The Nation Newspaper

Category: Segun Ayobolu

  • APC and direct primaries

    Hurriedly cobbled together into a coalition to wrest power from the then ruling People’s Democratic Party (PDP) at the centre in the run up to the critical 2015 general elections, the All Progressives Congress (APC) appeared to have rapidly exhausted its historic possibilities with its realization of its primary aim of becoming the country’s new ruling party.  The legacy parties that coalesced to constitute the APC apparently never had a common conception either of the progressive ideology that was supposed to weld them together or the philosophy of change that was promised to be the driving force of both its style and substance in government and which elicited such high expectations among Nigerians.

    Thanks to President Muhammadu Buhari’s personal asceticism and aversion to corruption (mind you, I am not saying he is a saint) the degree of venality and sheer pecuniary banditry in public life has been substantially reduced under the APC while there is a more serious commitment of resources to ameliorating the plight of a large number of the poor and vulnerable, infrastructure renewal and expansion as well as addressing the country’s severe security challenges.

    Yet, there is no discernible, deliberately and carefully fashioned as well as systematically and methodically implemented plan by the APC to achieve fundamental value re-orientation or sustainable behavioural change both at the individual and institutional levels. If there is, it has certainly not been effectively communicated to the public. The party also has to take more meaningful steps towards removing the structural and constitutional impediments to the practice of true federalism in the country. This is the minimum condition necessary for actualizing any concrete change that goes beyond the superficial exchange of PDP faces for those of the APC in public office.

    As the legal term of its first national and state executives was coming to an end, the APC approached a historic juncture. It could either choose a new, refreshing, revitalizing and rejuvenating path or opt to mummify itself in the seal of operational inefficiency, organizational incoherence and inefficacy as well as ideological insipidity exemplified by the erstwhile Chief John Odigie-Oyegun-led National Executive of the party. Interestingly, a not insignificant number of members of the party’s National Executive Committee (NEC) preferred the latter option.

    The real Buhari suddenly showed up at this critical time. Casting aside his taciturnly and seemingly disdainful disposition to party politics, PMB asserted his leadership of the party and insisted that the constitution both of the party and the country must be adhered to and intra party elections held to party executive offices at all levels. That principled stand nailed the coffin of the tenure elongation lobby. It steered the APC away from the ultimately self-immolating path it seemed bent on charting.

    It certainly would have been disastrous for the APC to have entered the electoral fray next year in a complacent and somnolent state of mind numbing itself to the seething discontent eating deep into its sinews. The intra-party congresses and conventions enabled these grievances and dissensions come to the fore rather than being dangerously hidden and repressed with future negative and more damaging consequences.

    Again, the defeat of the tenure elongation agenda and the attendant holding of the APC congresses and national convention facilitated the speedy exit from the party of disgruntled elements who believed that their interests could not be actualized within the APC. This is surely not illegitimate since politics is most times about the pursuit of private interest dressed in seductive altruistic garbs.

    Yes, there has also been a flurry of defections to the APC mostly from the PDP.  Many of those moving to the ruling party are seeking refuge in the new perceived ‘Noah’s Ark’ from the haunting flood of indictments and relentless prosecutions by the anti-corruption agencies particularly the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).  This indeed poses a grave moral dilemma for the APC. Many wonder how the party can credibly claim to be fighting corruption and yet gladly, even enthusiastically, welcome persons indicted for alleged corruption into its fold. It is clearly unrealistic to expect the APC to reject members seeking to join the party especially those with a strong electoral base.

    It appears that those persons who see membership of the APC as granting them immunity from prosecution and possible punishment for corruption have apparently not learnt the appropriate lessons from the fate of ex-governors Joshua Dariye and Jolly Nyame currently serving jail terms for corruption. The austere and inscrutable General from Daura is unlikely to bat an eyelid or lift a finger if they are found guilty of corrupt practices despite their migration to the ruling party.

    Within a very short while of his emergence as National Chairman of the APC, Comrade Adams Oshiomhole’s invigorating and rejuvenating influence is being felt both within and beyond the APC. The party is gradually being stirred awake from its organizational stupor. Both ministers and national legislators of the party are being made to realize that they hold their positions by virtue of the fact that they belong to a political party or were appointed by someone who won election on the platform of a party.

