The Nation Newspaper

Category: Saturday

  • Constitutionalism, materialism and security

    I  want  to go philosophical  today not because  of the saying that a man  with  a good wife is lucky but a man with a bad  wife  invariably  becomes  philosophical  about life. I  am  going this  way  in this piece because the concepts highlighted in today’s  headline have been lambasted and  violated by people in   very   high  places  and  in unexpected   scenarios   and institutions  in the last  week ,  hence  my concern,  which  is  deep  one indeed.

    Let  me lay  the foundation  for our discourse  with two  Nigerian  proverbs. The  first   is  that one does  not leave a fire  on a thatched  roof  and go to sleep . The  second is that anyone   who  rides on the back  of a tiger  ends up  in its belly. These  proverbs drive my analysis  and thinking on the topic  of the day  and the issues and incidents involved. The  first   incident  is the bold recourse  to constitutionalism  by the nation’s  president  and leader of the APC  in asking  the party’s  Chairman  and Executive Committee  to  follow  the  party’s  constitution  and not  elongate  their  tenure  because the nation’s  constitution  and  the party’s  constitution  forbid   such. The  second  is a publication I received  on Palm  Sunday in Christ  Church  Cathedral   Marina,  Lagos  titled ‘I  want  to become   the Bishop  of  Lagos Diocese  ‘with  a picture  of the outgoing Bishop  of  Lagos ‘  Rt Revd  Adebola  Ademowo ‘ in  full    regalia   with  wads and bundles    of  various Nigerian  currencies  and the dollar lacing  the pix  ,  with  a palatial  mansion  and  Chevrolet   SUV    in the background. The  third  is the strident  call  at a Convocation of the Taraba   State   University  by no less  a person than retired  General  Theophilus Danjuma  for  Nigerians  to arm  themselves  against  attacks  by  armed  Fulani  herdsmen  because the Army  cannot  protect  them  in this regard . The fourth  on the international  scene  was the unexpected visit  of North  Korea’s  missile  and  nuclear – pugnacious  leader ,  Kim  Jong  Un  to China   and  the prospect  of that for  world peace and security.

    Let  me make some initial and brief  comments on these  incidents in the light of today’s  topic. The  first  is that leaders  should  live up  to their responsibilities  and not go to sleep   in a house  with  fire  on  a thatched  roof.  That  is what  President Muhammadu  Buhari  has  done with APC  with  his warning  and alarm  on tenure  elongation. That  is what  General  Theophilus  Danjuma has done with  the Nigeria nation  and  government in  accusing  the army  of  partiality in defending Nigerians against  the fury  and violence  of  marauding herdsmen not only in    Taraba  but in the rest  of  Nigeria . Sadly  that is what the Nigerian  Anglican Communion  leadership  has NOT  done in the case of the election of the Bishop  of  Lagos in the  manner of the man  riding the back  of  a tiger  with predictable  and dire  consequences  such  as the publication which  vividly  dents  the image and standing of the Anglican  Communion  in terms charges of  misuse and abuse  of  power and crass  materialism  against  a leading  prelate  of the Church  on his retirement . Again , the North  Korean leader has seized  the bull  by the horn  in retracing  his steps from  setting the world  on fire by his visit  to  China  first  This is  before  his equally  unexpected   future  meeting with his Nuclear nemesis,  the equally tweeter  and  nuclear    crazy,  but effective world leader  in the quest  for global peace and  harmony, the   bold   antagonist  of fake news, US  President Donald   Trump.

    We  now  proceed to  highlight  the  salient  issues  inherent and flowing from  these  various events  and developments . We  start  with the issue of  constitutionalism  which President  has done just in the nick  of time . On  the  surface it may look  like  an  endorsement  of APC  leader   Asiwaju  Bola Tinubu’s  earlier  remark  on his new APC Reconciliation  Drive that the  current APC chairman John Oyegun  will  lead the party  astray. But  the President  has  shown  his hand that  this  cannot  be allowed on his watch  and  on the eve  of another presidential  election .According to  the Nigerian  president –‘ In  this  circumstance ,  what  is expected of us is to conduct fresh  elections , once the tenure of the  current executives  approaches  its end. A  Caretaker  Committee  cannot remedy this situation and cannot validly act  in place  of elected  officers ‘He  then  concluded  —‘  I  am   therefore   of the firm  view  that  it is better  to follow   strictly the  dictates of  our party  and national   constitutions rather  than put APC  and  its activities  at great  risk. ‘That  advice  or instruction  is the mark of leadership  and a lesson  in constitutionalism which simply  is living by the rules.

    Unfortunately  this is the opposite of what the leadership of the Nigerian  Anglican  Communion  has done on the complaints  by  concerned  members of the laity  at  the Cathedral  on the Marina with  regard  to the election  of  a bishop  to succeed  the outgoing Bishop whose image was  caricatured in terms  of materialism in  the publication ‘I  want  to be the Bishop of  Lagos Diocese’  now in circulation amongst  Anglicans in  Lagos  Diocese.   Incidentally    I wrote  on the legacy  of  materialsm  over spiritualty  apparent in the claims  of achievements   made   by  the outgoing Bishop  last  Saturday in  this  column and  the title  was ‘ Leaders , Values  and  Expectation.’  I  was therefore  pleasantly  surprised   last   Sunday  , which  is  Palm  Sunday  ,  to  see  the printed  sermon in the Cathedral’s  bulletin   titled – ‘Snares  to  Growing in the Knowledge  of  God – Materialism  (Wrong  Values)’.  The  sermon said –  ‘In  conclusion,  materialism makes  one blind to  the means through which one is making money.  A  materialistic  person  does not care who  suffers in their  process  of acquiring  wealth . ‘  That  sermon  which I   commend to all  Anglicans , was signed by  Revd  Canon Adekunle Ajado  and endorsed  by  ‘ the one who  serves among you ‘ the Very  Revd Adebola  Ojofeitimi, Provost  of the  Cathedral  Church  of  Christ  Marina. It  is apparent  that these men  of  God do not  believe in going to  sleep  in  a  Cathedral    with fire  on the roof   on the issue of  materialism.   An  issue   that   their leaders in Abuja  have treated   so  far  with such deafening   silence,   ecclesiastical  levity  and   benign  neglect .

    We  round  up  with  the alarm   by  General   Dnajuma that  Nigerians should  arm  and defend  themselves  against  armed  herdsmen  because  the army  is  not neutral  in protecting   them    According   to  the former  Army  general –   ‘There  is an attempt  at ethnic  cleansing in Taraba State   and some rural  states   in  Nigeria .. We must   resist it. We must stop it …Our armed  forces  are not neutral. If   you are   depending on the armed forces to stop   the killings,   you   will all die one by one‘.  The army  has defended itself  by stating that it was because  it   it stayed   professional   and  neutral   that    caused  the anger of the Taraba  state  governor against the army.  The Federal Government  has  condemned  and  called   the alarm  a call  to  anarchy. Either  way, the   Ministry  of  Defence   and   the Nigerian  Army   cannot  dismiss  the alarm  sounded  by  their former  boss who  was both a  former  Minister  of  Defence  and a former  Army  Chief  and one of the best  if not the most  successful . He therefore certainly knows what he was saying.   A word  is   therefore  enough  for  the wise in the interest  of the  security ,  unity , peace and stability  of the Nigerian  nation. Once again. Long live, the Federal  Republic of  Nigeria .

  • Democracy, Electoral Act: All hope is not lost

    UNTIL Justice Ahmed Mohammed of the Federal High Court, Abuja rules in April 25 whether the case brought before him by the Accord Party on the Electoral Act, 2010 amendment has merit or not, the political terrain will continue to quake under accusations and counter-accusations from the president’s supporters and opponents. The National Assembly had in February overwhelmingly voted to reorder the sequence of the 2019 general elections, with the presidential poll taking the rear after both the National Assembly and state legislative and governorship elections are conducted in that order. The electoral body, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), had in January announced the retention of the 2015 order of elections which put the presidential and National Assembly polls first, and governorship and state legislative polls second. But perhaps suspicious that the reordering of the polls targeted his re-election, the president vetoed it.  It is this veto that the National Assembly is attempting to override.

