP) as a cure all for all ailing African economies as a precondition for foreign aid and loans. In attendance, as a member of the Nigerian government delegation was the eminent journalist, media administrator and lawyer, Chief Tony Momoh, who was Nigeria’s Minister of Information. Also a frontline participant at the event was the respected development economist, public administrator, international civil servant, academic and researcher, Professor Adebayo Adedeji, in his capacity as Under-Secretary General of the United Nations and Executive Secretary of the Economic Commission for Africa (ECA).

    The Babangida regime had enthusiastically embraced the Structural Adjustment policies, which included massive currency devaluation, deregulation of the economy, reduction of the public sector workforce, comprehensive privatization of public enterprises, and removal of subsidies on critical social services among others. The regime’s officials, particularly the brilliant rationalist and Secretary to the Federal Government, Chief Olu Falae, articulately advocated the IMF and World Bank positions that there was no alternative to SAP as the only path out of Africa’s protracted crisis of underdevelopment. Professor Adedeji had at several fora vigorously canvassed an opposing view to the obvious discomfiture of his home government. He was of the firm belief that not only was most of the policy components of SAP inappropriate, but there were indeed viable alternatives to them. Chief Tony Momoh, spokesman of a pro-SAP government unconventionally put on his toga as a journalist at that event, got a tape recorder and sought an interview with the Professor, which the latter readily gave. The interesting exchange between the two men was later published in the Daily Times if my memory serves me right.

    It would appear to me as a layman that the defining essence of the life of Professor Adebayo Adedeji who passed on to eternity on 25th April, 2018, was the intellectual struggle to extricate African Development Strategy and Policy from the hegemonic stranglehold of external forces, particularly IFIs that may not necessarily mean well for the continent. For those of us who do not have the requisite grounding and expertise in economic as well as development theory and analysis to appreciate and apprehend his technical disquisitions, there are luckily a number of easily accessible publications on the life, times and works of Professor Adedeji. One of these, for instance, is a collection of essays in his honour when he clocked 65 titled ‘Issues in African Development’ and edited by Bade Onimode and Richard Synge. Published by Heinemann Educational Books (Nigeria) Plc in association with the African Centre for Development and Strategic Studies in 1995, the book is divided into four sections comprising 16 chapters and runs into 323 pages.

    The book’s contributors are some of the most illustrious scholars from diverse disciplines including economics, history, politics, public administration, development as well as experts in diverse spheres of international development administration. In the preface to the book by Stephen Lewis, we have a glimpse of what Professor Adedeji meant to those who worked with him at the ECA. In his words, “Collaborating with Adebayo Adedeji was an extraordinary experience. His whole persona comes alive when he speaks, feelingly, of Africa; it stimulates everyone around him; conviction and animation are unleashed in equal measure, and just when you feel the tensions perilously rising, his voluble laugh bursts forth in a catharsis of reconciliation. Adedeji’s great strength lies in his unswerving determination to resolve the African crisis. Nothing distracts him. As a result, his contribution to Africa gives meaning to internationalism”.

    The same impression is conveyed in a statement by the former Secretary General of the United Nations, Perez de Cuellar, to the 27th Assembly of the Heads of Government of the OAU, held in Abuja on 3rd June, 1991 in a fulsome tribute to Adedeji thus: “Professor Adedeji has been at the helm of ECA for more than half of its existence and has left an indelible mark on the work and objectives of the Commission. He has made significant contributions to successive initiatives to address and to improve Africa’s economic and social situation. I am pleased to have this opportunity to congratulate him, in his native land, for a job well done, and to wish him success in his future undertakings”.

    My favourite chapter in this book is titled ‘Africa’s Development Crisis in Historical Perspective’ by the late Professor J.F Ade-Ajayi; a chapter in which a scholar I had assumed to be essentially of a conservative cast traces the developmental travails of the continent to the legacy of foreign conquests such as the Arab and Atlantic slave trade, colonialism and neocolonialism. That chapter reminds one of the immortal Walter Rodney in his ‘How Europe Underdeveloped Africa’. Writing about the legacy of colonialism, for instance, Ajayi perspicaciously observes that “The interest of the European powers in Africa was to disrupt existing lines of intra-African trade, and channel all effort into the production of primary crops required for export, and encourage importation of European goods even if it meant destroying local manufactures, crafts and industries.

