The Nation Newspaper

Category: Saturday

  • Restructuring from below

    Restructuring from below

    He is a wily political tactician and a deft power strategist. It is thus not fortuitous that, despite his often fluctuating and floundering political fortunes, former Vice President Atiku Abubakar remains a recurrent and resilient actor on Nigeria’s ever so fluid political terrain. In recent times, Atiku has been effectively capitalizing on the seeming ideological schizophrenia and organizational frigidity that appears to have significantly  immobilized the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) to project himself as an agent of reform, modernization and structural change in Nigeria.

    Speaking in Kaduna recently at a memorial conference in honor of the late Major-General Hassan Usman Katsina, former military governor of the former Northern region, Atiku strongly reiterated his new advocacy for restructuring in Nigeria. Advancing his previous much discussed thesis on the same issue earlier in the year further, Atiku contended rather courageously that the North should no longer be content to be seen as an obstacle to the sustained clamor in diverse quarters for the re-compacting of the Nigerian federation.

    Challenging the prevalent conventional wisdom particularly among the hegemonic factions of the northern political class, Atiku declared: “The North and Nigeria have not been well served by the status quo and there is need for change…Did the Northern regional government wait to collect monthly revenue from allocations from Lagos (then National Capital) before paying salaries to its civil servants and teachers or fixing its bridges and roads?” The former Vice President argues that the North must be a prime mover of and active participant in the urgent and ultimately inevitable imperative of reconfiguring Nigeria’s political structure.

    As persuasive and seductive as Atiku’s rhetoric may be, the Turaki Adamawa is a most unlikely and hardly credible apostle of radical structural change in Nigeria. In sharp contrast to Atiku’s penchant for political vagrancy as well as Machiavellian opportunism devoid of enduring principles, Buhari exhibited rare ideological consistency in the wilderness of political opposition for several years. Atiku’s stupendous wealth is widely perceived, rightly or wrongly, as a function of his astuteness in manipulating and exploiting the loopholes of the extant structure he now rails against to feather his pecuniary nest and those of his close associates.

    Buhari is the exact opposite. Here is a man who, given the key military and political positions he has occupied in the past, ought to be a multi-billionaire in diverse currencies but is a symbol of moral integrity and ethical rectitude. Yet, he is unfortunately allowing himself to be cast in the mould of a stalwart defender of the continuity and maintenance of an entrenched structure he has scantly personally benefitted from. This is particularly annoying for some because Buhari triumphed in the last general elections after several failed attempts on the basis of APC’s platform of change. Consequently, Atiku is gradually being allowed to become the most prominent and vocal face of a reform minded, forward looking and progressive North with growing appeal in the South-East, South-South as well as parts of the South-West.

    Of course, this column does not subscribe to the rather romantic notion that all Nigeria needs is to seek first the kingdom of political restructuring and everything else will be added unto us. The inherited moral rot and systemic dysfunction being vigorously combatted by the Buhari administration are due to a combination of institutional and attitudinal anomalies. Positive change that can engender progress will thus be dependent on carefully calibrated adjustments in both structures and values.

    All too often, advocates of restructuring, whether they desire the outright dismemberment of the country or fundamental devolution of powers, resources and responsibilities to the lower levels of government, see excessive centralization and bureaucratization as the key impediment to realizing the country’s potentials. However, in an address he delivered to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the death of Colonel Adekunle Fajuyi, military governor of the former Western Region, in the July 29, 1966, counter coup, foremost human rights lawyer, Mr Femi Falana (SAN), argued persuasively that restructuring is as imperative at the lower levels -states and local governments- as it is at the centre.

    Falana, who was a participant in the National Conference organized by the President Goodluck Jonathan administration, pointed out that “Contrary to the misleading impression of certain highly placed Nigerians, the 2014 National Conference did not recommend the restructuring of the country. In fact, the most reactionary recommendation of the confab was that Nigeria be split into 54 states!”. But as the legal luminary also notes, the conference made several positive and necessary recommendations which, contrary to President Buhari’s position, can help strengthen the institutional and ethical fabric of the Nigerian federation.

    These recommendations include the reduction of the Federal Government’s share of revenue allocation from 52 to 48% and concomitantly increasing that of states and local governments , creation and funding of local governments by states, transfer of more responsibilities from the exclusive to the concurrent list of the federation, establishment of special courts to fight corruption, removal of immunity from prosecution for corruption and other criminal charges as well as making the fundamental objectives of state enshrined in chapter two of the constitution justiciable.

    None of these recommendations require any radical structural upheavals to achieve. All that a serious and committed change-oriented government needs to effect these highly desirable reforms are the political will and strategic acumen to forge a broad national consensus around  a progressive change agenda. President Buhari may mean well in his sincere belief that Nigeria’s prevailing institutional and constitutional order best guarantee her unity and stability, which he considers non-negotiable. However, getting him to see that greater decentralization of the polity and strengthening her fiscal federalism are necessary conditions for enduring national cohesion and progress should not be an insurmountable task. This should be the prime responsibility of the APC leadership.

    An interesting point that emerges from Falana’s paper is that some degree of restructuring has indeed been going on subtly and largely unnoticed since

    1. For instance, he notes that state governments, through several legal victories in the courts, have diachronically strengthened their autonomy in diverse areas including control and funding of local governments, authority over physical planning, responsibility for land use as well as collection of hotel and hospitality taxes within their territorial jurisdiction among others. Furthermore, he demonstrates how many states have been exercising functions and undertaking responsibilities with no opposition from the Federal government in areas such as airports, railways, waterways as well as funding and equipping of the police, that are all constitutionally on the exclusive list.

    Against this background, he asks rhetorically and justifiably:”By the way, do we need the fiat of Abuja to have regional or zonal economic integration in the face of the current economic crisis? What have the state governors done with the powers which have devolved to them since 1999? Have such powers not been deployed to enrich many governors, intimidate political opponents and oppress the people?…Unlike the President whose budgets are scrutinized by the federal legislators, the budgets presented by state governors to the state houses of assembly are passed by state legislators without debates”.

    While there are some exemplary exceptions in states that have made significant developmental progress since 1999,  it is difficult to fault the general scenario of authoritarianism, impunity and lack of transparency at the lower rungs of governance as depicted by Falana.

    The the over concentration of powers, arbitrariness and venality that have stunted meaningful governance at the centre tends to be reproduced in a more pronounced manner at the lower levels blunting local government efficacy, shackling state legislatures from effectively playing their checking and balancing role and rendering state electoral commissions ineffectual and redundant. Thus, Falana rightly submits that “…the campaign for true federalism is meaningless if it is not anchored on democratization, popular participation, accountability and transparency. Otherwise, powers are going to be transferred from Abuja to the emperors manning the state governments if the status quo remains”. It can certainly not be better articulated.

  • Ego-tripping governors

    Before the end of Goodluck Jonathan’s profligate government, his finance minister Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala warned of a shrinking economy and the need to tighten our belts. It was a timely advice. As Muhammadu Buhari took over, he too spoke of a drained national coffer, and urged prudence. The reason was simple. Crude oil, our major foreign exchange earner, was no longer earning anything of note. So far, both Dr Okonjo-Iweala and President Buhari’s warnings have fallen on deaf ears, mostly those of our leaders.

    It is a national shame.

    Penultimate week it was reported that our state governors were dreaming of a trip to Germany for a vocational training, a venture that is sure to further drain our resources and expose our legendary vanity. To be sure, it was not an isolated plan by one state chief executive or two or even three. Zamfara State Governor Abdulaziz Yari, who chairs the Nigeria Governors Forum, made that much clear when he spoke to State House correspondents in Abuja. When he spoke, he used the pronoun ‘we’, suggesting it was a collective plan of the 36 governors he leads.

    Think of all 36 governors planning a flight to Germany with their aides and perhaps their aides’ aides. Isn’t that mental catastrophe through and through?

    One report said governors of Kaduna, Niger, Plateau, Anambra, Ogun, Bauchi, Kastina, Kano, Kebbi, Delta and Abia attended the nocturnal meeting at which they deliberated on the trip. The report added that the governors who didn’t make the Abuja meeting sent their deputies.

    Governor Yari provided some detail. “We received some presentation from the German Ambassador prior to our trip to Germany for the vocational programme,” he told reporters, adding that Vodacom, a South African telecoms firm, equally briefed them on such areas of partnership as health and agriculture.

    What Alhaji Yari did not say, or probably did not want to say, was that they were planning a vacation trip rather than a vocational one.

    Alhaji Yari betrayed the vanity and Olympic-sized ego of the forum which he chairs. He also exposed their shallowness of thought as well as their striking confusion. First, don’t Alhaji Yari and his colleagues know enough about what is wrong with our health and agriculture sectors? Second, if such a training programme were necessary, in the first instance, can’t the NGF find a suitable place in Nigeria to hold it?