    On the one hand are those like the Accord Party who fear that if the National Assembly should be allowed to override the president’s veto in the order of elections matter, that action would constrict the electoral body’s elbow room in conducting the elections, for instance in terms of rescheduling postponed polls. Others in the same camp, including the president in particular, suggest that it would amount to usurping the functions and powers of the electoral body to impose a particular sequence on it. The umpire must not only have control of the order, it must also have control over the dates, they argue.

    On the other hand are those who argue that the order of elections is not the same as the date of elections, and that, in any case, they do not see why a popular president should be perturbed or feel targeted  by anyone using election dates and order. First or last, they suggest, the president should not feel intimidated by his popularity to contest the poll whether it is brought forward or rescheduled late. Whether the proponents of this position are being cynical or not, no one seems to know or even care. As far as everyone is concerned, the National Assembly has not abused its powers by amending the Act, and can furthermore, if the lawmakers so chose, even go ahead to strip more powers from the electoral umpire.

    It is simply democracy at work that the president and his supporters argue that the amendment is targeted at the number one citizen, fearing that rescheduling the order, and not the dates, of the elections could jeopardise his chances. It is also part of the dynamics of democracy that national lawmakers fear that should the presidential poll hold first, and the president wins, it could jeopardise the chances of victory for lawmakers and even governors who have drawn the ire, if not the fury, of the president. So, on the one hand, the president fears defeat should the presidential poll come last, for once his enemies win, they could immobilise him openly and remorselessly. On the other hand, the lawmakers fear defeat should the president win. The fear of defeat, rather than any thought of the sanctity and integrity of the polls, are the overriding considerations in the battle to amend or retain the order of elections.

    Significantly, one political party – ever so typical of the political class — has presumptuously dragged the judiciary into the fray. Here the Accord Party, which is not in alliance with the ruling party, nor seems on the surface friendly to the president, has gone to court over the matter. The party does not stand a cat in hell’s chance of winning the presidency, let alone suffer any loss by the reordering of the polls. Why it has gone to court is, therefore, not clear. Its action can of course not be thrown out on the ground of locus standi, and it can theoretically argue that the new order of elections as passed by the National Assembly could bring injury upon its political interests. It can also argue that it is selflessly concerned about safeguarding the independence and powers of the electoral umpire, which the lawmakers might be intent on eroding. But deep down, no one believes the Accord Party’s claim of political or legal altruism, nor of the sensibility and plausibility of its position.

    If the Accord Party should get any relief from the courts, the first beneficiary would be the president, not even the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) whose members dominate the pugnacious and antagonistic legislature. But the chances of getting any relief of any kind are not only slim, they are indeed next to nothing. What the courts will try to answer is whether the constitution does not empower the lawmakers to make amendments as part of the legislative process, or whether that lawmaking effort does not also include the process of overriding vetoes. The courts will also answer the question of at what point a judicial process can be initiated into and against legislative work: whether at the beginning, because a potentially injured person or part fears future damage, or at the middle, or at the end. Finally, the courts will also attempt to answer the straightforward question of what fraction of the legislature can override a veto, whether the ordinary two-thirds mentioned in the constitution as contained in the relevant override provision in Section 58, or in accordance with the explicit provision of two-thirds of All members as contained in some specific parts of the constitution such as Sections 8 and 9.

    Hopefully, in the final analysis, the courts will settle the question of the point at which an injured person can wade into the legislative process, such that whenever a similar case is brought before the courts in the future, it would merit outright dismissal. If it loses in the Federal High Court, would the Accord Party head to the Court of Appeal without seeming to be a busybody or stooge of the ruling party? No one can tell. April 25 is barely a month away, even though the contest seems clear and the winner incontrovertible.

    However, rather than see the presidency as being motivated by malevolent reasons, and the lawmakers as selfish and misdirected, and the Accord Party as dancing to nefarious tunes, and the courts as being pusillanimous in dismissing the matter, and the controversy surrounding the matter as needlessly passionate, partisan and misconceived, the public should proudly consider all the back and forth and cut and thrust as nothing but the exemplification and projection of the finest principles of democracy. Had this controversy popped up under the military, the question of order of elections would have been settled with a fiat or flagged as a no-go-area, an approach that has distorted and even stultified both democracy and constitution-making in Nigeria.

    The ongoing debate on the order of elections, the peaceful approach to litigating it, and hopefully the juridical expertise that would mark its conclusion, should inure the practice of democracy in Nigeria to the sometimes violent political vagaries that had hallmarked it in the past. The Accord Party’s judicial quest may be questionable and degrading, but as some developed democracies, particularly the United States, are showing, no country is immune to such judicial adventurism or humiliating flagellation.

    Whether Nigerians like it or not, democracy is not only taking root in these parts, it is fast becoming indispensable and largely irreplaceable. Its definition may be problematic, and even somewhat at variance with the simple, austere and engaging explanation offered by Abraham Lincoln, a former US president, but overall, once the element of compulsion is taken away from the practice of democracy, and if the country can manage to develop a judicial practice that is intellectually incontestable, constitutional flaws and idiosyncratic political failings may pale into insignificance. Both the president and the National Assembly may selfishly posture for political advantage today, but in the end what will remain, after the dissipation of the election sequence controversy, should be of such lustre that will encourage Nigerians to have faith in their democracy and work harder to entrench it.

  • Not exactly about Oyegun

    He was bold, decisive and forthright. Yet, President Muhammadu Buhari was at the same time conciliatory, consensual and diplomatic. The occasion was Tuesday’s National Executive Committee (NEC) meeting of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), where the President overruled the earlier extension of tenure by one year granted the Chief John Odigie-Oyegun-led National Working Committee (NWC) of the party by the NEC. President Buhari admitted that the decision of the NEC at its February 27, 2018, meeting to extend the tenure of members of the NWC by one year “was duly carried by a majority of members present…even though some of our party members have since spoken up very vehemently against it. Others have even taken the matter to court”. But apparently weighing in with his critical and difficult to ignore voice as leader of the party, Buhari told his audience that legal advice at his disposal was to the effect that the extension contravened both the Constitution of the APC and the Constitution of the country.

    In the President’s words: “While the APC Constitution, in Article 17(1) and 13.2(B), limits the tenure of elected officers to four years, renewable once by another election, the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria (as amended), in section 223, also prescribes periodic elections for party executives at regular intervals, which must not exceed four years”. Warning that the party should avoid the potentially very risky implications of legal challenges to its decisions if they violated constitutional provisions either of the APC or the country, the President stressed the need to immediately begin processes for going on with already scheduled party congresses and conventions to pick new party officers at all levels. In his characteristic manner, Buhari nevertheless threw his position open for discussion by NEC members apparently seeking to hear alternative views and superior arguments.

    Some distinguished senior lawyers and members of the party NEC who spoke in opposition to the President’s stance reportedly expressed the view that NEC’s decision was valid and within the law, that internal decisions of the party could not be challenged in court and that, in any case, the decision on tenure elongation was sanctioned by a majority of members of party members. The subtle insinuation here was that the President’s was a minority view on the matter and should not override the majority if the democratic principle were to be adhered to.  However, the intervention by the Vice President, Professor Yemi Osinbajo (SAN), reinforced the President’s position when he cited judicial decisions in Kano State specifically which had gone against the party because the party executives in place were appointed and not elected as mandated by the party constitution. He said the judicial decisions obligated the political parties to abide by their constitutions.

    But then, is there any need for the ruling party going into this tenure elongation controversy? Why should incumbent party executives at all levels seek to continue in office automatically without being subjected to the test of internal party democratic processes? If a key strength of the APC against the ruling PDP in 2014 was its open and transparent intra-party contests in contradistinction to the farcical exercises of the latter, why should the APC be eager to dispense with internal elections for tenure elongation at a time when the PDP, though still badly battered, is gradually getting its act together? Of course, let me quickly say here that it is entirely up to the APC if it opts to contest the next critical election from a legally fragile and morally diminished position. But as this column said when commenting on the last PDP convention, political parties are so critical to our political process that their internal affairs cannot be left to the whims and fancies of party members alone. Those who are non card carrying members of political parties also have a responsibility to encourage these critical structures to respect stipulated constitutional procedures in managing their affairs in the interest of the stability and well being of the larger political system.