    • Continued online www.staging.thenationonlineng.net

  • Amokachi, Eagles and the road to Russia

    History has an uncanny way of vindicating the just. It only takes time. This writer is always unsparing whenever Nigerian coaches handle the Super Eagles, largely because they hardly come clean in the team’s affairs. When they are not picking players on other parameters than current form, they are bullying the younger ones to accept what they couldn’t stomach as players. They create a facade around themselves under the guise of instilling discipline whereas they do worse things, such as engineering players’ revolts when their demands are outstanding.

    It is still a misery how coaches who claimed to be instilling discipline in the players come short when it comes to persuading them to back off from such revolts during big competitions, such as the Confederations Cup and the World Cup. These coaches don’t care about the odium they pour on the country with such disgraceful acts for as long as they achieve their goals. The excuse that the federation’s bosses would misappropriate cash amounts to cheap blackmail. Thankfully, the law of retribution catches up with them – Nigeria has never won any competition smeared with such shows of shame.

    ‘’Conscience is an open wound, only truth can heal it.’’ ( Uthman Dan Fodio) This quote rings so true about what transpired in the Super Eagles’ camp in 2014 in the explosive interview which former striker Daniel Amokachi granted AOIFootball.com on the Eagles’ way to the Brazil 2014 World Cup, where Nigeria was eliminated in the second round by France. Of course, the defeat came less than 10 hours after the team and their coaches spent the better part of the night before the match sharing $3.8 million which the Federal Government sent to avert a walkover. The squad threatened to boycott the France game during the revolt in Sao Paulo.

    Ordinarily, I would have ignored the report. But AOIFootball.com is the NFF’s official online platform where those who run the federation talk directly to the players and coaches. It was set up, following allegations by players and officials of being misquoted in the media. So, Amokachi couldn’t have been misquoted by the NFF online platform.

    Besides, KweseSports and Amokachi are like Siamese twins. They would have whispered into Da Bull’s ears about the gravity of his allegations since the other party to the discussion is dead. He would have authorised the publication. It should, therefore, be discussed, taking only the message not the messenger or the accused.

    Going to the World Cup in Brazil, there were tales that suggested a rift among the coaches, with many alleging that one of them forced the players to buy one of his wrist watches as a basis for qualifying to play in the team. It was dismissed as one of the tantrums of the media. But, it was clear that all wasn’t well with the technical crew, considering Amokachi’s pot-shots.

    “Brown, for me, was one player that I regret that we did not take to the World Cup in 2014,” Amokachi told KweséESPN, speaking for the first time on Brown Ideye’s shocking exclusion from the Eagles.

    “Hundred percent I didn’t know how he didn’t make that list. I never saw it coming that he didn’t make the list till when the list came out and we found out. I think I probably had a lot of fights with some people that I shouldn’t have, but it happened because I saw no reason why such a player should be left out. We ended up going to the World Cup with players that even me I don’t even know,” Amokachi revealed.

    “I think it is very tough if a coach is already an agent. It is very, very difficult, and that is why I always say you cannot be a coach and be an agent at the same time.

    “When the World Cup comes around, you always have a lot of new players showing up. Players who will decide that they are Nigerians and bring confusion to the team. When you find yourself in that situation, you try to advise, because you have agents that will be calling left, right and centre. If a coach is an agent, he will fall a victim too. Those are things that we really need to avoid. There is no room to be trying new players,” Amokachi concluded.

    He didn’t mention those responsible for the decision. But what stands out clearly is that the list was done with the coaches’ consent. And it says a lot on why Nigerian coaches cannot be trusted with such sensitive matters. Isn’t this the reason Nigerian coaches’ actions are vetted by chieftains of the Nigeria Football Federation (NFF), who carry the can when Nigeria fails while the coaches take all the credits in victory?

    What makes Amokachi’s revelation more disturbing is that the coaches in the 2014 squad were former Nigeria internationals who also made their marks playing for European teams . They were expected to replicate here the settings they found in Europe. They were also seen to have made enough cash to be able to shun foreign scouts, lobbyists and influence peddlers from the corridors of power.

    The KweseESPN report said: ‘’It is a stunning admission by Amokachi, who went on to suggest that outside influences may have played a part in the striker getting cut in favour of players like Michael Uchebo and Uche Nwofor, both of whom had a combined total of six international appearances prior to the World Cup. Four of those combined caps (two each) were in the friendly games just before the squad was named.’’