    The party is gradually becoming, once again the centre of gravity around which both the members of the executive and legislature belonging to it revolve. And Oshiomhole is obviously learning very fast the art of diplomatically asserting the supremacy of the party without necessarily resorting to the confrontational or hectoring tactics of the latent radical trade unionist in him.

    One of the most momentous decisions taken by the Oshiomhole-led National Executive of the APC so far is to utilize the method of direct primaries in picking candidates for elective offices at all levels with the exception of states where the majority of stakeholders opt for consensus or indirect primaries as permitted by the constitution of the party. This is indeed a revolutionary step to enthrone card carrying members of the party as the true sovereigns and owners of the party.

    If Oshiomhole and his NWC were actuated by a desire for concentration of power at the centre or opportunities to utilize his position as a means of accumulation, then the consensus or indirect delegates system would have been the preferred option for the NWC.  Empowering every party member to have a say in the emergence of candidates for elective offices decentralizes power within the party, re-federalizes the party structure and minimizes although not totally eliminating the influence of money in the candidate selection process.

    Of course, there is understandable resistance to this radical change from some quarters within the party who want the retention of the status quo. Oshiomhole has the responsibility of persuading and convincing the vast majority of party members that the direct primary method is in the best interest of the party. It is the best way of ensuring inclusiveness in the intra-party elections and limiting the possibility or efficacy of protest votes in general elections.

    Luckily, PMB has shown the way by not objecting to direct primaries in choosing the party’s presidential candidate. All levels of the party should certainly follow the president’s example. Osun State has already blazed the trail in showing that direct primaries are indeed feasible and practicable. The fear of insecurity can certainly not be an excuse. Otherwise, a persuasive case can also be made not to hold the 2019 general elections, which are even more all encompassing than intra-party elections, for security reasons.

    Those who claim that they do not have a reliable data base of party members have a point for exemption from direct primaries given the shortness of time. But this is an indication of leadership ineptness, which does not do the image of a self-proclaimed modernizing party of change like the APC any good.

    There are many factors that stand the APC governorship candidate in Osun in good stead for the September 22 governorship election. With a B. Sc degree in Insurance and an MBA from the University of Lagos, Alhaji Isiaka Oyetola is certainly knowledgeable in financial and economic management, which is crucial in a post-Aregbesola era. As Chief of Staff in the Aregbesola administration for over seven years, his office was critical in the conceptualization and implementation process of infrastructure projects and social welfare programmes, which makes him well placed to sustain and improve on the legacy of Aregbesola in this regard.

    Given his natural reticence, restraint and mature temperament, Oyetola is reputed to be a consummate negotiator with the capacity to maintain harmonious labour-government relations. Again, Oyetola has over 30 years experience in the private sector having run a solid and successful business before being appointed to public office. Not given to oratory or loquacity, the APC candidate is a restrained and competent technocrat in the mould of a Babatunde Raji Fashola (SAN) or Akinwumi Ambode, both highly accomplished successors of the visionary Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu in Lagos.

    All these factors pale into insignificance, however, beside the fact that Oyetola emerged through direct primaries garnering the support of no less than 127, 000 party members who already have a stake in the governorship election and will surely feel motivated to ensure their party’s triumph in the general election by participating enthusiastically in the exercise.

  • Neither Omooba Olumuyiwa Sosanya nor ANAN

    Yours truly was in Abuja on Thursday, August 30, as the reviewer of a new book on the accountancy profession in Nigeria titled ‘Revolution of Accountancy Profession in Nigeria’ and subtitled ‘History of the Association of National Accountants of Nigeria’. Written by the founder and first president of the Association of National Accountants of Nigeria (ANAN) between 1979 and 1996, Omooba Olumuyiwa Sosanya, this truly epochal book offers a titillating account of the evolution of the accountancy profession from ancient to modern times and paints an insightful picture of the growth and development of the accountancy profession in West Africa. Thereafter it zeroes in on the veritable revolution that the conceptualization and ultimate actualization of ANAN as the country’s second professional accountancy association was. This goal was achieved after a protracted struggle that lasted over 14 years with Omooba Sosanya at the forefront at every stage of the herculean battle.

    From the sowing of the seed for the formation of ANAN at a meeting in his Yaba, Lagos residence on November 6, 1978, attended by two other professional colleagues whom he describes as the ‘three men of history’ – the other two being  Olalere Akanbi Kolawole and Iyiola Olufemi Adefisayo – to the first announcement of the birth of the association in two full page advertisements in the Daily Times of 1ST January, 1979, the story of Sosanya’s professional life is intricately intertwined with that of the genesis, exodus and ultimately, revelation of ANAN.