    There are those who contend that the APC is so crisis ridden that holding party congresses to elect new party executives shortly before the 2019 polls will leave the party even more divided and thus ill prepared to compete effectively in the election. It is my view that the picture of a badly fragmented party in no position to abide by its own constitution al requirement to elect new party executives every four years is greatly exaggerated. The truth of the matter is that for an alliance hurriedly cobbled together to fight the 2015 election, the APC has held its own quite reasonably in the circumstances.  In any case, why should the APC seek to project a public image of a party so divided that it has become practically dysfunctional?  Is this not ultimately self-defeating? For, if it cannot manage its internal affairs as a political party, why should Nigerians entrust the party further with the responsibility of running the affairs of the country?

    Again, if the party has not made remarkable progress towards becoming a more cohesive organizational entity since the 2015 election, a huge chunk of the blame surely lies on the party executives seemingly so desperate for tenure elongation. It is difficult to understand, for instance, why the relationship between the National Assembly and the Presidency was allowed to degenerate so badly without the party leadership doing anything meaningful about it for so long. The consequence is that the Buhari administration has been considerably slowed down in the implementation of its policies to the detriment not only of the party’s image but the progress of the country. In the same vein, the party leadership inexplicably folded its arms and simply looked on as the APC degenerated into crises in several states. Surely, with a proactive, dynamic and purposeful party leadership in place, these crises could have been long tackled without the need of the President setting up a crisis resolution committee.

    Another argument of the tenure elongation proponents is that the period between now and next year’s election is too short for the party to organize and stage successful congresses and conventions.  This should certainly not be so if the party puts its mind to it. After all, it performed an even more herculean feat by holding at least three conventions between its formation and the last general election. It will only task the astuteness and acumen of the party leadership to the utmost. Again, however, the party leadership’s inexcusable lack of proactive initiative must be blamed if the APC finds itself in a tight corner as regards holding constitutionally stipulated congresses and conventions before next year’s elections. Since the party executive was aware of the time table for the elections as well as the legal expiry of its own tenure, preparations for these exercises should have been well under way by now. Should the current party leadership be rewarded with tenure elongation in these circumstances for what is clearly a dereliction of duty on their part?

    It is my view that the APC  will be in worse shape if it does not hold elective congresses and conventions to elect new executives at state and national levels as and at when due than if it does. For one, scores of party members who seek to contest party offices at all levels will feel short-changed as well as disaffected and alienated. Beyond this, hundreds of aspirants seeking to contest for the governorship or presidential tickets of the party will be justified in feeling that the incumbent occupants of the positions have a vested interest in desiring the continuation in office of the present party executives beyond their legal four-year terms.  The credibility of the governorship and presidential primaries will be significantly enhanced if they are conducted by party executives that emerge through the will of the party members in free, open and transparent intra-party contests.

    Contrary to the impression in many quarters, the issue of tenure elongation does not necessarily center on the person of the APC National Chairman, Chief John Odigie-Oyegun. It is rather a matter of fidelity to the party and the country’s constitutions. In any case, Oyegun like other members of the current NWC are not proscribed from seeking reelection into their current positions if they so desire. Those who believe they have performed well enough to continue in office will surely have the opportunity to vote for them while those opposed to the incumbents will also test their electoral strength among duly elected delegates. It is the principle of adherence to constitutional and democratic principles that matter and not personalities. In the final analysis, however, President Buhari deserves commendation for taking the lead in setting APC on the right course of constitutional adherence.

  • Mokugwo Okoye as nationalist and futurologist

    The year was 1966. The day was the 3rd of December. The venue was the Alexandria Auditorium, University of Nigeria, Nsukka. The atmosphere on campus was charged.   Most of the students were fervently and passionately in support of the plan by Lt-Col. Odumegwu Ojukwu to announce the secession of the Eastern Region from Nigeria and declare an independent Republic of Biafra. This was understandable. Emotions still ran high in the East following the massacre of Igbos in the North that year in retaliation for the perceived Igbo-centric colouration of the January 15, 1966, coup. Waves of Igbos had fled the North back to the East and Ojukwu had ordered non-Easterners to leave the region. As part of their drive in support of Ojukwu’s secessionist plans, the UNN students had organized a public lecture titled “The Role of Students in National Politics” at the Alexandria Auditorium.

    None other than the great Nationalist and close associate of Dr. Nnamdi Azikwe during the nationalist struggle for independence, Mokugwo Okoye, was the guest speaker. The great author of several cerebral books, including ‘Storms on the Niger’, ‘African Cameos’, ‘Blackman’s Destiny’, ‘The Beard of Prometheus’, ‘African Responses: A Revaluation of History and Culture, and Embattled Men: Profiles in Social Adjustment’, Okoye amazingly never had a post-primary education. (I owe this information to the journalist and columnist, Owei Lakemfa). Okoye had suffered imprisonment and other forms of harassment during the anti-colonial struggle but never wavered in his commitment to a free and united Nigeria.

    He was thus considered by the students to be one person who would be so disgusted at what Nigeria had turned out to be, particularly the painful experience of the Igbo, that he would give a fiery lecture in support of Biafra and denouncing Nigeria. It turned out to be a dramatic and historic encounter between a genuine nationalist who still believed in the possibilities of Nigeria despite his no less fierce opposition to the injustices inflicted on members of his ethnic group, and the young students of UNN on fire with secessionist fervor.

    I came across this intriguing story of a genuinely committed revolutionary who placed his Nigerian consciousness, indeed commitment to our common human solidarity, above ethno-regional and religious sectarianism in Dr. A. A. Amakiri’s book, ‘The Left in Nigerian Politics’ first published in 1997 by AMKRA books, Ilupeju, Lagos. It is based partly on the author’s doctoral thesis, ‘National Liberation Movements and the Non-Aligned’- a study conducted at the University of Leicester, England. The 206- page book is divided into seven chapters covering such topics as ‘The ‘Left’ and ‘Right’ in political history’; ‘The emergence of the Left in Nigeria’; ‘The Left under civil rule’; ‘The Left under military rule’; ‘The Left and the emerging fourth Republic’; ‘The Left and popular organizations’ and ‘The Left: Retrospects and Prospects’. It provides valuable information and insights into diverse aspects of Nigerian politics. I focus on the Mokugwo Okoye incident only as an example of one of the historical gems in the book as well as in the light of some of our recent historical experiences.

    Amakiri writes in his book that Mokugwo Okoye, that night, commenced his lecture on a rather probing and detached note when he gave some expositions on student unionism in a global context stressing human solidarity as a crucial element of the pan-student movement. The radical nationalist gradually began to warm up to his subject when he denounced and condemned what he described as the dehumanizing treatment meted out to their non-Eastern colleagues by students of the Enugu campus of the UNN on the day the former were expelled from the region along with other non indigenes of the region. According to Amakiri, Okoye “deplored reports of the unsympathetic attitude of the Eastern students towards those who had “shared the same hostels, dining hall, and classrooms” with them but were now forced to leave for no fault of theirs. In his opinion the spirit of solidarity ought to have prevailed on that sad occasion of forceful separation of friends”.

    Okoye lectured his student audience on the history of the Nigerian crisis suggesting what he considered should be the role of students at that sad juncture in Nigeria’s historical trajectory. However, the unrepentant thrust of his submission was that secession should not even be contemplated as a solution to the Nigerian crisis urging advocates of secession not to desecrate the sacrifices of the generation of nationalists that struggled to liberate the country from colonial bondage and their efforts to build a united Nigeria. At this point, his audience had had enough. The atmosphere became tense and restive.

    Amakiri’s narrative itself gathers pace and becomes tense. His words: “Hell was let loose at this juncture in the lecture as the students booed, shouted, and fired ‘missiles’ at the speaker…In the midst of the turbulence, Okoye could still be heard shouting: “Go and tell your leaders that secession is ill-advised. The East cannot withstand the federal might. Some of us sacrificed our youth to build what you want to destroy. You are on this campus because we fought to provide for you…The Federal might is great enough to crush your secession. You were all born Nigerians and would die as Nigerians. I warn you, secession is ill-advised”. The students grew more enraged. They fired missiles and hurled abuses at him. A defiant Okoye would not be intimidated. His voice grew louder according to Amakiri: “I have seen rough weather. I successfully stood against the colonial might. Your actions, your ‘missiles’ cannot scratch me. I tell you, you will be shamed if you ignore my advice and embark on your mad venture”.