    You can smell their vanity and ego a mile away. You can sense their satisfaction settling into comfortable seats on the international flight. Picture them escaping from their poorly developed states and country and heading for one of Europe’s most advanced nations. There, they will savour the relief and peace of law and order, the benefits of planning, the joys of meticulous execution, and, among other things, the comforts of well-made hotel beds. You can visualise them issuing instructions to their aids about their briefcases and cell phones, and can hear them let out a huge sigh of relief. Life is good, especially if you are getting away from a chore in the most difficult of places.

    To our leaders, there is little joy in the homeland. And there is no sense of urgency in changing this obnoxious mindset. By what logic did they conclude that it is in Germany, not Nigeria that they can learn to improve our moribund health infrastructure and comatose agric sector? Did the governors calculate the cost of such a trip and assess the damage it will do to their much-depleted state coffers? Most of the 36 states cannot pay workers’ salaries; some are paying reduced wages, despite a federal government’s bailout last year. Alhaji Yari was himself facing impeachment at home when they were planning the Germany trip.

    It is almost criminal to contemplate such an ego trip, even if the governors were paying for it out of their pockets.

    Who can blame them, really? The mindset is life can be sweet, but only abroad. One aching tooth, for instance, is fixable beyond our shores. No holiday is worth the name if it is not spent in Europe. Nor is any school worth our children’s while if they are not in America or Britain. It is a warped mindset our leaders seem incapable of changing. Worse, there is no serious effort to tap our infinite human and material resources to make the country, its people and institutions the envy of the world. We have not forgotten how Niger Delta governors in the past mounted such a spirited campaign for resource control, trying desperately to pass themselves off as the region’s heroes. But despite whatever funds they got, the region has yet to show it. Those leaders should give account. What effort did they and their governor-colleagues elsewhere make to develop their non-oil resources? Bayelsa State sticks out like a sore thumb. Lacking durable development, our states stretch out like carcasses, unloved and unlovable even by those who govern them. So to Europe and America such leaders turn. Shame.

    Peter the Rock at 55

    Of politicians I am not particularly fond but if there is anyone I respect it is Peter Obi who governed Anambra State for eight years. He turned 55 penultimate Tuesday.

    There are reasons why I admire him. Take his frugality. People who know him closely say he is content with a pair of shoes at a time until they are almost worn out. I also understand he earned a few critics, if not enemies, who credit him with perhaps the tightest fist in living memory. But that is because, as some of them have said, Obi does not believe in giving out money for its sake. Money is spent for a purpose, and that purpose had better be genuine.

    It is to his credit that he stabilised his state’s cash profile while in office. With little federal allocation and virtually zero derivation cash he left the state not in debt but a tidy sum with which his successor should carry on.

    If there is anyone who fits the Buhari model, it is Peter the Rock.

  • Broken record

    Anytime something fresh is about to break with our football, former Super Eagles chief coach Sunday Oliseh tweets on his handle to stir up a needless controversy. Coincidence? Oliseh is a gentleman. I also expected that he would have forgiven everyone now that he has left the Eagles job, instead of these sour grapes in the international media platforms.

    Oliseh’s tweets many inaccuracies that elicit responses from those concerned. It won’t do Oliseh’s credibility any good if portions of his tweets are debunked. What it says clearly is that Oliseh’s utterances should be taken with a pinch of salt. It is also not good for his reputation, which has been quite commendable, irrespective of his experiences as Super Eagles chief coach.

    If Oliseh feels strongly that his claims are the truth, he should seek all the available means for redress so that the matter is resolved. Indeed, chieftains of the Nigeria Football Federation (NFF) have denied owing Oliseh. It behoves on Oliseh to substantiate his claims with evidence to put any of the parties to shame. I have not had any encounter with Oliseh. From afar, he is a gentleman, willing to defend himself if anyone steps on his toes. Who won’t? It follows therefore that Oliseh forgets the issues from the Eagles job, knowing that he could in the future be asked to do something for Nigeria at a bigger stage. Who says Oliseh cannot be the Sports Minister? Oliseh could use this platform to right all the wrongs that he thinks exist in the industry.

    Since such an appointment is political, many may kick against his choice, citing these unsubstantiated tweets which they perceived to be jibes to impugn those he is talking about. I thought that Oliseh’s first tweets had all the issues settled.  His second looked slightly different but the third was simply a rehash. Oliseh, don’t you think you have said enough?

    Nigeria has had issues with several coaches, with many heading as far as the Court of Arbitration for Sports (CAS) to get their benefits. If Oliseh doesn’t know what to do, which isn’t likely, he could call up former Green Eagles defender Sylvanus Okpala to get tips on how to press home his demands through CAS. Okpala is being settled monthly part of his wages after getting CAS to rule in his favour.

    Even with CAS’s judgment, Okpala exhibited statesmanship by accepting that his debts be rescheduled on a monthly basis, even when the judgment said it should be done immediately, largely because he agreed that the NFF was cash-strapped. Indeed, Okpala applied to coach the Eagles recently, which underscores the fact that there are no permanent enemies but interest, in this case coaching the Eagles. Need I waste space to list coaches who have handled the Eagles after being sacked?

    I wonder how Oliseh would have felt reading Vincent Enyeama’s response to his last tweet. I must commend Enyeama for according Oliseh the respect that he deserves as he made his case. Enyeama wisely advised Oliseh to move on instead of dragging him in the mud while making his case.

    Read Enyeama’s tweet on Monday: “Please senior man, I will so much appreciate if you stop talking about me and face your life. Please, please, please.

    “All that glitters is not gold @SundayOOliseh stop mentioning me in your post. I don’t want to get dirty. We all can.

    “You keep saying that you took me to lunch @SundayOOliseh I am wondering if the Resto in Verviers on LILLE. #allthatglitterisnotgold.

    “Move on with your life please. Sort out your issues with the NFF. Please STOP mentioning me in your post. Pretend that we never met.

    “You keep saying that I was insisting on retiring. But my date was set even before you had the nightmare of becoming SE coach. @SundayOOliseh

    “Move on and leave me alone @SundayOOliseh I am running my race with my mouth close. Please don’t let me open my phone inbox,” he warned.

    My take on Enyeama’s tweet? Oliseh should always maintain decorum in the way he addresses people. He must also know that no one has the monopoly of using the media platforms to defend himself. I want to see if Oliseh would respond to Enyeama’s tweets now that he has warned the coach not to force him to open his telephone’s in-box.

    Equally alarming are the insinuations in Oliseh’s tweets which suggest that he was being attacked by evil forces while doing the Super Eagles job. I may be wrong but how else can anyone interpret this last tweet: “…Whilst coaching the Super Eagles in Abuja stadium prior to the Burkina Faso game. All of a sudden, I felt dizziness, light headedness, headache and could barely stand. I managed to finish the session before calling the doctor into my room who was clueless as to what was happening.

    “From then on, it was sleepless nights, loss of appetite, high blood pressure and before I knew it started losing weight. After several visits to doctors abroad, nothing was found, though the doctors found anomalies they couldn’t pinpoint the actual illness.

    “Prior to the away trip to Burkina Faso for the final CHAN qualifier game in Port Harcourt, after lunch, I was struck with the worst feat of this illness again. Could not walk, talk and felt like I was going to pass out.

    “I quickly demanded to the rushed to the airport and travelled to Germany to see specialists. After two days of nonstop tests, I was told that I narrowly escaped a total collapse in Nigeria.

    “For weeks I was bedridden, lost 7 kilos and could barely walk 5 metres without sitting down. My family was petrified and all feared the worst. One thing was for sure though, had I not taken that evening fight to Germany when I did, there was strong possibility of a far worse outcome.

    Thank God for his mercies.”

    Haba Oliseh! How can you say this about your countrymen? How can you say that a qualified medical doctor was clueless about your situation? How do you want the world to perceive Nigeria, if you say that the doctor attached to the Super Eagles is clueless? Did you not also pick some of them? Oliseh, please learn to love your colleagues like yourself. There are better ways to say these things.

    Oliseh, are you saying that those who worked with you are diabolical? Or that they were responsible for your situation? I don’t understand.

    Oliseh, is this not the same team that you played for and captained? How do you want those who worked with you to feel, with these insinuations? Come on Oliseh, you are more civil than the way your tweets portray you? Two wrongs don’t make a right. If you are angry, please don’t tweet because you may unconsciously be hurting many people. And that isn’t the message you want to put across. Better still, you could get someone to edit what you have tweeted before sending it to the world to read. Wanyo, wanyo Oliseh, as the Igbos would say.

    As a former captain of Nigeria’s biggest soccer team and indeed the team’s former coach, Oliseh is an ambassador whose utterances help to shape people’s perception of the team and country.

    Oliseh, you can do better by choosing words that are friendly when posting your tweets. You need to move on before you start sounding like a broken record.