    Sadly, Amokachi didn’t have the guts to name who picked the squad raising doubts about his intentions in granting such a controversial interview. Why did he not cry out when the list was released? Was he scared that he could be dropped from the team? I don’t think so, given Amokachi’s pedigree in the game and his popularity. Who knows, the team could have gone further than they did in Brazil, four years ago.

    The NFF should always get coaches to work in harmony. The federation should routinely hold talks with the coaches to gauge how they relate with each other. Except there is a synergy among the coaches, the team would totter during matches.

    Amokachi’s poked conscience has compelled him to speak the truth, which is the only way forward. He spoke late but the message wasn’t lost on Eagles manager Gernot Rohr, who rightly dropped Brown Ideye, who has not been a regular in the squad since he took charge.

    Rohr’s 30-man list is a departure from the past where at least four names would have been added to the authorised provisional 35-man list by FIFA, where each country would pick its final 23-man squad. Under Nigerian coaches, a horde of players with many unknown to lovers of the game would have been picked under the guise of giving everyone a chance to prove their mettle. This is where the sharp practices which Amokachi highlighted start.

    Indeed, I’m still pinching myself to find out if Samson Siasia criticised Rohr’s 30-man squad. If he did, he owes those of us who questioned his selections as Eagles chief coach an apology. Siasia scandalised this writer for daring to criticise his list. Siasia spared no word in deriding coaches and ex-internationals who queried his decisions, especially when the country stood behind Vincent Enyeama, asking Siasia to forgive him. He stood his grounds but paid dearly for it when Nigeria drew 2-2 against Guinea in Abuja. We didn’t qualify for that edition’s Africa Cup of Nations. Siasia got the boot.

    Glad to know that Siasia is canvassing the inclusion of Efe Ambrose, four years after his below par outing in Brazil. This is the problem with Nigerian coaches who are eternally committed to players they discovered. Siasia, Junior Ajayi had his time with the Eagles. He appears to be a club player. Besides, he is injury-prone. This is the difference with foreign coaches. they consider factors which our coaches cast an indulgent eye on.

    The fixation of Nigerian coaches has killed many enterprising players who rot away because those manning their positions in the Eagles were discovered by the coach. Products of our successful age-grade teams, especially the Golden Eaglets, have melted from our sights like ice-cream under the scorching sun – no thanks to our local coaches’ fixation.

    Today, Nigeria is heading for the Mundial with its youngest crop of players. This means that we are building for the future, using the World Cup. If we qualify for the second round, we would have equalled our feats in the last five editions in which we participated.

    Nigeria is not alone with her armada of young boys for the Russia 2018 World Cup. England’s 23-man squad isn’t anything different from ours. This means that the two countries will have players ready for the big stage by Qatar 2022. That is the way forward, except that England will see theirs through while Nigeria’s may be destroyed by the diabolical machinations of those fighting to be members of the next NFF board.

  • Anti-graft war and 1985 post-coup perspective

    Last Tuesday, President Muhammadu Buhari once again voiced his opinion on why he believed he was deposed in the 1985 military coup that brought Ibrahim Babangida to power. It is not clear why the president continues to reiterate the view that his deposition was mainly because corruption fought back against his anti-corruption war, or why he has refused to banish the memory of that period. But it is at least clear that the events of that year have not left him nor ameliorated his animosities. The inauguration of the N24bn corporate headquarters of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) provided the president a fresh opportunity to recall his ouster in 1985 and the lessons he drew from the obviously unsavoury experience that has left a permanent scar both on his mind and his attitude to leadership and politics.

    In his remarks, the president reminded Nigerians that his conclusions about the 1985 coup were indisputable. It was clear to him, he said, that he was deposed because he fought corruption, and corruption fought back. “This government promised to fight corruption, but corruption will continue to fight back,” he said of his presidency with a hint of plaintive resignation.  “During my first attempt to fight corruption (December 1983-August 1985), corruption fought back successfully.  I was removed as the head of state, detained for three years, and people who we recovered stolen money from were given back their money and I remained in detention up until my mother had to die to save me from detention.”