    When the lecture ended at around 10p.m that night, according to Amachree, Okoye was a lonely and deserted man on a hostile campus. Yet, almost 30 years later in 1995 specifically, Okoye in a private letter to Amakiri said he had no regrets on his stance that night stressing “I do not regret the line I took on the Nigerian crisis, and history seems to have vindicated me”. By the time he died in 1998, Mokwugo Okoye was a member of Anthony Enahoro’s Movement for National Reformation and was still preoccupied with the struggle for the liberation of Nigeria. Yet, dismemberment of the country was never an option for him.

    Okoye’s position on secession, Amakiri explains was in consonance with the dominant perspective among the Nigerian Left at the time because “In Leftist thinking, it was considered reactionary to support secession, since support would be inconsistent with the ideology of internationalism”. Was Okoye a romantic and unrealistic nationalistic dreamer? Would the likes of  Nnamdi Kanu and his Indigenous Peoples of Nigeria (IPOB) fellow travellers have thought and behaved differently if exposed to the seminal thoughts of great Igbo men like Mokugwo Okoye? Did history really vindicate Okoye? So many questions.

  • Super Eagles’ friendly: A post-mortem

    The noise from the social media after Nigeria beat Poland in Wroclaw penultimate Friday was deafening. It was as if the Super Eagles lost the game, with paralysed analysis bothering on the people’s primordial sentiments on how the team should look. Chief among the complaints was the clamour for Vincent Enyeama’s return, even when  we know that he has been inactive in Europe this season. The submissions gave the impression that they would rather have Enyeama in goal with a walking stick than allow Francis Uzoho man the goalpost in Russia. Let me not say what have gone down in the social media since Eagles lost 2-0 to Serbia in England. Everyone talking about going to the drawing board to plot new tactics. I wonder if this board isn’t in tatters.

    The friendly matches against Poland and Serbia were meant to test the players and see how they would fare against countries that have similar playing patterns and mentality like the Croatians, Nigeria’s opening game opponents at the Russia 2018 World Cup on June 16. Besides, the two matches were meant to expose the team’s lapses so that the coaches could find the right players for weak positions. I’m glad that both games served the purpose, with the tie against Serbia showing that Eagles’ regular back men have no substitutes. It is also not too late to look for reliable defenders to rival the first team players.

    Enyeama was awesome with the Eagles. When Adegboye Onigbinde told us (Nigeria sporting press) in Japan that he was fielding Enyeama ahead of Ike Shorunmu in Nigeria’s last World Cup game against England at the Korea/Japan World Cup, many wondered  if he could stop David Beckham’s free-kicks. Enyeama kept a clean sheet in that game. The rest is history.

    What these analysts don’t know is that Uzoho will only gain experience playing games such as the one against Poland. The essence of friendly games is to correct mistakes. Most teams at this time are work-in-progress, like the coaches say. It is worthy to note that Rohr listed Uzoho in the Serbian game, making the goalkeeper know that his fate doesn’t lie with what critics say but how the manager rates him – boosting his confidence.

    Two balls slipped through the defence into the net. The first which happened in the Poland game was debatable. But the slip in the first half against Serbia was a good goal. Rohr needs to warn his defenders and Uzoho that such slips would be captured by the Video Assistant Referee (VAR) machine, which wasn’t used in the two matches. On the score of 10, I will rate Uzoho 7, as a first timer in such high profile matches.

    Sticking to Uzoho underscores the importance that Gernot Rohr attaches to using this Mundial to give Nigeria a team that would have a lifespan of 10 years, which is what Clemens Westerhof did when he started rebuilding the Eagles in 1990. Nigeria is going to the Russia 2018 World Cup with the youngest squad. Nobody is casting any doubt on the players’ ages because most of the players pledged their allegiance to Nigeria from other countries, although they have Nigerian parentage. It simple means that their ages are incontestable, how being born in Europe. We are tired of always rebuilding Eagles after every failed expedition. The drawing board we always refer to after every aborted trip must be tattered now.

    It is obvious that many players have lost their shirts, given their contributions in the last two games, especially the one against Serbia, which we lost by two goals. Rohr must dig deep into his bag of tactics to evolve a system that would make the players play at their best. The only consolation is that Nigeria’s last group opponents at the Mundial, Argentina were whacked 6-1 by Spain. I know many pundits would say that the results would have been better if Lionel Messi had played. Hmmm! The same excuse when Nigeria beat Argentina 4-2 last year in Russia. Failure beckons, if Argentina’s coach must be told the truth.

    Rohr, happily, isn’t perturbed by the defeat. He gambled on Ahmed Musa to lead the team’s attack, which is normal for friendly matches. It didn’t work. He played Awuziem in place of injured Leon Balogun; it was catastrophic. Oguenyi Onazi was lost in the game just Victor Moses, who apparently played to avoid injuries. The results of friendly games will count for nothing, when the chips are down during the Mundial. Balogun’s absence  in the team’s  defence showed when the Serbians launched their onslaughts. They effectively utilised Eagles’ weakness to play aerial balls, especially from set-pieces. Rohr should find a way to play Ola Aina regularly. He is big and strong, scared and plays regularly for Hull City in the English Championship, even though he is a Chelsea star on loan. Aina can dash forward to score like he does with Hull City.

    Moses appears unable to carry the fortunes of the team, if marked like we saw against Serbia. Perhaps because Ivanovic, the Serbia captain, knew him – they were mates at Chelsea. One word- Moses isn’t Eagles messiah at the Mundial. Eagles, don’t have any undertaker in the mould of Lionel Messi (Argentina) and Cristiano Ronaldo (Portugal), Neymar (Brazil), Thomas Muller (Germany), Paul Pogba (France), Hazard (Belguim) et al. I’m scared to pick Wilfred Ndidi as Nigeria’s undertaker because he lacks the World Cup experience. He isn’t also a prolific scorer for the Eagles, unlike the aforementioned players in their countries.

    Alex Iwobi looks like the man to do the creative job for the team at the Mundial, only if he is told so now. There is an obvious reason for that. Nigeria head coach Gernot Rohr may have an exciting young squad to take to Russia but he hardly has creators like Mesut Ozil and Henrikh Mkhitaryan. Iwobi is perhaps the nearest the Super Eagles have to a playmaker. He certainly looked like their best hope for a goal as they laboured against a disciplined Serbia.

    A few people would argue that John Mikel Obi’s contributions were missing. True, but Mikel still needs a younger player, such as Iwobi to use his passes and dribbling runs to attract markers to him. This way, openings would be created for goals. Eagles’ midfielders in the two matches were tentative in their displays, with none of them willing to seize the initiative of being match winners reminiscent of the Nwankwo Kanu and Austin Okocha era.

    With a dysfunctional midfield like we saw in the two matches, there is no way the strikers can work. Strikers are best utilised if the defence-splitting passes are there. They would find it easier to run into space to receive such passes, where the midfielders can dribble to unlock the oppositions’ defences. Our players’ resort to long balls to unlock defences was poor tactics as it rendered the strikers otiose. The manager needs to either look for the players (I wonder if there is the time) or find a better pattern of play that will bring out the players’ best qualities.

    ‘’Nigeria may have come away from Barnet licking their wounds, though it was largely to do with a youthful defence incapable of taming Aleksandar Mitrovic and the woeful display of Ahmed Musa as a central striker,’’ Standard Sports newspaper of England wrote on Wednesday.

    “Rohr commended the boys and urged them not to drop their heads because no football team in the world wins all their games,” Eagles spokesman Toyin Ibitoye said.

    “The coach told the team they should learn from this defeat but not suck, but rather go back to their clubs and keep fighting. He said what was most important after such a loss is how you react, he said we have to bounce back.”

    “The coach reminded the boys that they have not been doing badly as a team and what has happened should be put behind. He said it is a game and they have done their part and should forget the rest. We have three more friendly matches to play before the World Cup proper. Ours is to take the positives from the Serbia game, study them critically and implement,’’ Ibitoye said.

    It is good to know that NFF chieftains are on the same page with Rohr and the team. Amaju Pinnick’s statement underscored the need for all the parties to work towards getting Nigeria into the quarter-finals. At that stage, anything is possible, especially if Nigerians rally round the team. They could spring surprises.

    Pinnick wrote this writer in a terse reply to an inquiry about his thoughts on the game: ‘’Trust me, it was a good preparatory game against Poland, for instance. We are satisfied. You learn more when you lose matches and learn less when you win games.