    Prior to the emergence of ANAN, the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Nigeria (ICAN) enjoyed an absolute monopoly of regulating the accountancy profession in Nigeria courtesy of the ICAN Act of 1965, a law of the Nigerian parliament in the first republic. The monopoly enjoyed by ICAN understandably bred a restrictive and difficult to justify elitism, which saw ICAN producing only 55 accountants in the 13 years between 1965 and December 1978.

    As the author points out in the book, the Nigerian Law School comparatively produced 2,405 lawyers in the 12 years between 1966 and 1978. It was difficult not to come to the conclusion that ICAN was deliberately pursuing a policy of creating an artificial scarcity of accountants it deemed qualified to practice. This perception was reinforced by the fact that with the emergence of ANAN as a competing accountancy association, ICAN produced 300 professional accountants between in the four years between 1978 and 1981.

    The consequence of this unhealthy situation was a severe shortage of professional accountants in Nigeria with public and private organizations having to rely on foreign accountants from countries such as India, Pakistan and Philippines among others with the attendant drain of scarce foreign exchange resources from Nigeria. It was this entrenched, highly influential and enormously wealthy professional accountancy elite represented by ICAN that Omooba Sosanya mobilized his ‘forces’ to confront, and which they eventually overcame through the ANAN Decree 76 of 25th August, 1993, signed into law by military President, General Ibrahim Babangida; a historic legislation that broke the back of ICAN monopoly and ushered in a new, more vibrant and qualitative era in the evolution of accountancy in Nigeria.

    Earlier, the House of Representatives in Nigeria’s second republic had passed into law a Private Members Bill giving legal recognition to ANAN as Nigeria’s second professional accountancy association. The Bill was, however, technically killed in the Senate when it was passed to two committees for deliberation a day before the expiration of the life of the National Assembly. In his book , the author over 400 pages in 21 chapters gives graphic details of how he sustained and was the live fire of the struggle to actualize ANAN against all odds until the attainment of the goal in 1993. His claims are backed by 36 pages of photographs, newspaper clippings, photocopies of documents including bank receipt and other financial transactions.

    In my review of the book, I considered as quite preposterous and a travesty of justice what appeared to be deliberate attempts by Sosanya’s successors at ANAN’S helm, to obliterate his contributions to the founding and nurturing of the association for close to one and a half decades. However, a day before the official launch, ANAN published a full page advert in several national newspapers dissociating the association from the book. Contending that Omooba Sosanya had been expelled from the association for unspecified ‘subversive activities’, ANAN stressed that its founding President was unknown to the association by law and thus had no locus standi to write a history of the association.

    Obviously reacting to the ANAN disclaimer, many of the eminent invited guests, including Voice President Yemi Osinbajo (SAN), Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, General Ibrahim Babangida (Retd), General Abdulsalam Abubakar (retd) and the Emir of Kano, Alhaji Lamido Sanusi, stayed away from the event with some of them only politely sending representatives. Yet, to my utter surprise, the thousands of accountants who are opportune to practice today by virtue of their membership of ANAN were also not adequately represented at the book launch. I thought this was rather strange for an association which the author not only founded but led for 14 years.

    Yes, living witnesses to Sosanya’s struggles and claims in the book including Alhaji Sidi Ali, a member of the House of Representatives in the second republic and Mrs. Kehinde Ajoni, an officer of the federal Ministry of Justice at the time the ANAN law was drafted were on hand to testify to Omooba Sosanya’s indelible contributions to the struggles that birthed ANAN. Yet, that was hardly enough. I did not hear any key ANAN member cognizant of the origins of the association speaking up in defence of Sosanya. What could be responsible for this? There are divergent perspectives.

    A school of thought does not deny Sosanya’s struggles to get ANAN established but feels that he did not invest enough in ‘empowering’ other members of the association during his 14 years at the helm the way his successors did thus enabling them to continue to wield tremendous influence within the association. Others sympathetic to Sosanya see such ‘empowerment’ as nothing but another name for corruption and frittering away of resources, which the founding President, they claim, simply did not have at the time.