    Perhaps age has tempered his tendency to name names. But back in 2012, he had pointedly revealed the identities of those who he claimed were corrupt and who fought back until he was overthrown in the coup of 1985. He named Generals Babangida and Aliyu Gusau. He could not at the time swear that Gen Babangida was corrupt, he admitted, nor that he (IBB) was the target of a purge initiated by his government, but he insisted that Gen Gusau, whose appointment into certain key positions he had opposed, was to be retired for a number of reasons, including alleged corruption. In the said interview some six years ago, he confirmed that he presented the proposal to retire Gen Gusau before the Army Council, a proposal he concluded led to a rallying of forces against his leadership of the country.

    During the inauguration of the EFCC Headquarters, President Buhari stuck to his earlier conviction that he was deposed because he fought corruption, and corruption fought back. He confirmed to his audience that based on that experience, he knew enough to suggest that in his current battle to undo the forces of corruption in Nigeria, corruption would fight back, and is indeed fighting back. He offered no indisputable proof, not in 1985, and not now. In his own account of the circumstances surrounding the attempt to retire him, Gen Gusau however asserted that despite his active and significant role in the overthrow of the elected government of President Shehu Shagari, the number one beneficiary of the coup, the then Gen Buhari, treated him shabbily, denying him significant postings.

    In an interview published about two months ago in the Daily Sun, Mustapha Jokolo, a former aide-de-camp to President Buhari when he was military head of state, gave a totally different account of the circumstances surrounding the 1985 coup. According to him, the new Buhari military government was unfair to those who financed and participated in the coup, and was even more irritatingly inaccessible. Hear Alhaji Jokolo who was at the time a major: “They (the coup plotters) knew it was easier to have access to Babangida. And it showed so. When we took over, none of the coup plotters was given political appointment. The only two people who were given appointments were David Mark who was posted to Niger State as Governor, who I believe was influenced by Babangida because it was his home state, and Ahmed Abdullahi in whose house we were doing a lot of things, that was made a minister. He was made Minister of Communications. Apart from those two, all other coup plotters, none of them was given political appointments. And that set the stage for the coup of 1985. What happened was that when we came to Dodan Barracks with Buhari, he was holding meeting with some senior military officers, and all the coup plotters were outside, and they came to meet me in the office of the ADC. Shagaya, Akilu, Sabo Aliyu, Zaki, Tanko Ayuba, all of them who were in Lagos at that time. They told me ‘Mustapha what the bloody hell is going on?  Why are we outside and these people are inside, not holding meeting with us? We have just finished this coup and honestly we are going to stage another one now. They said that to me. They are alive.’ “

    Speaking more directly about the allegations of corruption made against Gen Gusau, Alhaji Jokolo averred further: “Aliyu Gusau too, in spite of the fact that there is no love lost between me (Jokolo) and Aliyu Gusau, he helped us because he financed the coup. Okay, like the import license (controversy), which was sold to one German through Mai Daribe, the money was used to facilitate the coup. It is not even that one that is important. What was important was that Aliyu Gusau, as Director of Military Intelligence, was the one who protected us from the Nigerian Security Organisation (NSO) led at that time by Umaru Shinkafi. We would have all been arrested. He had good connection with Shinkafi, and any time some of the coup plotters got drunk, they spoke rubbish and threatened people. The NSO agents were picking up reports and were sending them. So that was what Aliyu Gusau did. In any case what brought the problem was that Buhari was not comfortable with Aliyu Gusau. I asked Buhari why we didn’t make Aliyu Gusau the Director General of NSO. He said he would not give two security positions to Babangida’s people. One, Haliru Akilu, and not Hallilu Akilu as you people have been writing; it is Haliru Akilu. He was the one appointed Director, Military Intelligence. So Buhari was not comfortable giving the NSO office to Aliyu Gusau who also was Babangida’s boy because he had some…I don’t know what went wrong with two of them but there were some misgivings between the two of them, Babangida and Buhari.”

    The account of the 1985 coup will always be contested. So, too, will the content and direction of President Buhari’s anti-corruption war, not to talk of some of the people that have become the war’s victims. Rather than dwell on the pains and punishment inflicted upon him after his ouster, it should have been a sufficient exculpation for the president that he finally won the 2015 presidential election, and by May next year will have presided over the affairs of Nigeria for four years. Every other experience, including those that followed his ouster, ought properly to serve as lessons for him, especially for his leadership style. But he has dwelt too long on the pains of the past, and in the process has either deliberately twisted historical accounts by depressing some facts and promoting others, or the passage of time has reshaped and coloured his memory of what transpired in those feverish months when he rewarded those outside the coup circle and alienated those who propelled him into office.