    ‘’I must congratulate Serbia for giving us a good game, which helped to expose the weaknesses of our team. This is the essence of playing such friendly games. The coaches have taken notes and we expect good reaction from them in subsequent matches before the World Cup proper in Russia.’’

     

  • Leaders, values and expectations

    The  saying that bad news travel  fast has become an understatement in  this age of viral social  media  and fake news.  It  is   a  world where   hacking has become a  real and potent cyber  weapon  that  destroys democracies  and even  the companies  that  have  made  billions from the internet   through  mass  consumer  participation  and sheer  volume. This   has made data  mining a huge  wealth  spinning proposition  for internet  companies like  Face  Book  which  for   now  is fighting for its corporate  life because information  and data  have  become weaponised  and have been  pilfered  cheekily  under  its watch.  Such  data  is now said to have been  used  to get the President of the US  elected  and the world  is reeling from that development   which    both  British  PM Theresa May  and defeated US presidential  candidate Hillary   Clinton  had  earlier   warned  the world  about  but were ignored at the time.

    In  spite  of this development  however  bad  news will  still  remain  bad news and  it is in that light that I look  at  today’s topic. It  is my  contention here that in an  age of  fake news and cyber  hacking, leaders especially  of democracies  must be on their  toes  in living up to the expectations of  those who  elected them  as well as those  such  leaders lead  in any  aspect  of leadership  especially  the political and religious. To  illustrate  my views  today  I  will  look perfunctorily  at  events in Nigeria, Poland, China, and  the US  and the role of some political  and   religious   leaders  in those nations and draw  conclusions  and lessons  from  the events I  will  highlight.

    On  Nigeria   I  wish  to  discuss  Nigerian  issues  on a comparative  basis with  Poland  not because  the Eagles  are playing with Poland in   a  friendly  soccer match this weekend  but because  of the issues  of patriotism,  and   national pride inherent  in the events   I  want   to discuss about  the two  nations. All   the events  look  like bad  news  but in the light  of expectations of leadership involved in them one  can still  see that all  hope for improvement  is not lost . In  Nigeria the news  that over  a hundred  of  the Nigerian  girls  seized  by Boko  Haram  had  been  returned  by their abductors  is good  news  but the abduction  and the   negligence   involved  in their being taken  and returned  by their captors is  dangerously  bad  news indeed. Where  is the power  and authority of the sovereign state, in the hands of the government  of the day, in all  these?  It  obviously  took  a   nap  while Nigerian  girls  were  taken  away by insurgents  that were  said to have been  defeated   but  who  resurrected  to show  their staying power  with  disdain  and impunity. As if to say  they can always  abduct  and return  Nigerian  citizens in their nation and there is nothing the Nigerian  government can  do  about it.  That  is bad news indeed  and certainly  worse  than the cyber  hacking   blamed on  Russia  and threatening western  democracies as  we  know  them  today. It  is poor  consolation  to assert  that the  DSS  negotiated  their return  and that  they will  be received in Abuja  by the president.  This  is because   the   DSS  and  government should  have  prevented  the abduction  in the first  instance  and giving  them  audience  in  Abuja is like giving  an  award  to   Boko  Haram for its   invincibility,  terrorist insolence  and murderous intents  and actions that have killed many  Nigerian with impunity in recent  times.  This  is  indeed  a very  sad  development  in our  fight against  Boko  Haram  insurgency.

    Similarly, a priest  in  Poland   recently  said  he hoped the present  Catholic  Pope  should  just  die  and go and meet  his father in heaven  because  he  asked Christians in Europe  to  accept  Muslim  migrants. The  priest  has been  admonished by  his superiors  in the Catholic  hierarchy  but  what  he has said seem  to  be the policy  of the government  of  Poland.  This is because  Poland, Hungary, Czech  and Slovak  Republics, all  members of the EU  have refused  to take their quota  of  migrants allotted  them   by the EU. Even  in the face  of threats  by the German Chancellor Angela  Merkel  that their structural  funds  for development from  the EU  will  depend on their readiness  to  accommodate migrants,  these four elected  governments who  have branded  themselves  as’ illiberal  democracies ‘ have refused to take in  Muslim  migrants  claiming  they will  undermine  their  security  and that  of  Europe at large.

    I  want  to compare  the frustration or  fallen  expectation of the Polish  priest with  the leadership  of the  Catholic  Pontiff   with  a worrying development  in the Anglican  Communion in Nigeria with  regard  to the election of a new Bishop of  Lagos whose   seat  is in the illustrious  Cathedral  on the Marina in  Lagos. Some  key  members of the Cathedral  had made  allegations   of bribery  in the election  of the new  Bishop    who  I understand  is a committed   prelate  in his own  right   and have  accused the outgoing Bishop   who  also is an Archbishop of railroading his succession   and taking the diocese  through  unnecessary  and extravagant  farewell  benefits and send  off  events. What  bothered  me however in a letter sent  to me on Whats App  was  the reply  to the accusations   of abuse  of office  and power  against  the outgoing prelate. The  man  of God  retorted  with  flourish    that  even  if  he was  being given  a 200m naira farewell  handshake  it  was not peculiar  to  him  because two  former  prelates  of his calibre  had  taken  50m naira  more  before  him.  In  addition  he wrote  that  the Chancellor  inspired  the benevolence  and there  was  nothing to it as  far  as he was concerned.  This was his reply on the social  media to a query  from the  spiritual  leader of the Anglican  Communion in  Nigeria.

    This  reply  in circulation in the social  media reminded  me of the arrogant  but unconvincing answer of former French  President Valery Giscard  d ‘Estang  to allegations that  he received  gifts from  former    blood   thirsty   dictator  Jean Bedel Bokassa of the Central African  Republic. Giscard    imperiously  replied  then  – ‘I issue  a categorical  denial  and a contemptuous one ‘.  

    But no one  believed him. Similarly  the prelate  on the Marina has a credibility problem  on his response.  This is not difficult  to see, given  the fact that  he did  not  accept   or see  that 200m  naira  is a lot  of money  to give  to  an outgoing priest  no  matter  his rank  or  the investments he made  for the progress  of the diocese  during his tenure. Indeed  to  see a   religious  legacy strictly  in terms of material  achievements  is a sign  of potent ecclesiastical   impoverishment and  lack  of  spiritual  commitment  and  leadership . Definitely  a 200m  naira  mansion  on earth   makes  it  extremely  difficult   for  a rich  man  to  seek  heaven  in   any hurry. Just  as the bible says it is easy   for  a camel  to pass through  the eye  of   a needle   than    for  a poor  man  to enter  the kingdom  of heaven. Surely  in this instance the hood  has not made  the monk   and the  probleam of  the laity  in the Cathedral  on  the Marina  is  clearly  understandable  in terms of  concern  over   failure  of leadership  by example, this time on the   spiritual   than the material  plain.

    Finally  let  me take both  the US  and  China  together  on  leadership,  values  and expectations  on  drugs  and intellectual  property  which  were  the issues  very  much  in the public  domain  this week.  On  drugs,  US  President Donald  Trump  has advocated  the death  penalty  and he  really  meant it  and I give  him  kudos for  that  even  though  he has gone on to link that  with his anti  migration policy   by stressing that drug  pushers come from the nations he wants their  citizens  kept  out of the US and build border  walls  against.  But   he is   behind China  in his death penalty stance  because China  has long ago prescribed the death penalty  for  corruption.  But    in  announcing a huge  tariff  against  Chinese  goods  on intellectual  property I  commend  the US president   because  China is the piracy  capital of the world  and there is no book, good or service that the  Chinese  cannot copy  and sell  globally   with   impunity   in  violation of international law.  China  may  bristle or   even  threaten  retaliation. That is the truth  and the Chinese    need   to  put  their  house in order  and respect copy rights and other intellectual  property  requirements  to  make the world  a civilized place  for all  of us to live in. Again   Long  live the Federal  Republic  of  Nigeria.

  • Still obsessed with the North-South divide

    If anyone thought the chasm between the North and the South was narrowing, the war of words between the Yoruba Council of Elders (YCE) and Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF) a few days ago should disabuse their minds. On Tuesday, while responding to leaders of the northern women socio-cultural organisation, Jam’iyya Matan Arewa (JMA), in Kaduna, the ACF chairman Ibrahim Coomassie made a terse remark that Nigeria could not survive without the North. He offered neither proof nor expatiation, prompting the suspicion that the statement was not only at variance with the substance of the visit, but that it was the product of his residual and disgruntled irredentism.