    Mikel as Team Nigeria’s captain

     

    Let us applaud those who chose John Mikel Obi as the captain of Team Nigeria to the Rio 2016 Olympic Games. I unconsciously shouted inside my office reading the story sent from Abuja that Funke Oshionaike would be his assistant. Marvelous decision even though I felt like rolling back the tape for Mikel to appreciate why it is good to always choose your country ahead of any club. Those who felt that Segun Toriola should be given the captain’s band are justified, except that there are no rules guiding how such an exercise should be conducted. It is the prerogative of the Nigerian government to pick her captain. They have chosen Mikel. We all need to support him. For Toriola, you have made your mark. Congratulations.

    Mikel is certainly Nigeria’s biggest sports person, matched only by Blessing Okagbare. Oshionaike is also big. The same can be said of Segun Toriola, Aruna Quadri and the female wrestler Odunayo Adekuoroye.

    Many thanks Nigeria Olympic Committee (NOC) for picking Mikel as our torch bearer to the Olympics. Football without doubt, is the King of Sports. It would be great to see Nigeria’s captain to the Olympics returning with the gold medal dangling around his neck. Will somebody shout Amen?

    Good night, Big Boss

     

    By the time you would be reading this piece, Stephen Keshi would have spent his first night in his final resting place. He has finished his race. He would be remembered for all the good things that he did. Keshi is surely seated at the right side of Our Father, who art in heaven. Rest well, Big Boss. Good night, Olubodun ti o teri.

  • Turkey, Trump, Nigeria—And the global jungle of democracy

    The  recent   failed  coup in  Turkey has  shown  vividly  that  the  world’s  democracies  are  not safe  or  immune  from military  coups and take overs which  were the norm in the world in  the sixties  and  seventies. Just  as the emergence  of  Donald  Trump  as the presidential candidate  of  the Republican  candidate has  shown  that  democracy in even  the most  sophisticated  democracies  in  the world can degenerate and  decay in  terms  of the  language of political  participation and  the rhetoric  of the  quest  for  power. This  is brutally and glaringly true in  spite  of  the  fact  that  Hillary Clinton made  history this week as the first woman to  be nominated  to contest for  the presidency of the US on the platform  of the Democratic  Party.

    Both scenarios  in  Turkey  and  the US  provide  the food  for thought today  and  the approach  I have  adopted  to  illustrate  them  is both historical  and  comparative.  I  will  also  look  at  the situation  in  Nigeria   where  past   arms  purchases  have   opened  a canker worms  of  corruption  and  even  the present   army  chief  is  under  the searchlight  in  the   public    domain   for  the purchases  of  houses  in  Dubai   while   still   a serving  public  official.   It   is  my intention  to  show   through  these  issues  that  democracy  is under  stress  globally  and has  become a jungle  of  sorts  given the  challenge of  militant  Islam   or  Daesh as well  as the dwindling  available   resources  of  even  the richest  economies  and democracies  to  provide  the necessities  of  life  that their  citizens  have come to take for granted and  which  immigrants  from  hostile  places  have come largely  uninvited  to share  and consume.

    Turkey  provides  a unique  example  after  my  heart  of  a democracy  that  works when  the leadership  is strong  and bold  and the economy is strong and buoyant  and the people have  confidence  in their  government.  Indeed  that was  the  reason the coup  failed  because  the Turks  took  to  the streets, faced tanks and dragged   tank  drivers  and  soldiers  out  of their war  tanks  and stripped  them  of  their  uniforms.  Indeed   the  streets  were  littered  with discarded uniforms  and  boots of  soldiers who fled  nakedly  and in borrowed  robes  to  escape  the anger  and indignation  of  a  democratically  charged  and  alert  electorate. That  to  me is  the face of  modern  democracy.  When  people are  motivated  to secure  their  democracy  with their  lives  in the face of  violence  that seeks  to trample  or  destroy it, right  before  their eyes.

    Yet  Turkey  has  a history  of  success  of  military  coups  that  the Turks  have come  to  expect as a  way  of  life  and political  culture   until  the  present President  Recep  Tayyip  Erdogan  came to  power. Erdogan,   in  our    time has become a case  study  on  how  to  tame  military  intervention  in  politics  and  has my  admiration  in  this  regard in  the way  he  handled  the  last  coup.  Even  though  he  seems  to  me  to   have overreached himself  by  arresting  over  6000 people  on the coup  thereby   virtually  turning his  nation  into  a  huge  garrison  of  sorts,  a situation   which  places enormous strain on  Turkey’s   security   resources  and     apparatus  at   a time when  the ISIS/  Daesh   threat  is ever  present  and  dangerous.

    Erdogan’s  survival  strength  did  not   however  come  out  of a  vacuum. He  and  his party  have  won  three elections back  to  back  in  Turkey  whose secularity  is guaranteed  by  the  army  according  to  the constitution  handed  down  by  Kemal  Ataturk  who established  modern  Turkey  from  the rumps of the collapsed  Ottoman  Empire  which   bestrode  Europe  at  the time  and reached  as  far  Austria   in  Europe   before  its  collapse.  Erdogan  may  not  be a  Sultan  of  the Ottoman  Empire  but  he  has dreams of  their  splendor  which  he has realized  by  building a 1000  room  Presidential  Palace  in  Istanbul, Turkey’s  capital  and  in  the way  he has  successfully  changed the constitution  of  Turkey  recently  to  a presidency  with himself  as the  first  president.  Obviously  Erdogan  is sitting tight  in  Turkey  and has  turned  the tables  on the military  which  did not reckon  with  the populism  and charisma  he has  acquired  in three  election  victories  as well  as his   bravery  and boldness  to stand up  and protect   his well  earned    democratic  political  stature  and popularity. He  has    definitely   taught  the generals in Turkey   a  huge   lesson   that even in  the   rough   and  tumble  of   democracy, might  is not  always  right.

    In Nigeria  the present President  Muhammadu  Buhari  has been  bold  in his anti-corruption  campaign  which  he   has  embarked  on  single  mindedly  in  spite   of  diversionary  tactics of  even  those  with  whom  constitutionally  he  shares  power.  But  he    is  still  admired  for  his anti – corruption  drive    even  though  the  economy  is performing dismally  with  a falling currency  against  the  dollar  and dwindling oil  resources occasioned by  the   blow  up   of  pipelines by  militants in  the oil  rich  delta area.  But  Buhari’s  rise  to  power  is another romantic  political  story   similar  to that of  Erdogan  in Turkey  but  in the opposite  direction in terms  of ascendancy  and  history   Buhari was  military  leader  ousted  from office  by  his  soldiers  in a  military  coup 31  years   ago. He  then  went into  political oblivion only  to  surface as  a politician  who  contested  presidential  elections and lost  serially.  Until  2015  when  his party   the   APC, marshaled  by a former  governor  of  the  nation’s  commercial  capital  won  a landslide  victory  in  the 2015  `presidential  election. Buhari  who  had been  suspicious all along  on  why  the  Boko  Haram was winning  the war  against  a vastly  superior  Nigerian  army,  ordered  a probe  of  arms  purchases   and that  threw  up  a frightening revelation. Past  arms funds  had  been  diverted  to other  purposes   other  than  the Boko Haram War  and  the  presidential  campaign  of  the ruling  PDP  had   been  largely  funded from  funds  meant  for  arms purchase  to  fight  and  defeat  Boko  Haram.

    For  a military  man  turned  politician  like  Buhari, the  die  was  cast  as he said  at  his inaugural  address  even  though  as at  then,   he did not  know  the level  of stench in the  Augean Stable  handed   over   to  him  by  his predecessor. Only  a man  with  Buhari’s  antecedents  can take on  the  military in  Nigeria  given  the  level  of  corruption on  diversion  of arms  purchase  funds  by  past military  chiefs  and the present clamour   for  the  probe of  the  present army  chief  who  has been quite  successful  though,   on  ousting the menace  of  Boko  Haram  from  the battle   fronts  and driving them into  the desperate  survival and lethal  retreat    tactic  of  using small  girls  as  suicide  bombers.

    Like  Erdogan, Buhari  is bold,  has charisma and  Nigerians  trust  him because of  his integrity. But  the  Achilles   heels   of  his administration  are  the weak  economy,  the huge  rise in petrol prices  he brought  on  board as well  as  lop  sidedness  of  government  appointments  in  favour of the North in  a nation in which  the federal  character  is  in  the constitution to prevent  such discrimination. It  is such   lapses  that  his  administration  need  to  focus on urgently, as  these  are  issues  that  those caught  red  handed in looting the treasury   especially  in  the military  can exploit  to  cause  confusion.  Fortunately  the  image of  the  Nigerian  military  is in  tatters as at  now that  revelations on  arms  funds  diversion  are  in  the public domain   and  the situation  of a military coup  is just  unthinkable  for  a military  in  utter disgrace  for using  money  meant   for war   for  personal purposes  not  only  now,  but in the past. That  is  the jungle  our  own  democracy  is in right  now and we depend on commitment  and charisma  of  Buhari  to  get us  out  of  the woods  God  willing.