    Others are of the view that Sosanya wanted to continue to exert influence in running the affairs of ANAN even after he had ceased to be President leading naturally to resentment and resistance by his successors. From the pro-Sosanya perspective, however, the conduct of some of his successors in denouncing and playing down the founding President’s role in ANAN’S historical trajectory smacks of treachery and betrayal.

    Well, no matter what side one is, the truth is that neither Sosanya nor ANAN can be the ultimate winners as things now stand. ANAN’ rich history of heroic organizational struggle cannot be told without reference to the superhuman efforts of Omooba Sosanya. ANAN cannot continue to pretend that its first 14 years of existence is an illusion. Something cannot stand on nothing. But Omooba Sosanya, having spearheaded the founding of ANAN cannot claim to be its eternal personification and embodiment. The young must grow. Sosanya planted a seed that has now blossomed into a mighty Iroko tree, that transcends him – a feat for which he should justly be proud. There is no alternative to an amicable settlement of this entirely ego-driven rift among the contending parties.

     

     

     

  • Path to justice sector reforms

    Ordinarily, President Muhammadu Buhari’s submission at the opening of the 2018 Annual General Conference of the Nigeria Bar Association (NBA) on the relationship between the rule of law and national interest as well as security should not generate needless controversy. No society, democratic or otherwise, allows personal liberty to supersede considerations of national interest and security. As the President rightly, even if controversially, said: “However, let me remind you all, my dear compatriots that the law can only be optimally practiced in a Nigeria that is safe, secure and prosperous”.

    Although he did not give specific details, the president said “Our apex court has had cause to adopt a position on this issue in this regard and it is now a matter of judicial recognition that where national security and public interest are threatened or there is a likelihood of their being threatened, the individual rights of those responsible must take second place, in favour of the greater good of society”.

    Yes, law can only be practiced within the context of a safe, secure and prosperous country. But can sustainable safety, security and prosperity be achieved without the guarantee of the supremacy of the rule of law as a bulwark against descent to arbitrary rule? Nothing in history suggests that this is so. A fundamental difference between a dictatorship and a democracy is that in the former, the interest of the extant regime is conflated with national interest. In a democracy on the other hand, it is the constitution as interpreted by the judiciary, an independent arm of government that determines what constitutes a threat to or subversion of national interest.

    The executive cannot at once determine what constitutes a violation of national interest and security, pronounce as guilty those it perceives as being in breach of national security and interest as well as subject those so accused to prolonged imprisonment without trial in utter violation of court orders. If that happens, the bedrock of constitutional democracy, which is the submission of all those within a given territorial jurisdiction including the state to the sovereignty of the rule of law, has effectively been removed and nothing can sustainably continue to stand on nothing as the lawyers sagely remind us.

    Yes, PMB may be naturally restrained and mature in the utilization of the enormous state powers at his disposal. Already, however, the Nigerian presidency is perceived to be one of the most powerful offices in the world. Not every President coming after him can be expected to be a Buhari. We must be wary of creating precedents that more ruthless and Machiavellian occupants of the office in future can cite or exploit to hound perceived enemies and do grievous harm to the country’s democracy.

    PMB’s umbrage at the outrageous and unconscionable elite corruption responsible for the co-existence of obscene wealth for a few and the mass misery and impoverishment of the vast majority of Nigerians is understandable. It is dissatisfaction with this kind of gross inequity and injustice that informed the advocacy in a 1994 public lecture by legal icon, Professor Akin Oyebode, that “it was time we did away with the shibboleth of the rule of law and embrace the seemingly novel notion of the rule of just law or, more plainly, the rule of justice in order to re-establish the link between law and social reality”. This kind of elegant theorizing is in my view of little practical import in a liberal democracy like ours in terms of concrete policy.

    There are two options for us. We can opt for a revolutionary approach to fighting corruption, which will entail terminating the current democratic process and allow President Buhari because of his anti-corruption credentials, to transmute into a maximum ruler for an interim period in order to enable him frontally confront the scourge of corruption without the encumbrance of the rule of the law. Thereafter, we can return to the practice of democracy. After all, is it not possible to argue that elections in which allegedly corrupt persons who have acquired humongous amounts of stolen resources can legally contest and even win, constitute a violation of national interest and security? In choosing such a path, let us never forget Lord Acton’s proven iron law that ‘power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely’ no matter how saintly and well meaning its wielder may be perceived to be.