    According to Mr Coomassie, a former Inspector General of Police, “We all know that without the North, Nigeria can never survive. We still stand by it. But now is the time to walk the talk in the interest of our people.” He then adds, in the same breath: “Chibok girls are still missing. Now it has gone to Dapchi in Yobe State. What happened? Are we always going to be the victims? Boko Haram; see what they did to the Northeast. They have spread over to the Northcentral and even to the southern part of the country. Should we continue to be regarded in the negative side? No. We are leaders in our own right and we must exercise this responsibility for our people. Whenever there is crisis, women and children are always the major victims. Enough is enough. Enough of killings of our women and children, enough of kidnapping of our daughters and enough of destruction of our property.”

    Except he was badly reported or misquoted by the reporters who covered the visit, there did not seem to be a connection between his declarative assertion of the North’s indispensability and his jeremiad against the same region’s serial misdeeds. It was not a Freudian slip that Mr Coomassie suggested that the North was indispensable to Nigeria’s survival; it is a dangerous and plainly unsubstantiated conviction rooted in the primordial and narrow worldview of the region’s elite. Had the former police boss limited himself to exposing the socio-economic and cultural contradictions in the region, and to asking for his visitors and every responsible Nigerian to join hands with the ACF to help redress the ills, he would have come across as a responsible and farsighted leader who is passionate about overthrowing the maladies that have arrested or stunted development in the deeply scarred region.

    Mr Coomassie’s statement might not be shocking to his visitors or indeed most of the North, but he should have known that to many in the South, what he said was like a red rag to a bull. It was hardly surprising that two days later, the YCE secretary general, Kunle Olajide, took umbrage and fired a volley at Mr Coomassie. Said Dr Olajide humourlessly: “The newspapers reported the Arewa Consultative Forum as saying that Nigeria cannot survive without the North. Whatever was meant by that statement credited to the ACF chairman remains to be understood. However, I congratulate him for accepting that the North, as it is today, represents all that is wrong with Nigeria. The Northeast is ravaged by insurgency costing the country billions of dollars annually. The Northwest is home to religious crisis, and the Northcentral is ravaged by herdsmen of northern extraction. Collectively the North is home to all negative indices of the quality of life. Infant mortality rate is highest in the North.”

    Not done, and still feeling provoked, the YCE scribe added: “Illiteracy rate is highest in the North and the number of out-of-school children is highest in the North. The poverty index in the North is high, while the twin evil bedevilling the North is feudalism and religious fatalism. It will not be out of place to say the North has in fact been dragging Nigeria down since independence. All sorts of mischievous phrases were coined  by the very tiny political/military elite of the North to give undue advantage to the North.” Clearly, northern and southern elites have very unflattering but differing picture of Nigeria and the tenuous existential chord that binds the beleaguered country together.

    It would have been both fitting and helpful had Mr Coomassie offered a definable and rational basis for his assertion on the North’s indispensability. Perhaps he will still do so, if not now, maybe a little later. It would help to shed light on whether he was in fact suggesting that the country’s greatness would be advanced by a deft application of the North’s huge economic potentials; or whether he was implausibly arguing that Nigeria would be untenable without the North, and that the other parts of Nigeria, whether singly or collectively, could not hope to survive because of a lack of potential or resources. Short of second-guessing the ACF chairman, and risk getting it woefully wrong, the analyst must resist the temptation to expand his provocative assertion beyond its ordinary grammatical meaning.

    It would be helpful if the North and the South, and the various peoples of Nigeria, overcame their mutual suspicions to strenuously forge a nation out of their disparate nationalities. There are immense possibilities in forging a country with a common objective, a centralising national identity, and a noble and inspiring continental destiny. So far, unfortunately, Nigerian leaders have neither shown the intellect nor summoned the will to build a stable and progressive country. But to suggest that one part could not survive without the other is not only sentimental nonsense, it is ignorant and self-serving. Take Nigeria’s three leading ethnic groups, the Hausa, Igbo and Yoruba, for instance. None is less populous than the topographically challenged Netherlands (Pop. circa 17.2m), or the small and semiarid Israel (Pop. 8.8m). Divided opportunistically along the lines drained by the Rivers Niger and Benue, the three former regions could hold their own admirably in the world. And should the country fracture along the expedient six geopolitical zones, they would still be able to hold their own in the world. And so whether three or six zones, there is little doubt that they would put their shoulders to the wheel and survive.

    Mr Coomassie’s argument is unhelpful and jaded. It is not supported by economics, geography or politics. It is suspected that his narrow and prejudiced views are popular among many northern governors and possibly even the presidency. The facts, however, show that no region of Nigeria, including the North, would collapse should the country be dismembered. What Nigerian leaders should be preoccupied with, rather than holding on to and propagating tired narratives, is to identify and strengthen common grounds, and to help produce a new crop of leaders not hamstrung by old and diseased perceptions of Nigeria. Mr Coomassie’s views are provocative and futile, and Dr Olajide’s riposte two days later was also fierce and counterproductive. Both viewpoints are unfortunately representative of the popular view of the tenuousness of Nigerian unity and the impermanence of its borders. By a combination of deep prejudice and ignorance, Nigerian leaders have proved mystifyingly incapable of reversing such dominant views or mitigating their injurious consequences.

    Admittedly, such trenchant and uninformed views do not amount to hate speech by any stretch; they are only dangerously anachronistic. After three major democratic false starts between 1960 and 1999, the Fourth Republic was supposed to offer the country a golden chance to make amends, rebuild the foundations of the country, and begin carefully, intelligently and synergetically to recreate a new nation from the diseased and aging one. Sadly, that hope has proved to be a chimera, especially with the older elite and unimaginative political, ethnic and religious leaders fanning the embers of mistrust and exploiting the issues and controversies that divide the country. But until Nigeria can find the right structure to guarantee balance and stability, and manage to put the right leaders in office, it would be nothing but platitudinous to speak glowingly and fondly of a crop of leaders destined to unify and lead the country to greatness.

  • Before the knives are drawn

    Russia 2018 World Cup is 83 days away. Everyone seems convinced that the Super Eagles will do well at the Mundial, unlike in the past when our preparations were dogged by bickering among Nigeria Football Federation (NFF) members, sports ministers struggling to hijack the federation’s duties, as well as wrangling among the players and coaches. Nigerians were left unimpressed. Of course, Eagles never did well.

    The fragile peace among football faithful as we countdown to the world’s biggest sporting activity is hinged on the fact that issues which heated up the polity have been settled, with oil giant Aiteo Group  paying N581 million ($600,000 and N370 million) to coaches, including the Eagles technical crew. The players’ and officials’ allowances and match bonuses have been settled. Besides, the players and their coaches were at the meeting where they agreed with NFF chieftains what they should be paid during the Mundial, beginning with Nigeria’s opening game against Croatia on June 16. The government has the report, which is good. So, we know who to blame when things go awry.

    My take on this is that the Federal Government should ensure that the agreement is fulfilled. We are tired of Nigeria being the laughing stock at the World Cup because of our players going on strike for their entitlement. The government should direct the sports minister to allow the federation handle cash disbursement. If the minister feels strongly that any cash is misappropriated, he is free to petition the relevant bodies to prosecute those liable. The idea of the minister paying sportsmen and women at international competitions is not only an aberration, but a laughable act. Our ministers should learn to trust their subordinates like the President does with them.

    Interestingly, NFF men have made accountability sacrosanct by allowing renowned financial agencies that brokered the deals to handle the disbursements. What the federation’s chiefs  are doing now is to make requests based on what was agreed when the cash was sourced. They get what they want after due diligence by the financial agencies.  It explains the seamless manner of financial transactions leading to our qualification. Of course, there are pockets of protest, most from those who want the old order to continue.

    Accountability is a major problem within the sporting sphere in Nigeria. No company will support any sport and not expect such a federation to account for what it got. No company will identify its products and services with federations enmeshed in controversies or burdened by allegations of corruption. All appears well between the NFF and the Sports Minister, who once declared the country squad for the 2016 Olympic Games missing, when indeed they were in America. The stories of how an American airline took our team to Brazil, nine hours before their first game should never happen again. Equally unacceptable was the financial assistance to the squad by a foreigner when the contingent cried out for cash to settle hotel bills. We had at least four years before the last Olympics to prepare for the competition. NFF has sourced for its funds which it has used to give Eagles the desired preparations for the Mundial.