    With  regard  to the US,  the  call  by  the Republicans through their candidate Donald  Trump  that his  opponent in the race  Hillary  Clinton  should  be  jailed is  both  chilling  and  frightening  and  shows  that  the division  in the  US political system is  deeper  than  envisaged. But   democracy  is a competition  for  power  and it  has its rules,  ethics and  protocols. It  is like sports  in  which  the  loser  must  congratulate  the  winner  and life  goes  on. It  is not  a matter of  life  and death.  Hillary  Clinton  may  have  had  her  faults  and could  even  have  been  extremely careless on  her  handling  of  her  mails as Secretary  of   State   as  the  FBI  boss,  said    but  she  is  certainly  not  a criminal.

    Nevertheless   the   historic  emergence  of  Hillary  Clinton  as the presidential  candidate  of  the  Democratic  Party  this week  is  most  welcome  more  so  as  the language of  her backers  at the Convention has been civil  and  tolerant even though  everything hinges on  Hillary  contesting on the legacy  of the Obama Administration.  This  is  a  legacy    whose  failures  especially on  foreign policy, the economy  and security are  fuelling the  Trump  campaign  and  has sustained  it  so  far to  the chagrin  of those  Americans  yearning  for  some  decent language  and  politics  in  this  unique  2016 presidential  campaign  and  elections.

    Undoubtedly    and  decidedly,    Donald  Trump  has  created  a  vengeful  presidential  campaign   for  the US   presidential  election  of  2016  and the  American  political  system  is  facing  its stiffest  test in terms  of stability, security   and  tolerance  for  decades.  How  it survives in  the face of such do  or  die  rhetoric with  the emergence  of  a man like  Donald  Trump  who could  be its  next  president  if  he wins, will be    most  interesting to  watch,  behold   and     even    analyse,   as it  unfolds   till  the elections in  November.  Why  or  how  the  divided  Americans     of  today,   steeped  in democracy  for  ages as they   are,   have not themselves seen the looming political  chaos   and  danger   awaiting them  in the emergence  of  Donald  Trump in this  presidential  campaign  certainly  beats  my  imagination.  The  fact  that  even Obama  concedes  that  a  Trump  victory can  only  be averted by  the Democrats by fighting  desperately    for their  political  life  in  this campaign   shows  clearly  that  the die  is  cast  for  the  sanity of  American  politics  between  now  and the presidential   elections in  November 2016.

    Once  again  long  live  the  Federal  Republic  of  Nigeria.

  • A shared fate

    A shared fate

    It was exactly 50 years yesterday since the cold-blooded murder in Ibadan, capital of the former Western Region, of the country’s first military Head of State, Major General Thoma Aguiyi-Ironsi, and the military governor of the Western Region, Colonel Adekunle Fajuyi. The day was July 29, 1966, when rebel troops of northern origin staged a counter coup to avenge the earlier January 15, 1966, coup of the majors. Ironsi who was in Ibadan to address a meeting of the country’s traditional rulers was the target of the mutineers. Fajuyi the host insisted they would have to kill him along with his guest.

    Five decades after, the fears, distrust, resentments, suspicions, misunderstandings, differences and recriminations responsible for the coup and counter coups of January and July, 1966, persist. Contemporary Nigeria is a seething cauldron of competing mutual ill will, frustrations and grievances.

    Those who killed Ironsi saw him as the most prominent face of a perceived Igbo conspiracy to seize control of and dominate the country. For them the January 15, 1966, putsch was an Igbo coup pure and simple. This perception spurred the organized massacre of Igbos in the North culminating in the revenge coup that claimed Ironsi and Fajuyi among others.

    True, the key planners and executors of the  majors’ coup were Igbo. There were only two Yoruba and no northern officers among them. Again, the casualties of the coup were solely from the North and the West.  Political leaders who lost their lives in the coup included Premier of the North, Sir Ahmadu Bello, the Prime Minister, Alhaji Tafawa Balewa and the Premier of the west, Chief Samuel Ladoke Akintola.

    The two Igbo Premiers of the East and Midwest regions were not touched. All the top military leaders killed in the coup were from the North and West. Lt-Colonel Arthur Unegbe, quartermaster general of the army, was the only Igbo officer who lost his life. But is this sufficient to validate the Igbo conspiracy thesis? I don’t think so.

    The blunt truth is that those political leaders who lost their lives on Januray 15, 1966, were directly responsible for the descent to violence and anarchy in the West that ultimately led to the collapse of the First Republic. They plotted the unconstitutional and illegal sacking of the legitimate government of the West. They imposed a thoroughly detested Akintola on the West and brazenly rigged the 1965 Western regional elections to keep him in power against the popular will.

    Indeed, the January 15 majors’ coup was a preemptive strike. It was no secret that Ahmadu Bello and Akintola planned a major military crackdown on the insurrectionary West. The major’s coup truncated the plan. The January 15, 1966, coup initially enjoyed widespread support. It was popularly perceived as a necessary displacement of a decadent, lawless and unjust order.  Only later were ethnic colorations mischievously read into the coup.

    Was Ironsi complicit in the January 15 coup? Those who killed him believed so. They allege, for instance, that he did not bring the detained ring leaders of the aborted coup to trial. This is true but Ironsi had little room to maneuver. The major Kaduna Nzeogwu led executors of the coup were as popular in the south as they were detested in the north. However, Ironsi made no attempt to identify with the majors’ radical plans. Ironsi was no radical. He was an apolitical, professionally puritan military officer. Many even considered him politically naïve.

    Thus, Ironsi appointed Colonel Yakubu Gowon as Chief of Army Staff and surrounded himself with personal security staff mostly made up of northerners. He did nothing about the predominance in the West of troops of northern origin. Ironsi trusted too much in the organizational ethos and espirit de corps of the military. This is why he and Fajuyi were sitting ducks when the vengeful mutineers’ struck in Ibadan.

    Ironsi was accused of being overly reliant for counsel on an inner circle of Igbo intellectual and bureaucratic elite. This in itself is no crime. Any leader’s kitchen cabinet will necessarily comprise of his trusted aides. However, Ironsi’s tragic fate shows that in a complex polity like Nigeria, a leader should have an inner core of advisers that will encourage him to run an inclusive administration sensitive to ethno-regional diversities.

    It is unfortunate that Ironsi’s inner core of advisers did not make him realize the dangers of the pattern of promotions he approved in the public service. For instance, 18 out of 20 military officers promoted to the rank of colonel under Ironsi were said to be Igbo and this against the advice of the Supreme Military Council. Even if this pattern of promotions was reflective of merit, it was dangerously insensitive to the political context within which it was carried out. It only lent credence to the Igbo domination thesis even if there was no such conscious conspiratorial agenda in reality.

    The perception of a conspiratorial Igbo agenda informed the ferocity of the reaction in the North particularly to Ironsi’s decree No 34 of May 24, 1966, which transformed Nigeria instantaneously from a federation based on regions to a unitary state based on ‘Groups of Provinces’. That such sweeping structural changes, which included the abolition of regional public services and their replacement with a single, centralized public service, was effected without wide consultation in a country as diverse as Nigeria, shows how removed from reality Ironsi and his idealistic advisers had become.

    In the north particularly, the regional federal structure was seen as imperative to enable each region develop at its own pace without fear of domination by those more advanced educationally or socio-economically. The grand irony is that the same forces opposed to Ironsi’s unification decrees which abolished the regions, later broke the four regions into 12 states and this process of fragmentation has introduced their own variant of centralization under which the ‘federatingentities’ have been balkanised into the present 36-state structure that is only federal in name. They have also stoutly resisted any attempt to revert to a region-based federation. Was Ironsi then prescient and thus deserving of an apology?

    Colonel Adekunle Fajuyi’s critical significance in history was his heroic refusal to bargain for his life at the expense of his guest and Commander-In-Chief. This is particularly noteworthy given the political and ideological differences between both men. Fajuyi was as progressive and radical as Ironsi was apolitical and conservative. However, he exhibited exemplary courage, valor, honor, decency and dignity by opting to die rather than betray Ironsi. This is in tandem with the Yoruba aphorism: Iku ya ju esin (Better death than a life denuded of honor).  May the souls of these great gentlemen/officers continue to rest in peace.

    Opeyemi Bamidele @ 53

    He first burst into public consciousness in the early to mid eighties as a vibrant, ideologically conscious and committed students’ union leader when he served first as Public Relations Officer of the Students Union Government of the university of Ife (now Obafemi Awolowo University (OAU), then Chairman of the University of Benin Students Union and ultimately National President of the National Association of Nigerian Students (NANS) in 1989. For Honourable Opeyemi Bamidele, who turned 53 yesterday, it has been an eventful five and three decades of dedicated and selfless service to humanity. It is impossible to write the history of the spirited resistance struggles of Nigerian students against  the Structural Adjustment  Programme (SAP) and military dictatorship in the eighties without acknowledging Opeyemi Bamidele’s leadership.