    On the other hand, there is the possibility of working carefully and meticulously within the context of the extant liberal democratic system to identify weaknesses and initiate far reaching justice sector reforms to gradually turn things around. This is exactly what Vice President Yemi Osinbajo did as Attorney General and Commissioner of Justice in Lagos State between 1999 and 2007. In a comprehensive account of his tenure when leaving office, Osinbajo itemized no less than 30 problems identified on his assumption of office in 1999 and the concrete actions taken to address them through the Justice Sector Reform Programme implemented from 1999 to 2007.

    These reforms were based on the recommendations of the Justice Committee, one of the Transition Working Groups inaugrated  by the then Governor-Elect, Senator Bola Ahmed Tinubu, at the Lagos Sheraton Hotel & Towers on January 25, 1999. Permit me to refer at some length to only three items in Professor Osinbajo’s report:

    1. ERADICATION OF CORRUPTION IN THE JUSTICE SECTOR

    Recommended Extract

    “Corruption is a matter of serious concern not just for the administration of justice but for governance as a whole. It is clear that the ability to deliver on election promises will largely depend on the availability of resources. Where resources have been looted, as has been the experience in the past years, service to the people is impossible…It is therefore critical that institutions and policies are created to eliminate corruption”.

    Action Taken

    “The state Government has addressed the problem of corruption, especially in the judicial system by taking prompt action to remove affected persons from office…At the same time, significant efforts are made to improve the recruitment process, enhance the welfare of judicial officers, establish transparent procedures and cultivate a culture of zero tolerance for corrupt practices. At the point of making judicial appointments, the input of the State Bar Association is sought on each applicant. This allows for better scrutiny of applicants’ records. Those who may have complaints against him/her are also thereby given the opportunity to speak up. Furthermore, all complaints against Judges and Magistrates are promptly investigated by the Judicial Service Commission. So far, 3 judges and 22 Magistrates have had their appointments terminated on account of this disciplinary process”.

    1. APPOINTMENT AND TRAINING OF JUDGES AND MAGISTRATES

    Recommended Extract“The 1999 Justice Committee recognized the fact that the number of judicial personnel was inadequate and that training facilities available to them were poor”

    Action Taken

    “During the past 7 years, over 30 High Court Judges and several Magistrates were appointed into the state judiciary. The process of selection has radically changed. The new policy entrenches merit as the principal consideration as rigorous tests and interviews now precede judicial appointments. Also potential lawyers are identified not only from the ranks of State Counsel and Magistrates but also among other lawyers in various fields of endeavour. This has considerably enriched the state Judiciary and changed the culture of judicial appointments for the better. In the Magistracy, promotion to higher levels now depends on performance in mandatory assessment examinations”

    1. OFFICE OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER (LEGAL AID SERVICES)

    Recommended Extract

    “The government of Lagos State must quickly carve a niche for itself as a serious believer in human rights. Government can actively collaborate with Faculties of Law of the two universities in Lagos and civil society groups to establish Legal Aid Clinics and Centres in the State”.

    Action Taken

    “The Lagos State Government established a full-fledged Directorate for Citizens Rights in the Ministry of Justice in 1999. The Directorate has, among others, the Office of the Public Defender (OPD), and the Human Rights Protection Unit (HRPU). OPD offers free legal advice/representation in civil and criminal matters to the poor and most vulnerable. At the moment OPD operates from 5 centres across the state and has about 40 full time lawyers…To institutionalize the concept of free legal services, the State Government has enacted the Lagos State Office of the Public Defender Law, Cap L82, Laws of Lagos State 2003 which sets up OPD as a statutory body with its own management and staff structure”.

    These are only three out of the over 30 reform initiatives in the Lagos State justice sector reforms contained in the Osinbajo 2007 report. Achieving meaningful justice sector reforms as well as meaningfully fighting corruption requires a well conceptualized and articulated plan and not the erosion of the rule of law or restricting democratic liberties. Critical to achieving this is a Minister of Justice/Attorney General with a capacity for hard work, attention to detail, passion for justice, creative thinking and impeccable integrity; an AGF with the human skills to mobilize the bar, the bench and civil society components to work harmoniously to achieve concrete positive reforms.

     

  • Exceptions to political vagrancy

    In the aftermath of the historic victory of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in the 2015 presidential elections, there was a mad rush of scores of leading members of the dislodged former ruling party, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), from their former political abode to the perceived new venue of sumptuous pecuniary dining. This trend has continued in the last three years despite the reputation of the President, General Muhammadu Buhari, as a no nonsense, tight fisted, corruption hating and fighting crusader.