    But the masterstroke by NFF, which has raised Nigerians’ hopes of a credible outing in Russia, has been the quality of international friendly matches lined up for the team. I would rather the friendly games expose our flaws than to win them, only to be beaten groggy in Russia. Nigeria played against Poland in Wroclaw yesterday and the players’ performances will form the bulk of the discussions today. On the 27th in London, Eagles will file out against Serbia, a game which is meant to know how Croatia plays.

    Gernot Rohr stated the obvious when he told the international media on Tuesday that he doesn’t have match winners in his team who could change the tide of matches the way Austin Okocha and Nwankwo Kanu did. Rohr, however, revealed that his side’s strength rests with their collective play, which is what a team needs to avoid selfish tendencies among the players.

    ‘’We have a difficult group with Argentina, Croatia, and Iceland, to which we came from the fourth basket. This shows that we

  • Who casts the first stone?

    There was an interesting story on page 4 of last Sunday’s edition of this newspaper. Titled “Battle of the billionaires: Arthur Eze, Ngozi Olejeme in tussle over $2.8m, N240m’, the report gives details of the impending titanic legal battle between the oil magnate, Prince Arthur Eze and the no less formidable political and financial Amazon of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), Dr. Ngozi Olojeme. According to the report, “A staggering loan of N1.2 billion allegedly borrowed by a People’s Democratic Party (PDP) stalwart, Dr. Ngozi Olejeme to enable her prosecute her aspiration of contesting the 2015 governorship election in Delta State has now landed her in court. The lender and Olojeme’s long standing associate, Prince Arthur Eze is frustrated that repayment of the alleged loan is not forthcoming and prays an Abuja High Court to compel her to pay. The loan, according to Eze, is in two parts: $2.8million and N240million Naira. He said the agreed repayment dates for the funds have long expired without any attempt by the defendants to settle the debt”.

    On the expiration of the 2016 deadline for the repayment of the ‘interest free loans’, Arthur Eze complained to the court, the demand letter written to the defendant by his solicitor was rebuffed as Olojeme “merely deployed her personal aides to plead to me for time as she was having issues with the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission”. Without prejudice to the case, which is in court, it is pertinent to wonder at the nature and soundness of the ‘investment’, which Eze made in Olojeme’s governorship ambition. Is the governorship of Delta State a profitable enterprise, which was supposed to yield such munificent dividend to enable Olojeme repay a debt of N1.2billion a year after assuming office? Did the agreement with Olojeme, which was reached according to Eze on April 2, 2014, take into consideration the possibility of her losing the election? If she did not win as eventually happened, could the agreement still be binding? Where was she expected to get the money?

    Well, Arthur Eze is not a billionaire for nothing. He is certainly not dumb and must have calculated that Olojeme would still be able to repay her debt whether or not she realized her governorship aspiration. Of course, that was a rational assumption in yesterday’s Nigeria where a clean distinction was once famously made by, you know who, between saintly stealing and devilish corruption. After all, Olojeme at the time she obtained the loan for the prosecution of her ambition was chairman of the Nigerian Social Insurance Trust Fund (NSITF), another juicy position with ample and delicious fiscal delicacies to satisfy the palates of our decadent political elite. But then, neither Eze nor Olojeme reckoned with the political ascendancy of the ascetic General from Daura with his obsession with taming the monster of corruption in the country.

    Buhari’s anti-corruption war has thrown a spanner in the wheel of the two billionaires. For, Olojeme, according to another report on page 7 of Tuesday’s edition of this newspaper, is currently being probed by the EFCC for an alleged N62.3billion fraud during her tenure as NSITF Chairman with $48, 485, 127 reportedly credited to her account at the time. The ex-NSITF boss, who is currently placed on administrative bail by the EFCC, has had 30 accounts allegedly belonging to her frozen by the EFCC and the commission has obtained a court order to seize 37 of 38 houses reportedly belonging to her. Surely, had the PDP won the 2015 election and Olojeme retained her headship of the NSITF honey pot as would most likely have happened, it is unlikely that this naked legal dance in the market place between the billionaires would occur.

    The Arthur Eze/ Ngozi Olojeme saga helps to throw light, once again, on the character of politics and the perverse utilization of state power in postcolonial Nigeria. For the most part, public office is perceived and utilized as a means of material accumulation by its lucky occupants. Political entrepreneurs like Eze invest in political aspirants such as Olojeme with the objective of reaping humongous yields from the risky but profitable enterprise. While the N1.2 billion he lent Olojeme was supposedly ‘interest free’, it is only natural and rational that the oil magnate would expect a much higher return on his investment.

    Apart from money voted by political aspirants for ‘logistics’ such as bribing electoral and security officials, ‘settling’ influential community, religious and political leaders, transportation and publicity among others, a sizable chunk of the expenditure by political aspirants is dedicated to directly bribing voters both before and especially on election day. This was popularized as ‘stomach infrastructure’ in Ekiti’s 2014 governorship election. In a recent governorship poll in one of the South West states, it was the pecuniary inducement of voters was cynically christened ‘dibo ko se obe’ (vote for our party and enjoy a rich pot of soup).

    This is why we must be wary of superficial analyses of the phenomenon of corruption in Nigeria. Corrupt enrichment transcends political boundaries. It is not the sole preserve of any political party. It is an ingrained culture both among the political class and a not insubstantial number of the general populace. Perhaps this explains why most of those indicted for colossal acts of corruption still remain highly revered figures in their respective communities.

    In the light of the revelations by Senator Shehu Sani, as regards the humongous, utterly unjustifiable and unconscionable salaries and allowances collected by members of the National Assembly, for instance, one would have expected spontaneous and sustained nationwide mass action against the legislators. But apart from a vocal minority – some lawyers, civil society and trade union leaders – the silence over the issue is deafening. The point is: how many Nigerians see the conduct of the legislators as wrong and how many finding themselves in their shoes will not toe the same line? In any case, the menace of corruption is not limited to the legislature; it is also prevalent in the two other arms of government.

    Corruption is not the exclusive preserve of the centre, it manifests, perhaps even more virulently, at the lower levels of government. We also tend to make the mistake of focusing almost exclusively on corruption in government. But the virus of corruption is also wreaking considerable havoc in the private sector, among civil society groups, Non-Governmental Organizations, trade unions, the professions, academia, religious organizations, the media and other segments of society. This is why, although commendable, this administration’s anti-corruption war must go beyond identifying and arraigning indicted corrupt persons before the law courts. Concerted efforts must also be made to rigorously study the problem, identify its root causes and evolve multi-pronged anti-corruption strategies that encompass the cultural, educational, religious, economic, intellectual, social and legal terrains.

    In the vast ocean of corruption that contemporary Nigeria is; who really is qualified to cast the first stone in this war? Not very many if truth must be told. But one of the few is certainly President Muhammadu Buhari whose legendary asceticism and aversion to material accumulation is near miraculous given the moral putrescence of our society. Buhari’s hands and credibility can only be strengthened in this regard, however, if he acts decisively to discard with some of his close and trusted associates who hide under the aura of his undisputed integrity to perpetrate acts of corruption that severely discredit and damage the administration’s anti-corruption war.

    A first class graduate’s plea for help

    “Sir, My name is Moses Alabi-isiama, age 33, an indigene of Utagba in Delta State and a first-class graduate of Energy and Petroleum Studies. I got admission into the Petroleum Engineering Department of the University of Ibadan in the year 2000 but had to leave after seven years due to bad health, financial issues and some bad decisions. After five years of leaving University of Ibadan, I got some money and got admission into Novena University to study Energy and Petroleum Studies and I finally graduated in August 2017 with First-Class honours (4.60). After all the sleepless nights towards graduating with a first class, I was hoping to be retained as a Graduate Assistant in Novena University (which is the policy of the university); but because I was not able to pay my final year fees (N509,000) plus clearance fee (N100,000), the university has refused to give me employment; even after telling the university management to make 80% deductions from my supposed salary of N40,000 which is what is paid to graduate assistants.