    He equally played a frontline role in the pro-democratic struggles that ushered in this political dispensation even suffering the deprivations of exile in the process. Bamidele was a key player in the administrations of Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu and Mr Babatunde Raji Fashola (SAN) in Lagos State serving with distinction at various times as Senior Special Assistant, Chief of Staff to the Deputy Governor, Commissioner for Sports and Youth Development as well as Commissioner for Information and Strategy between 1999 and 2007. He was elected to the House of Representatives from Ekiti state in 2011 and served as Chairman, Legislative Budget and Research Committee of the House.

    A disagreement with some leaders of the defunct Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) in Ekiti forced him to contest for the governorship of the state on the platform of the Labor Party in 2014 coming third in the election. Today, Bamidele is back in his natural political habitat contributing his quota to the growth and consolidation of the APC. Although he is presently preoccupied with his extensive legal practice, Opeyemi Bamidele’s rich political and managerial experience, wide network and organizational dexterity qualify him for a frontline role in the struggle to extricate Ekiti State from the current stranglehold of visionless political vagabonds. Surely, for this dynamic progressive, the best is yet to come. Happy birthday my dear friend and brother.

  • Osinbajo and restructuring

    Osinbajo and restructuring

    Not unexpectedly, the recent submission by the Vice President, Professor Yemi Osinbajo (SAN) that, much more than restructuring, what the country urgently needs is the diversification of her economy to boost productivity and wealth creation, has elicited denunciations from some quarters. Responding to a question recently at a public lecture in Ondo State, Osinbajo said:  “We are not earning enough from oil and taxes anymore, every state can feed and also export if we engage in agriculture” and that “Even if states are given half of the resources of the Federal Government, the situation will not change; the only change is to diversify the economy”.

    Although some people may not like to hear this, I think the Vice President spoke the blunt and courageous truth. The Pan-Yoruba group, Afenifere, carpeted Osinbajo for taking a position allegedly contrary to that of the South-West zone where he comes from. I am unaware of any unanimity of opinion in the South West on restructuring. There is fierce autonomy of individual thought in the highly politically sophisticated region. The insinuation that the Vice President may have come under pressure from the presidency to support the status quo is unsubstantiated and speculative.

    But then, in the final analysis there does not appear to be a substantial difference between Osinbajo’s well documented views and actions on the country’s federalism and that of Afenifere. The Pan-Yoruba organization itemizes fiscal federalism, freeing mineral resources from the exclusive list, multi-level policing and bureaucratic decentralization as some of the elements of the restructuring it advocates. But these are some of the causes that the Vice President vigorously fought for during his tenure as Attorney General of Lagos State in over a dozen landmark cases at the Supreme Court.

    For instance, federal intrusion into local government administration contrary to the constitution and federalist principles was one anomaly that Osinbajo and some other progressive states’ Attorney Generals successfully checkmated at the apex court. The National Assembly in the Electoral Act passed in 2001 not only altered the tenure of local government councils nationwide but also imposed qualifications for those seeking to contest Local Government elections. Osinbajo challenged the law on behalf of Lagos state and the Supreme Court ruled that the National Assembly exceeded its constitutional bounds in purporting to make laws qualifying or disqualifying candidates for elections.

    According to the apex court: “The National Assembly has no power whatsoever under item 11 of the concurrent Legislative List of the Constitution or indeed under any provision of the Constitution, to increase or alter the tenure of the elected officers of the Local Government Councils. Only the House of Assembly of a state has such power in view of the provisions of Section 7 subsection (1) of the Constitution and item 12 of the Second Schedule to the Constitution”.

    In the same vein, Lagos, Abia and Delta states in 2005 successfully challenged at the Supreme Court the ‘Monitoring of Revenue Allocation to Local Government Act’, which sought to monitor funds allocated to local governments from the Federation Account through a State Joint Local Government Allocation Committee established in each state by the Federal Government. Nullifying the law, the Supreme Court Supreme Court in its lead judgement said: “Federalism as a viable concept of organizing a pluralistic society such as Nigeria for governance does not encourage so much concentration of power in the centre”. An overbearing centre could easily abuse such powers to emasculate the other tiers of government financially.

    Again, in 2002, Lagos, with Osinbajo as the spearhead, and some other states, responding to the then Attorney General of the Federation, Chief Bola Ige’s famous ‘resource control’ suit against littoral states, made counterclaims challenging the way the Federal Government was managing joint resources and making allocations from the Federation Account. Before then, the Federal Government simply deducted funds for Joint Venture Contracts and Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) priority projects, servicing of Federal Government’s external debt, Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, and the judiciary among others from the Federation Account before sharing whatever remained among the different tiers of government.

    In its landmark final judgement on the case, the Supreme Court held among others that (1) It was unconstitutional for the Federal Government to charge funding of Joint Venture contracts and NNPC priority projects to the Federation Account. (2) The allocation of 1 per cent of the Federation Account to the FCT was inconsistent with Section 163(3) of the constitution and thus void. (3) All revenues accruing to the government not listed in Section (162) (1) the Federation Account and (4) It was illegal for the Federal Government to make deductions from the states’ share of the Federation Account with the aim of paying such funds to the Local Governments.

    The illegal seizure of Lagos State local government funds by the Obasanjo administration as well as the violation of Lagos State’s urban and regional planning laws by the Federal Government are other issues on which Osinbajo successfully helped to deepen Nigeria’s federal practice through progressive judicial activism. The Vice President’s federalist credentials remain impeccable. However, if by restructuring, it is meant that the country regresses to the geo-ethnic regional arrangements of the First Republic, this column agrees with him that this will be distracting and even harmful. Creating another layer of governance at regional level will needlessly increase the cost of governance and most states will stoutly resist any attempt to dissolve them into resurgent regional entities.

    Before the current drastic shortfall in the nation’s revenues, states received double or even triple their current levels of federal allocation. Yet, how many of them were truly financially buoyant and economically self-sustaining? Again, what impact has the 13% allocation to oil producing states for derivation made in terms of accelerated development? This is why Osinbajo’s contention that, beyond joggling sharing proportions of current revenues among the tiers of government, we must emphasize diversification of the economy, to substantially increase the quantum of wealth production before distribution makes eminent sense.

    Making Nigeria’s unity non- negotiable (2)

    I believe that President Buhari means well when he says Nigeria’s unity is non-negotiable. However, the language comes across as imperious and overbearing. It suggests that every part of the country have no choice but to accept Nigeria’s continued unity maybe they like it or not. Indeed, the infinite and elastic negotiability of the conditions for the continued co-habitation of the peoples of Nigeria through a virile and vibrant democratic process as well as a dynamic, flexible and responsive federal practice must be guaranteed. This I believe is what the Nobel laureate, Professor Wole Soyinka, means when he avers that the negotiation of Nigeria’s unity must be a continuous, never ending affair of dialogue, bargaining as well as give and take.

    With the possible exception of the super patriot, General Olusegun Obasanjo, I do not think there is anyone who can love an abstract concept like Nigeria for the sake of love. Love for an artificial political construct like Nigeria cannot be blind. It must be predicated on concrete benefits derived by the citizenry from the union including the guarantee of security, economic well being, psychological fulfillment and ensuring social justice individually and collectively. The Nigerian state must earn the trust, confidence and fidelity of the Nigerian people by living up to its obligations and responsibilities so that the non-negotiability of its unity would not be the mantra of a privileged few but an article of faith firmly held by a critical mass of the populace. In particular, the Nigerian presidency is designed to be a unifying institution hence the occupant must secure broad geo-political electoral support to win. Whether or not the presidency exerts a centripetal or centrifugal pull on the polity will, however, be a function of the large heartedness, broadmindedness, generosity of spirit, degree of pan Nigerian inclusiveness as well as sense of fair play and justice of the incumbent. The ball is in President Buhari and the APC’s court.

    Dino Melaye as Kogi West mirror?

    Ever since his latest display of perverse bravery and misdirected male gallantry in the hollowed chamber of the Senate, during an unedifying encounter with a respected and distinguished female colleague, I have been bombarded with questions on whether Senator Dino Melaye truly mirrors the people, particularly men, of Kogi West Senatorial district.

     Are Okun men given to uncontrolled fits of temper, threats of rape and violence against women, indecorous language, gross disrespect for elders and disgraceful exhibitions of  pugilistic dexterity at the slightest provocation? This is  certainly not the case. How then did Melaye, given his

    unsavory record in the House of Representatives, earn a promotion to represent Okunland in the Senate? Well, that is the nature of Nigerian politics. Suffice it to say that Melaye’s predecessor, Senator Smart Adeyemi, always comported himself with decorum and dignity even if you disagreed with his politics. The Okun people are highly cultured, respectful of authority and of women, industrious and restrained almost to a fault. There are not less than 300 distinguished professors from Okunland and thousands of accomplished Okun professionals as well as business men and women holding their own in different spheres across Nigeria and beyond. However, I will not write Melaye off. Happily, Senator Oluremi Tinubu says she forgives him. He can turn a new leaf and become a true mirror of the Okun persona. His inexhaustible drive and energy can be transformed into positive asset. It is never too late.