    In the previous 16 years from 1999, the flow of political vagrancy, the rampant defections of political actors from one party to the other largely for selfish reasons than those of ideology or principle, was mostly from opposition parties to the PDP. The excessive centralization of power and resources in Nigeria’s largely unitary federal system makes it almost compelling for most members of a political class, dependent on the state for primitive accumulation and economic empowerment, to be members of the ruling party at the centre.

    Indeed, the success of the opposition APC in dislodging a ruling party from power at the centre for the first time in the country’s history was partly due to this culture of vagrancy, which saw a not insignificant faction of the PDP defecting to the opposition shortly before the election. The phenomenon of political vagrancy throws light on certain aspects of Nigeria’s political culture. One is the desperation of political actors to hold public office at all costs and by all means since state power is the most important source of material accumulation in our rentier economy.

    Another is the absence of any clear cut differences of ideological or even philosophical orientations beyond superficialities among the major political parties, which makes it easy for political actors to traverse diverse parties without moral compunction. Again, there is the lack of internal democracy within parties, which gives those who believe that they are denied a competitive level playing field in intra-party competitions, a plausible ground for jettisoning one party for another and casually returning to their former parties in the same cavalier manner they left. This is all in pursuit of personal interests. The APC’s new resort to direct primaries may be an antidote to this but that is a matter for another day.

    There have, however, been some notable exceptions to political vagrancy in Nigeria’s political evolution. Perhaps the most important factor in the sustenance and survival of the current democratic dispensation, for instance, was the stout and steadfast refusal of Asiwaju Bola Tinubu to play the political vagrant in the aftermath of the devastating loss of the defunct Alliance for Democracy (AD) to the PDP in the South West with the exception of Lagos in the 2003 elections. It was a testy and difficult moment. Tinubu was the last man standing in the AD. All his colleagues – Olusegun Osoba, Lam Adeshina, Bisi Akande, Niyi Adebayo and Adebayo Adefarati – had been dislodged in Ogun, Oyo, Osun, Ekiti and Ondo states respectively.

    It was only a matter of time, the PDP behemoth believed, before the diminutive Lagos helmsman would cross over to the happening party which at the time believed it would be in power for at least 60 years. But Tinubu chose to say no to vagrancy. He rallied his former South West governor colleagues to stand firm in the defense of progressive ideals in the South West. Aided partly by the exceptional ineptness and lack of vision or a sense of mission of the PDP South west governors, the progressives regained political vibrancy and electoral vitality in the 2007 elections. Through the courts they recovered stolen mandates in Osun,  Ekiti as well as the neighbouring Edo state.

    Tinubu remained at the centre of various experiments in party formation – Action Congress (AC), Action Congress of Democrats (ACD) and Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN)- all within the progressive social welfarist and federalist tradition but never considered the PDP an option  despite what is widely percieved as South West tactical contribution to Jonathan’s victory in 2011. A key component of the ruling APC, the South West progressives are today major participants in a democratically elected government at the centre for the first time in Nigeria’s history. The easier path would have been for Tinubu to succumb to political vagrancy in 2003 and migrate to the seemingly invincible PDP. He chose the narrower route of staying in opposition. That is a key reason why opposition survived in Nigeria and was gradually strengthened and able to successfully challenge and triumph over the ruling party in 2015.

    Chief Obafemi Awolowo was one of the most ideologically consistent politicians ever in Nigeria’s political history. He was the founder and leader of the country’s most disciplined and ideologically clear political parties – the Action Group (AG) and Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN) after Aminu Kano’s Northern Elements Progressive Union (NEPU) and Peoples Redemption Party (PRP) in the first and second republics. He ardently and earnestly desired to be President of Nigeria but would not compromise his ideological and philosophical beliefs to achieve this goal even though his UPN went into a tactical alliance with a faction of the conservative northern political class in 1983.

    In 1977, leaders of the Middle Belt in the Constituent Assembly met with Awolowo at his Apapa Park Lane residence and promised to support his presidential bid if he would appoint persons from the Middle belt as Finance and Foreign Affairs ministers. According to Mvendaga Jibo who was at the meeting, “To our utter amazement, Awolowo flatly refused to make any such commitments”. Desperation for office was not in his dictionary. Ironically, however, Awolowo’s party, AG, was believed to be the instigator of the first act of political vagrancy in Nigeria’s history.