    I have pleaded with the school authority for the past seven months and reached out to people around but to no avail. It’s been seven months of hell. I can’t get my certificate to work anywhere else and the school I graduated from with a first-class is refusing to employ me. I have been living on borrowed money and having suicidal thoughts because of the shame. My dream is to become a Professor on energy/Petroleum related matters; but my dream is being threatened even after the delay of 17 years to get a B.Sc. I need the help of well-meaning Nigerians to pay off the N609,000 I owe Novena University so I can proceed for my Masters program. I am willing and ready to work in any capacity to pay off this debt; but without my certificate from Novena University, I am stagnated again. Please I need Help!

    -Moses Alabi-isama, (09064548640; mozizboss@gmail.com)

        

  • Prosecute barbarians, please

    They are the 12th player on the field. They raise the stakes of games. They add to the ambience inside and outside the stadium with their theatrics, drama and the suspense they create with their pre-games’ hypes. Fans are unmistakable during matches with jerseys and other apparels that distinguish them. They could cause pains with their poor conduct. But the security operatives are always at the alert to quell such misdemeanours.

    Resentment against teams by the fans starts with boos after some poor displays. It deteriorates to the level where firstly, certain players are hounded with every move that they make. Then the managers feel the heat, with the fans waving their white handkerchiefs to indicate a vote of no confidence on them.

    Matters get to a head when drones, kits and, in many instances, helicopters are deployed to unleash posters with the faces of the managers, urging them to quit. Such things get the media’s attention, forcing such clubs’ managements to either back the embattled manager or sack him. If the managers retain their jobs, the fans persist with all manner of posters and, in some instances, caricatures of the manager flooding the social media and match venues.

    This is not to say that the fans don’t acknowledge successful mangers, players and teams. When successful teams dominate, their fans go wild in celebration, with many storming drinking bars and eateries. The fans, particularly players’ family members storm the stadium wearing jerseys with their favourite players’ pictures.

    Arsene Wenger has turned the fortunes of Arsenal FC around, such that it is only one of the few clubs that are solvent. Wenger achieved these feats without compelling the club’s owners to break the bank during transfer seasons. Wenger isn’t the manager who shops for players with mind-boggling figures. He is prudent in his spending and quick to ask for any players worthy of such huge figures at the Emirates. Love Wenger, hate him, he has made Arsenal the most exciting team to watch when things are right. And he achieves that with seemingly average players who start as rookies. In fact, deep pocket teams such as Manchester City have literally made Arsenal the shopping centre in the same way Liverpool FC’s managers have turned Southampton FC to their recruitment base.

    Wenger’s argument for not spending big is germane. He argues that paying one or two players staggering figures could destroy the synergy existing between the players and the manager. He states too that paying new players big cash increases the demand from older players who have taken the club to the height where new ones want to be part of.

    However, the Frenchman’s philosophy was put to great test when Gunners’ fans turned on the team following poor performances recently. Arsenal fans booed players after the humiliating defeat to Manchester City on March 1, 2018. They chorused in anger: ‘You’re not fit to wear the shirt’ in half-empty Emirates Stadium.

    The Citizens tore Arsenal apart for the second time in four days, beating them 3-0 that fateful Thursday night.

    On March 4, some travelling Arsenal fans turned mutinous at the Amex Stadium as Arsene Wenger’s Gunners hit an embarrassing new low against Brighton & Hove Albion FC. After just 28 minutes of the Premier League clash, Arsenal found themselves 2-0 down against the newly-promoted side. Lewis Dunk and Glenn Murray scored in a first-half rout that could have been so much worse.

    And with mounting pressure on Wenger, there was a sense that the patience of some supporters had emphatically snapped.  A “Wenger Out” banner was unfurled almost as soon as Murray found the net.

    If there is a crisis in Manchester United today, it is because big stars in the clubs such as David De Gea and Paul Pogba, are demanding pay rise because of what Jose Mourinho offered former Arsenal striker Sanchez in the January 2018 transfer window. Dea Gea wants 350,000 pounds a week, which he justified with his incredible reflexes that have aided Manchester United’s campaigns this season. Pogba wants an increase in his pay, having been the highest paid star until Sanchez joined them in January.

    Indeed, the rift between Pogba and Mourinho could be the reason Manchester United are out of the UEFA Champions league, even though a few of the club’s fans won’t agree. Truth be told, if all was well between Mourinho and Pogba, the latter would have started the Tuesday night game against Sevilla FC of Spain at the Old Trafford stadium and United would have won. Manchester United’s game enjoyed good fillip when Pogba was introduced in the second half, but the Spaniards had scored twice and defended stoutly till the end of the match.

    Arsenal fans and Wenger have had yearly fights over the team’s composition, with many insisting that the team should parade big names, if they hope to compete with others. Wenger understands their concerns but would rather have younger boys who he can nurture to greatness. Gunners’ fans can’t wait. They want to see their team at the top, dominating like in the past. This disagreement between Wenger and his supporters has reached a disturbing dimension, given the empty stands when Arsenal beat Watford 3-0 on Sunday.

    Will Arsenal fans change their minds and back Wenger, having reinvented the team in the last three matches against AC Milan in the Europa League and Watford. With 10 goals and conceding a goal in the three matches, it won’t be shocking if the fans return to the Gunners.

    It is acceptable for the fans to boycott matches of their favourite teams if they are under-performing. What is absolutely unacceptable is the manner in which West Ham’s fans stormed the pitch to fight their players after a disappointing 4-1 home loss to Leicester City last weekend. The England FA has queried the club The FA chieftains will definitely treat this issue as  a criminal offence and those fingered made to face the law.

    This barbaric act was enacted in France, where Lille FC’s fans lost patience with the team and clearly showed their frustration during the 1-1 against Montpellier at Pierre-Mauroy Stadium last Saturday. TV footage showed supporters surging towards the Lille players and aiming kicks at some of them after the final whistle of the Ligue 1 match.

    Former Super Eagles goalkeeper Vincent Enyeama has whole-heartedly condemned the incident via social media. The 35-year-old Lille goalkeeper tweeted: “How did we get here. The last time LOSC had fans on the pitch was for celebration. The real fan/supporter will always stay behind the team no matter what. Good or bad times. tousensemble#onestlelosc# ilfautpasoublie.”

    But the shameful act of interference with the game came from PAOK Chairman Ivan Savvidis, who stormed the pitch with a gun in his belt and confronted officials after a disallowed goal against AEK Athens. He told the referee: ‘You’re finished.’

    Fernando Varela thought he had scored a last-gasp winner for PAOK, only for his effort to be ruled offside. That decision sparked furious scenes which included Savvidis, one of the richest men in Greece, storming the playing field, appearing to carry a gun in his waistband, and a pitch invasion. Fixtures have now been suspended indefinitely.

    ‘We have decided to interrupt the championship. It won’t start again unless there is a clear framework, agreed by all, to move forward with conditions and rules,’ Greek Deputy Culture and Sports Minister Georgios Vassiliadis said.

    The world is watching. It won’t be long before FIFA chiefs react to these disturbing trends.

     

    Not again, Siasia

     Samson Siasia is a very good coach, given his results with age-grade Nigerian teams. He has also done well on the few rescue missions with Super Eagles. Siasia does not like being owed his wages. Nobody wants to be owed his/her wages. So, he should forget about the job.

    All may be well with Eagles this time, but the team’s manager, Gernot Rohr didn’t get his wages as at when due. Rohr knew that a World Cup for Nigeria will be his meal ticket to better jobs next year.

    This is the difference between a Nigerian coach and a foreigner, with our local coaches looking for how to survive instead of using the platform for better jobs. Whereas successful foreign coaches with Eagles have gone to get bigger jobs, our coaches are eased off only to be recycled when the opportunity beckons again.

    Siasia has boasted that the NFF will return to him after the Russia 2018 World Cup. Siasia, I don’t think so, except Eagles fumble in Russia, which is most unlikely, given the team’s preparations. Did Siasia not tell us that he won’t return to the Eagles job again?

    If Eagles do well in Russia, Rohr will retain his job. If he chooses to leave, there is no way Nigeria will allow a Nigerian coach the team, given the ease with which we qualified for the Mundial in Russia. Non payment of coaches is a trademark of the Glasshouse. Siasia should look elsewhere for a job. He shouldn’t return and then complain about things that cannot change for now.