  • Turkey, Trump, Nigeria—And the global jungle of democracy

    The  recent   failed  coup in  Turkey has  shown  vividly  that  the  world’s  democracies  are  not safe  or  immune from military  coups and take overs which  were the norm in the world in  the sixties  and  seventies. Just  as the emergence  of  Donald Trump  as the presidential candidate  of  the Republican  candidate has  shown  that  democracy in even  the most  sophisticated  democracies  in  the world can degenerate and  decay in  terms  of the language of political  participation and  the rhetoric  of the  quest  for  power.

     Both    scenarios  in  Turkey  and  the US  provide  the food  for thought today  and  the approach  I have  adopted  to  illustrate  them  is both historical  and  comparative.  I  will  also  look  at  the situation  in  Nigeria   where  past   arms  purchases  have opened  a canker worms  of  corruption  and  even  the present   army chief  is  under  the searchlight   for  the purchases  of  houses  in  Dubai in  the public  domain. It   is  my intention  to  show  through  them  that  democracy  is under  stress  globally  and has  become a jungle  of  sorts . Given the  challenge of  militant  Islam as well  as the dwindling  resources  of  even  the richest  economies  and democracies  to  provide  the necessities  of  life  that their  citizens  have come to take for granted.

    Turkey  provides  a unique  example  after  my  heart  of  a democracy  that  works when  the leadership  is strong  and bold  and the economy is strong and buoyant  and the people have  confidence  in their  government.  Indeed  that was  the  reason the coup  failed  because  the Turks  took  to  the streets, faced tanks and dragged   tank  drivers  out  of their war  tanks  and stripped  them  of  their  uniforms.  Indeed the  streets  were  littered  with discarded uniforms  and  boots of  soldiers who fled  nakedly  and in borrowed  robes  to  escape  the anger  and indignation  of  a  democratically  charged  and  alert  electorate. That  to  me is  the face of  modern  democracy,  when  people are  motivated  to secure  their  democracy  with their  lives  in the face of  violence  that seeks  to trample  or  destroy it right  before  their eyes.

    Yet Turkey  has  a history  of success  of  military  coups  that Turks  have come  to  expect as a  way of  life  and political  culture until  the  present President  Yaccip  Erdogan  came to  power. Erdogan  has become a case  study  on  how  to  tame  military  intervention  in  politics  and  has my  admiration  in  this  regard in  the way  he  handled  the  last  coup  this week. Even  though  he  seems  to  me  to   have overreached himself  by  arresting  over  6000 people  on the coup  thereby virtually  turning his  nation  into  a  huge  garrison  of  sorts  and which  places enormous price on  Turkey’s  resources at  a time when  the ISIS  threat  is ever  present.

    Erdogan’s  survival  strength  did  not come  out  of a  vacuum.  He  and  his party  have  won  three elections back  to  back  in  Turkey  whose secularity  is guaranteed  by  the  army  according  to  the constitution  handed  down  by Kemal  Ataturk  who established  modern  Turkey  from  the rumps of the collapsed  Ottoman  Empire  which   bestrode  Europe  at  the time  and reached  as  far Austria  before  its  collapse. Erdogan  may  not  be a  Sultan  of  the Ottoman  Empire  but  he  has dreams of  their  splendor which he has realized by building a 1000  room  Presidential  Palace  in  Istanbul, Turkey’s  capital   and   in  the way  he has  successfully  changed the constitution  of  Turkey  recently  to  a presidency  with himself  as the  first  president.  Obviously  Erdogan  is sitting tight  in  Turkey  and has  turned  the tables  on the military  which  did not reckon  with  the populism  and charisma  he has  acquired  in three  election  victories  as well  as his   bravery  and boldness  to stand up  and protect his well  earned  political  stature  and popularity. He  has    definitely   taught  the generals in Turkey a  huge  lesson   that even in  the   rough   and  tumble      of   democracy, might  is not  always  right .

    In Nigeria  the present President  Muhammadu  Buhari  has been  bold  in his anti  corruption  campaign  which he   has  embarked  on  single  mindedly  in  spite   of  diversionary  tactics of  even  those  with  whom  constitutionally  he  shares  power.   But  he  still  admired  for  his anti  corruption  drive    even  though  the  economy  is performing dismally  with  a falling currency  against  the  dollar  and dwindling oil  resources occasioned by militants in  the oil  rich  delta area.  But  Buhari’s  rise  to  power  is another romantic  political  story   similar  to that of  Erdogan  in Turkey  but  in the opposite  direction in terms  of ascendancy.

    Buhari was  military  leader  ousted  from office  by  his  soldiers  in a  military  coup . He  then  went into  political oblivion only  to  surface as  a politician  who  contested  presidential  elections and lost  serially.  Until  2015  when  his party   the   APC, marshaled  by a former  governor  of  the  nation’s  commercial  capital  won  a landslide  victory  in  the 2015  `presidential  election. Buhari  who  had been  suspicious all along  on  why  the  Boko  Haram was winning  the war  against  a vastly  superior  Nigerian  army ordered  a probe  of  arms  purchases   and that  threw  up  a frightening revelation. Past  arms funds  had  been  diverted  to other  purposes   other  than  the Boko Haram War  and  the  presidential  campaign  of  the ruling  PDP  had   been  largely  funded from  funds  mean,t  for  arms purchase  to  fight  and  defeat  Boko  Haram.

    For  a military  man  turned  politician  like  Buhari  the  die  was  cast  as he said  at  his inaugural  address  even  though  as at  then  he did not  know  the level  of stench in the  Augean Stable  handed   over   to  him  by  his predecessor . Only  a man  with  Buhari’s  antecedents  can take on  the  military in  Nigeria  given  the  level  of  corruption on  diversion  of arms  purchase  funds  by  past military  chiefs  and the present clamour   for  the  probe of  the  present army  chief  who  has been quite  successful  though on  ousting the menace  of  Boko  Haram  from  the battle   fronts  and driving them into  the desperate  survival and lethal  tactic  of  using small  girls  as  suicide  bombers.

    Like  Erdogan, Buhari  is bold,  has charisma and  Nigerians  trust  him because of  his integrity. But  the  Achilles heels of  his administration  are  the weak  economy  and the huge  rise in petrol prices  he brought  on  board as well  as  lop  sidedness  of  government  appointments  in  favour of the North in  a nation in which  the federal  character  is  in  the constitution to prevent  such discrimination. It  is such   lapses  that  his  administration  need  to  focus on urgently, as  these  are  issues  that  those caught  red  handed in looting the treasury especially  in  the military  can exploit  to  cause  confusion.  Fortunately  the  image of  the  Nigerian  military  is in  tatters as at  now that  revelations on  arms  funds  diversion  are  in  the public domain   and  the situation  of a military coup  is just  unthinkable  for  a military  in utter disgrace  for using  money  meant   for war   for  personal purposes  not  only  now,  but in the past. That  is  the jungle  our  own  democracy  is in right  now and we depend on commitment  and charisma  of  Buhari  to  get us  out  of  the woods  God  willing.

    With  regard  to the US,  the  call  by  the Republicans through their candidate Donald  Trump  that his  opponent in the race  Hillary  Clinton  should  be  jailed is  both  chilling  and  frightening  and  shows  that  the division in the US political system is deeper  than  envisaged. Democracy  is a competition  for  power  and it  has its rules  and  protocols. It  is like sports  in  which  the  loser  must  congratulate  the  winner  and life  goes  on. It  is not  a matter of  life  and death.  Hillary  Clinton  may  have  had  her  faults  and could  even  have  been  extremely careless on  her  handling  of  her  mails as Secretary  of  as  the  FBI  boss  said    but  she  is  certainly  not  a criminal.  Donald  Trump  has  created  a  vengeful  presidential campaign for the  presidential  election of 2016  and the  American  political  system  is  facing  its stiffest  test in terms  of stability, security  and  tolerance  for  decades.  How  it survives in  the face of such do  or  die  rhetoric with  the emergence  of  a man like  Donald  Trump  who could  be its  next  president  if  he wins , will be the  real  seventh  wonder  of  the world .  Why  or  how  the  divided  Americans      steeped  in democracy  for  ages as they   are   have not themselves seen the looming political  chaos   and  danger  is what  baffles  my  imagination .

    Once  again  long  live  the  Federal  Republic  of  Nigeria .

  • Sack federations’ chiefs

    Ordinarily, I shouldn’t be looking for a topic to write. A lot happened in the sporting world last week to write about. A lot can also be written of the European Cup, the competition’s big stars’ performances, Cristiano Ronaldo’s exceptional conduct and that of his Portuguese clan. Serena Williams’ record equaling Steffi Graff’s feat of 22 Grand Slams in tennis is equally exciting. But what is it that one can write about these big events that hasn’t been written? Perhaps, many would argue that I should write mine. True, but won’t I be sounding like a cracked record?