    The president suggested at the inauguration of the EFCC headquarters last Tuesday that corruption was fighting back, and that he expected it. But Nigeria would be best served had he demonstrated, much more than the resolve he prides himself in, that he is capable of the introspection required to reshape and fine-tune the anti-corruption war. It is suspected that he does not fully understand the issues involved in the war beyond arresting and prosecuting some of the corrupt officials the government can find. Nor is it clear that his government possesses the intellectual depth to conceive and emplace philosophical underpinnings to the war. There is no policy that will not produce its supporters and enemies. What is important is to first understand the factors that promote the corruption cancer, such as the country’s fragile and untenable political and economic structures, and then design appropriate remedies.

    The fact on the ground, regardless of the recovery of stolen funds adumbrated by the EFCC boss, Ibrahim Magu, is that no structured war against corruption is really going on. There are undoubtedly campaigns, and naming and shaming. But in terms of substance, no war can really be fought until the roots of the problem are identified and tackled. The government has up till today continued to preoccupy itself with combating the symptoms of the disease; that is why the war has become difficult, even tedious. And that is why, in addition, it is unlikely that the Buhari presidency will have a profound impact on the crisis. Worse, the presidency’s stubborn refusal to fully understand the ramifications of the problem and brilliantly conceive a structured and philosophical response to the crisis will continue to doom the campaign to nothing more than ephemeral propaganda propelled, as it is becoming increasingly obvious, by doubtful and perhaps private and prejudiced motives.

    Fighting corruption is a noble and laudable task. It is time the Buhari presidency understood how to prosecute the war if it is to achieve the kind of result it boyishly continues to dream about.

  • Herdsmen killings and Garba Shehu’s theory of war

    THERE will obviously not be an end to the government’s theories explaining the persistence of killings in many parts of the country. A significant section of the worried public blames herdsmen, suggesting that the conflict between cattle breeders and farming communities was taking its toll on the country and predisposing the society to complete breakdown of law and order. But the government continues to struggle with many explanations, some of them quite difficult to  rationalise. After the seemingly unending rigmarole and dithering, the presidency, through one of its spokesmen, has now propounded a new theory about the killings.

    According to the presidential spokesman, Garba Shehu, the killings are an attempt by some nameless characters to instigate war. Said he: “These persistent killings are not spontaneous; there are subterranean forces with a sinister agenda to instigate war in the country for selfish purposes. Although unconventional war is particularly complicated, our security forces are making rigorous efforts to better understand these enemies, with a view to decisively checkmating their evil attacks…It is very clear that there is an attempt by some people, within and outside the country, to create a war. There is intelligence available that clearly indicates that, yes, there are Fulani herds people who kill, but this country also suffers from attacks by ISIS, which has come into the country and they found a place in the cleavages that divide the country.” At last, Mallam Shehu has grudgingly conceded that perhaps sceptics were right in some of their suppositions all along, particularly as it relates with the activities of herdsmen. “Yes, there are Fulani herdsmen who have taken to this criminality,” he moaned; “there is also the Islamic State in West Africa factor, and the fact that the opposition political party seems to be operating from a different country.”

    In the statement he released a few days ago, Mallam Shehu made no mention of the earlier four theories bandied about by the same government he serves. So, Why should the public take this latest explanation, the fifth so far, seriously? Here are some of the past theories given by the same government to explain the killings:

    1) “Your Excellency, the governor, and all the leaders here, I am appealing to you to try to restrain your (Benue farmers) people. I assure you that the police, the Department of State Service (DSS) and other security agencies have been directed to ensure that all those behind the mayhem get punished. I ask you in the name of God to accommodate your countrymen. You can also be assured that I am just as worried and concerned with the situation.”

    President Buhari, January 15, speaking with Benue State leaders at Aso Villa

    2) “Obviously it is a communal crisis, for herdsmen are part of the community. They are Nigerians and are part of the community; are they not? Let’s use the example of Benue, you know most of these states where you have several languages, you know it is an issue of communal misunderstanding. I think what we should be praying for is for Nigerians to learn to live in peace with one another, I think it is very important.”

    IGP Ibrahim Idris, January 5, after the New Year’s Day massacre in Benue.