    Honestly, I wanted to write about Ronaldo. I tried scribbling things down during the competition. I noticed that I was always alone watching the matches. It dawned on me that something was missing anytime Portugal played and Ronaldo shone. I couldn’t fix it until the Portuguese missed a penalty kick. Someone inside the newsroom screamed, mogbe! (I’m finished!)

    My countenance changed. I remembered my colleague the late Dada Aladelokun. He would have sighed the same way. He would have followed it up with a chronicle of big stars who lost such penalty kicks. For the late Dada, Ronaldo could do no wrong. His exciting moments were when Real Madrid was playing, with Ronaldo showing why he is the world’s best.

    The late Dada would have been sad, if he had watched Ronaldo cry when he was being taken out of the field in the finals against France. The celebrations would have been unimaginable, had Dada being alive. Ronaldo is an enigma. His passion infects his mates who strive to match Ronaldo’s ambition by giving their best. Besides, Ronaldo showed his mates immense respect despite his larger than life image. Anytime his mates played badly, he expressed his feeling wherever he was on the pitch, but was quick to contribute his quota when given a pass. He rallied his mates after he was stretchered out of the pitch in the final game. They listened because they knew he respected them.

    Said Ronaldo of his mates to UEFA.com: “I’m so happy – very happy. This was something I’ve wanted for a long time now, ever since 2004. I asked God to give me another chance. The Portuguese people deserve this. Unfortunately, things didn’t go well for me. I injured myself in the first few minutes. But I’ve always believed in these players. They have quality and ability, along with our coach’s strategies to win.”

    Ronaldo’s comments underline why the Super Eagles of Nigeria are not in the first 10 in Africa and are far flung on the FIFA ladder. If Ronaldo was a Nigerian, he would have been stepping on us while moving on the streets. He would have dictated virtually everything for the team. He would have shown so much disdain to his team mates. The few who play for big European clubs don’t think it is right for their mates to have their contact addresses and phone numbers. They walk apart while in the camp. It is easy to identify all the camps in the Eagles from the way the players interact.

    Of significant importance too is Ronaldo’s acknowledgement of the coach’s strategies, which explains why football is a team game, not a one-man’s show. Many thanks Rondalo for these tips for the Eagles. Of course, Ronaldo recognises the importance of God in any person’s ambitions. He led by example. He was the best player and he rightly deserved to be captain, irrespective of the fact that there were older players in the team. Captaincy isn’t a function of how old a player is but his contributions to the team. A captain should inspire others. He shouldn’t be the leader of crisis like we have in the Eagles. He should be the team’s rallying point to earn his mates’ respect. They knew Ronaldo would be marked, but played their part so well during the matches leading to the finals that it didn’t come as a surprise the way they fought in the final game, after Ronaldo had been removed.

    With these ingredients, it doesn’t matter if the Portuguese gained from the new 24-team format by UEFA. They played their style and got the cherished prize. Under the old format, there was no provision for third best teams, which is what qualified Portugal to remain in the competition after the first round of matches. Equally important is the fact that the Portuguese were unbeaten in the competition like the co-finalist France.

    For a team to win big, there must be an “undertaker” like Ronaldo and mates who are committed, determined and ready to be focused to achieve the set objective.  Ronaldo is out for five months, but he will stay on the sidelines a fulfilled man eager to leave the game now that the ovation is loudest. Here is wishing Ronaldo a quick recovery. He, is a worthy leader and one of the icons of our time.

    Was I so close to Dada? Yes, at least when talking sports. Dada was a passionate lover of football and tennis. He would stay awake to watch Ronaldo and Serena Williams. Dada was at his best when discussing Ronaldo or Serena. I can still capture the way Dada danced when either Ronaldo or Serena was performing. Dada would come early to do his job, knowing that later in the evening it was either Ronaldo’s show or Serena’s.

    I miss Dada’s details on Serena. Let me leave out how he would have described her; the movement of his waist, not forgetting how he would have kissed the air in admiration. Serena’s admirers know what I’m talking about.

    What is it that one can say about Serena that is new? Perhaps, I could predict that she will set a new Grand Slam record of 30 wins. Far-fetched? With an average of three grand slams in the next three years, she can achieve it. Realistically, I predict 26 grand slams, with one or two coming years later. Is anyone shocked at the development of Serena and her elder sister Venus? It is the way to discover, nurture and expose athletes at the right age. Venus, at 36 years, joined the league elders in the female game who reached the semi-finals at Wimbledon.

    Their father Williams Senior encouraged his girls and supervised their development. Lately, he appears to have taken the back seat, knowing the girls are already accomplished stars, who are icons of the game.

    Will I shock you, dear reader, if I tell you that Nigeria’s greatest lawn tennis star, Nduka Odizor doesn’t have a national honour? Will I also shock you if you read here that one of our administrators asked Odizor to bribe him to be listed for national honours? Bless you, Odizor for rejecting that dirty offer.

    Odizor qualified for the last 16 of the Wimbledon in 1983. Odizor (born 9 August 1958) represented Nigeria at the 1988 Summer Olympics in Seoul, where he was defeated in the first round by American lucky loser Robert Seguso. The right-hander won one career title in singles (Taipei, 1983) and seven doubles titles. He reached his highest ATP singles ranking of World No. 52 in June 1984.

    Would you blame the administrator who asked for bribe? I won’t. That wouldn’t have happened, if the Tennis Federation chieftains knew their onions. Most times, those in the sports federations see their nominations as another platform to share the national cake. Such names as Odizor sound like fairytales which don’t bring cash. How then do we encourage younger ones to play tennis or to compel Odizor to allow his kids play for Nigeria? Odizor’s absence from the national award list for athletes isn’t one off. Table tennis legend, Segun Toriola, who has created Olympic Games history with hisseventh consecutive appearance at the multi-sports event doesn’t have a national honour. The question is; who are those who get these awards? Or is this the fallout of lesser sports being treated with levity by our inept sports administrators? I hope that the next national awards list for sportsmen and women would include Odizor, Toriola and other deserving athletes.

    If sports must grow in Nigeria, the minister must dissolve all the federations after the Rio 2016 Olympic Games. From what we can see wrestling , table tennis and basketball federations appear to have the right calibre of members to change the face of their sport in the next millennium. One would have added athletics federation, except that it appears to be run by one’s initiatives, making others look like errand boys. The pedigree of the federation’s boss dwarfs others and it affects the quality of advice that they get during meetings. Athletics can rival football if the next board has knowledgeable members who can match their boss’ wits for change.

    I would suggest to the minister to appoint chieftains of the Lagos Boxing Hall of Fame to take charge of our boxing. What this body has done for boxing is immeasurable. Its members think outside the box, which should be the first quality any member of the new sporting federations must have. For the Lagos Boxing Hall of Fame’s chieftains, boxing should be taken to the people. And it starts by building gymnasium in the hinterland. That way, the youth are compelled to box, especially after watching others in their areas shown on television.

    The Lagos Boxing Hall of “Famers” don’t just organise tournaments; they also ensure that they expose their boxers to the new trends of the game by inviting amateur boxers from England to box here in Nigeria. This initiative has grown to such an extent where boxers of the programmes go to England to box in exchange programmes.

    With the Lagos Boxing Hall of Fame’s initiative, Nigeria can dream of winning a medal at the 2020 Olympic Games. Indeed, the minister would be shocked to find out how these men source sponsorship for their programmes. Once the corporate firms can trust you, they will support all your progammes. That is the way it works. Simple.

  • Lesson from Nigeria’s tormentor-in-chief

    After a fantastic speech, a family huddle at the door and a wave, David Cameron left 10 Downing Street for the last time on Wednesday holding hands with his wife and three children. He had been British Prime Minister for six years. We have a few things to learn from him.

    For the people he led, his record was probably better than mixed. Dealing with them, he was just about the perfect gentleman. Taking questions from parliamentarians, the Prime Minister did his best to be civil and respectful even when handling some troublesome questioners. For Nigerians, he was probably not the friendliest. And that is putting it charitably. We have not forgotten, for instance, how, in May, he calmly but firmly informed Her Majesty the Queen that we were fantastically corrupt. In June 2013 Mr Cameron announced that Nigerians travelling to the United Kingdom would each pay £3,000 to his government before being allowed into the country, adding that the money would be returned if they kept faith with their visa terms and did not overstay. It is clear that there was something in the Nigerian that triggered the alarm bell in Mr Cameron. He tormented them ceaselessly.

    Before the visa saga, Mr Cameron had declared imperially that Nigeria had better embrace same sex activities and relationships including marriage, if the country wanted to enjoy British aid. Shun gays and forget aids, he said, in other words.

    Nigerians shot back, literally telling him to go to hell.

    Yet, in the past few weeks Mr Cameron so conducted himself in the countdown to his departure from office that we, his punching bag, not only applauded but will do well to copy. In June Britain voted in a most controversial and divisive referendum to exit the European Union (EU), a 58-state organisation that harmonised nearly everything about them including trade and movement. Mr Cameron led the ‘Remainers’ who lost the referendum vote to the ‘Leavers’ by the slimmest of margins.

    He must have seen the sign that somehow something was wrong somewhere. As Prime Minister he failed to convince more Britons to stay in the EU. Leaders, he must have reasoned, should have the backing of more, rather than less, of their people especially in certain crucial circumstances. He offered to resign as Prime Minister after six years and as the Conservative Party leader after 11 years. He fought back tears as he announced that the country needed a fresh leader to negotiate its departure from the EU, and to also navigate party waters. It is unclear why Mr Cameron got emotional. Did he weep for a country that somehow failed to see the foolishness of leaving an organisation from which it benefitted so much? Or did he nearly break down because he felt betrayed, or that he was quitting prematurely?

    No matter. That he quit at all, is worthy of commendation.

    He was also quick with the quitting. He did not pretend to consult elaborately nor seek to point out the folly of the Brexit outcome. Nor did he try to delude himself that he was the best thing to happen to Britain.

    If he was bitter or hesitant leaving, he did not show it. He joked seemingly offhandedly. His tone and pitch of voice was upbeat as if relieved to leave. As he spoke he was cheered, not booed. Had Mr Cameron ever worked and roused up the British people the way he did on his departure?

    Yet it was not just his charm or delivery. He spoke about honour in serving his country and its people. He spoke about support from his family, making the point that the time had come for them to quit 10 Downing Street and move on. Mr Cameron wished Theresa May, his successor, well, even though he knew that the woman, 10 years older, could hardly wait to take over from him, having announced during the brief period of jostling that she was the best for the job.

    The transition was swift and seamless, almost natural and in fulfilment of some superior legal code. In one day Mr Cameron and his cabinet came down, and Mrs May’s up, making the point that governance must not be held up under any circumstance.

    Watching the proceedings on cable TV in Lagos, a round of applause coincided with London cheers as Mr Cameron ended his farewell speech.

    In our country, such a smooth transition is unheard-of. There is usually every attempt to prevent it from happening. Incumbents find it hard to give way even when they must. In these parts there are handwritings on the wall but our leaders turn a blind eye to them. When their time is up they seek to lengthen it and, in doing so, betray their emptiness, vanity and selfishness. Olusegun Obasanjo, to mention one example, so loved power that the only way to retain it when his time was up was to fashion out a devious third term. One or two highly-placed individuals said between N8b and N10b was thrown into the unsuccessful bid, which Chief Obasanjo would later deny. More recently, Goodluck Jonathan begged to differ by conceding defeat in the last election but his discretion earned him nothing but condemnation, even attack by his henchmen who thought he should have dug in and brought the house down with him.

    It hurts to hail your tormentor-in-chief, but hail him we must, and better still, copy him.

  • Making Nigeria’s unity non negoiatiable (1)

    Making Nigeria’s unity non negoiatiable (1)

    Is Nigeria’s unity non- negotiable and the country’s territorial integrity cast in unalterable stone for all time? President Muhammdu Buhari’ s answer to this question is emphatically affirmative. The President has consistently admonished the growing cacophony of voices, not just calling for the dismemberment of the country but taking precipitate actions, to actualize their objective to come to terms with the ultimate futility of their plans. Implicit in this stance is the president’s determination if need be to use the immense powers, responsibilities and resources of his office to enforce and demonstrate the Nigerian state’s legitimate monopoly of the instruments and techniques of violence within its area of territorial jurisdiction. In other words from the president’s perspective, those insurgent groups that seek to dismember Nigeria and constitute themselves into separate sovereign entities must be prepared to achieve their aim through the demonstration of overwhelming and compelling superiority of force over Nigeria’s military.

    In a way, Buhari’s logic and sentiments are understandable. As president and Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces, he holds the sacred mandate of the majority of the Nigerian electorate. The essence of that mandate is to defend and protect the constitution as well as preserve the country’s territorial integrity. Buhari holds no mandate to preside over Nigeria’s disintegration or dismember. Every part of the country, including the now belligerent South-South and the ever increasingly restless South-East, participated in the 2015 election. Incidentally the two regions voted emphatically for the continuation of the PDP and former President Goodluck Jonathan’s stay in power. The rest of the country voted with no less conviction for the change that propelled Buhari and the APC to power. Can aggrieved groups in the South-South or South-East justifiably seek to get through destructive militancy or separatist agitations, what they failed to achieve through the ballot in the last election? Should parts of the country that do not have their way in future elections also resort to self help through disruptive activities that seek to indirectly nullify the will of the majority?

    Confronted with the threatened secession of seven slave owning southern states, the 16th president of the United States, Abraham Lincoln, in his first inaugural address on March 4, 1861, reiterated the legal and moral obligation of an electoral minority to respect the decision of a constitutional majority if democracy is to be sustained. In Lincoln’s words “Plainly the central idea of secession is the essence of anarchy. A majority held in restraint by constitutional checks and limitations, always changing easily with deliberate change of popular opinions and sentiments, is the only true sovereign of a free people. Whoever rejects it does of necessity fly to anarchy or despotism. The rule of a minority as a permanent arrangement is wholly impossible so that rejecting the majority principle, anarchism or despotism in some form is all that is left”. Stressing that all his authority as President derived from the people, Lincoln affirmed that his sacred  duty was to administer his government and “transmit it unimpaired to his successor”. Buhari can also logically make this claim.

    There are those who will seek to justify the economy crippling militancy in the South-South and South-East and resurgent pro-Biafra sentiments in the South-East with reference to the extremist Boko Haram insurgency perceived as a ploy to make the country ungovernable for Jonathan. Suffice it to say that the former President and his military high command had the wherewithal to effectively and decisively check the Boko Haram menace if they applied their minds to it. Shocking revelations of the looting of funds meant to procure weapons for prosecuting the anti-terrorism war by top military brass and ruling party politicians explains the psychological, professional and logistical incapacitation of a once potent Nigerian military to contain a rampaging Boko Haram ragtag army. The Jonathan administration thus can blame no one for its self-inflicted organizational debility and incoherence in this regard.

    This column does not support the school of thought that government should enter into dialogue with every group that challenges the authority of the Nigerian state and expresses separatist aspiration for any number of real or imagined grieviances. It is, however, instructive that despite his tough stance on the non negotiability of Nigeria’s unity, President Muhammadu Buhari has demonstrated eagerness to dialogue with the Niger Delta avengers. On one occasion Buhari even begged the militants in the name of God to stop their destruction of oil facilities in the Niger Delta with catastrophic consequences for the economy. This was after the initial deployment of massive force to contain the resurgent Niger Delta militancy. Nevertheless, the bombing of oil facilities in the Niger Delta remains unabated thus exposing the weak underbelly of the Nigerian state. Perceiving the government’s readiness for dialogue as a sign of weakness, the number of militant groups in the Niger Delta has mushroomed rapidly and the most ridiculous and humbling terms are being given as conditions for dialogue. That is the drawback of attempting to engage even rabidly criminal elements in dialogue from a position of weakness. But then the Nigerian state has no choice as years of insidious corruption, poor governance and lack of vision has hobbled its institutional efficacy and emboldened rogue elements to taunt and thwart its authority.

    Each time President Buhari talks of the non negotiability of the Nigeria’s unity, he does so within the historical context of the tragic civil war that clost between two and three million lives. This is understandable. He fought in the war and he is right that we should never desire to witness such a disaster ever again. Buhari insists that the wartime slogan ‘Go On with One Nigeria’ is still relevant today. However, the war was fought to keep Nigeria one by force. Four and a half decades after, the non-negotiability of Nigeria’s unity can no more be a matter of force and compulsion. It must be a function of persuasion, rationality, wise statesmanship as well as creative and productive leadership. Nigeria’s unity and stability is non- negotiable if we do not want the vast territory that comprises the country to degenerate to sheer chaos and anarchy far worse than the ills we argue about within the existing structure. The borders of the component parts of the country are fluid and the interconnections and interpenetrations of our diverse peoples intricate and complex. The number of diverse kinds of weapons circulating in informal and undetected channels across the country is so immense that it will be difficult maintaining any semblance of meaningful authority in a dismembered Nigeria.

    Here again, I find the words of Lincoln to his country’s secessionists relevant to our country’s present circumstances. In his words: “We cannot remove our respective sections from each other nor build an impassable wall between them. A husband and wife may be divorced and go out of the presence of each other, but the different parts of our country cannot do this. They cannot but remain face to face and intercourse, either amicable or hostile must continue between them”.     However, in the case of Nigeria, a critical condition for making the country’s unity non negotiable is to eschew and expunge from our vocabulary the phrase that the country’s unity is non- negotiable. That language must no longer be part of the grammar of Nigerian politics.