    3) “Whatever crisis that happened at any time, there has to be remote and immediate causes. What are the remote causes of this farmers/herders crisis? Since Independence, we know there used to be a route whereby these cattle rearers use. Cattle rearers are all over the nation, you go to Bayelsa, you see them, you go to Ogun, you see them. If those routes are blocked, what happens? These people are Nigerians, it’s just like you going to block river or shoreline, does that make sense to you? These are the remote causes. But what are the immediate causes? It is the grazing law. These people are Nigerians, we must learn to live together with each other, that is basic. Communities and other people must learn how to accept foreigners within their enclave, finish!”

    Defence minister, Mansur Dan Ali, January 25, after emerging from a meeting with the president and other security chiefs

    4) “The problem is even older than us. It has always been there, but now made worse by the influx of gunmen from the Sahel region into different parts of the West African sub-region. They were trained and armed by Muammar Gadaffi of Libya. When he was killed, the gunmen escaped with their arms. We encountered some of them fighting with Boko Haram. Herdsmen that we used to know carried only sticks and maybe a cutlass to clear the way, but these ones now carry sophisticated weapons. The problem is not religious, but sociological and economic. But we are working on solutions.”

    President Buhari, April 11, speaking in London with Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby

    Clearly, Nigerians want both the killings and the government’s vacillations to stop. They are tired of the back and forth, and are exasperated by the government’s seeming impotence in the face of the relentless murder of their fellow countrymen. They are right to distrust the government, and to fear that it may not even be sincere in trying to put down the malady and stanch the flow of blood. The government has been anxious to suggest that the killings have nothing to do with the country’s religious divides. But by failing to curb the madness, and by initially offering what seemed to many victims justifications for the killings, they open themselves up to public suspicion, and the country and the crisis itself to all sorts of nefarious explanations.

    Garba Shehu
    Garba Shehu

    Now, the dismal show of combing for theories is continuing, with Mallam Shehu arguing that some shadowy characters and groups might be working hard to instigate a war, and that the opposition Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) might be unhelpful in their criticisms. Alas, the APC did worse in their days in opposition. Even then, the PDP has been very restrained in taking the government to task both in terms of the government’s understanding of the crisis and the application of solutions. But both in the president’s London analysis and Mallam Shehu’s latest theory there were no indications that the government understood nor could explain why the instigators and agent provocateurs they so glibly talked about skipped over the Sahel region of Nigeria to land smack in the middle of the country. Mallam Shehu suggests implausibly that the reason for selecting the points of attacks may be because the instigators know the Middle Belt to be the fragile and vulnerable dividing line between Christians and Muslims, and between the North and the South. And though he suggests that there is a welter of intelligence to underpin this curious theory, it will remain far-fetched until more proof is found.

    Before the year is over, no one can tell whether the government will still not propound another theory of the killings. They will probably continue to reel out theories until they run out of explanations. Meanwhile, what Nigerians demand of their government are expertise and competence in understanding crises — for crises will always come — and firmness and fairness in finding and applying solutions. The government has demonstrated no competence in both. It will, therefore, continue to be susceptible to well-founded suspicions, and the country itself unnerved by all manner of theories and complications about the killings. Christians will feel justified to wonder why they must be on the receiving end, and the Middle Belt of Nigeria will wonder whether there is really no subterranean plot to expropriate their lands. The longer the crisis persists, the more complicated and intractable it becomes.

    Given the government’s inexpert approach to the crisis so far, not to say the propagation of untruthful and puerile theories, there is no indication it can get to the bottom of the crisis any time soon. This is apocalyptic. It is truly shocking that the government has been unable to assemble the team needed to help the country reason and forge a way out of the terrible quagmire. It has spoken contradictions and acted contradictorily. The country even senses that their government is at sixes and sevens over the killings, approving costly but ultimately unworkable and tedious establishment of security bases in the time-worn flat-footedness that has unhinged security operations in the country. There may be no significant opposition rallying force at the moment, but the Buhari presidency must still urgently find a way out of the bloodletting if it is not to be undone by the kind of panic that finished off the Goodluck Jonathan presidency. This government has been more heavy-handed than its predecessors, but it is not certain that a resort to strong-arm tactics, as it has begun to show in its overconfident approach to governance, would not eventually doom its electoral chances in next year’s polls.