    After the 1951 elections under the Macpherson constitution, the AG was believed to have exploited ethnic sentiments and alleged pecuniary inducement to prevent the popular National Council of Nigerian Citizens (NCNC) from forming the majority in the Western Regional House of Assembly. Some members of the NCNC including five members of the lbadan Peoples Party (IPP), which was in alliance with the NCNC,  defected to the AG on the eve of the convening of the new legislature in Ibadan on 7th January, 1952. This enabled the AG to form the regional government and utilizing its majority to prevent Dr. Nnamdi Azikwe, leader of the NCNC, from either heading the Western Regional government or even being elected to the federal legislature in Lagos from the Western Regional House of Assembly.

    Of course, I cannot understand why the great Zik would want to be Premier of the Western region when an Igbo, Dr. Michael Opara was Premier of the East and Alhaji Ahmadu Bello Premier of the North. But I digress. In the run up to the inauguration of the Western Regional Assembly, according to Alhaji Adegoke Adelabu, the great Penkelemesi, member of the IPP and NCNC as well as leader of opposition in the Western region, “We were daily progressively reduced to 42, 37, 33, 30, 38, 26, 25”. This depletion of the NCNC ranks he attributed to the fact that “our opponents had no scruples as to whether recruits belonged to their faith or not, as they had no worthwhile faith except feeding fat on the spoils of office”.

    In his last battle cry against political vagrancy, Adelabu declared “I advise all those who seek material gains and the spoil of office to move over into the other camp whilst there is still time. So far as I am concerned, if Dr. Azikwe and myself alone are left, I will go on fighting to my last breath. I will be happy”.

    President Muhammadu Buhari is another notable exception to the virus of political vagrancy. Even though he was in the political wilderness of opposition in the 16 years before his election, he never for once contemplated joining the ruling party. His previous contests for the presidency were on the platforms of the All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP) and Congress for Progressive Change (CPC). If wealth accumulation was his aim, migrating to the PDP would have been PMB’s best and wisest option.

    If he had done so, it would have been impossible for PMB to be a critical part of the APC merger and without his presence in the party it is doubtful if the victory of 2015 could have been achieved. How do we ensure a substantial increase in the number of principled and ideologically constant politicians in our polity and a continuing depletion of the tribe of  unprincipled political vagrants? That is the big question.

  • Beyond Lawal Daura

    At the end of the day, the sacked Director-General of the Department of State Services (DSS), Mr. Lawal Daura, may have done our democracy, the polity and the administration of President Muhammadu Buhari a great deal of good by his inexplicable decision, on Tuesday, August 7, to deploy about 100 mostly masked operatives to lay siege to the National Assembly barring access into the premises for hours.

    The real motive and influencing actors behind Daura’s action remain, so far, in the realm of conjecture. Was he acting out the script of members of the ruling party who ardently desired a change in the leadership of the National Assembly particularly the Senate? Could he bizarrely have been a willing puppet in the hands of a desperate Senator Bukola Saraki and his supporters who needed to win a substantial degree of public sympathy at all costs? Only a thorough going probe can unveil the truth. For now, Daura has borne the brunt as the man at whose desk the buck stops at the DSS. The only rational conclusion was that  the decision was solely that of Daura without consultation with higher authorities. This certainly should be a poignant lesson to all those tempted to utilize the agencies they head for purposes indefensible by law at the behest of forces that can so easily deny them if thing go awry.

    By moving decisively to terminate Daura’s appointment in defence of constitutionalism, democracy and the rule of law, Acting President Yemi Osinbajo (SAN), sent a strong signal that the Buhari administration could indeed act to check lawlessness or disregard for duly constituted authority. His National Assembly misadventure was obviously only the last straw that broke Daura’s professional back. He had been accused of several earlier infractions that simply beggar belief.

    If Daura’s dismissal from his very powerful and influential office demonstrates to other officers both within and beyond the top security hierarchy of the administration that no one is above the law despite PMB’s legendary patience and willingness to give his appointees a long rope, it would have served a useful purpose. We can recall, for instance, the tolerant stance that the President adopted towards Inspector General of Police, Ibrahim Idris, when he was informed on an official visit to Benue that the IG had flouted presidential orders to relocate to the state to check killings arising from herdsmen/farmers clashes. Those who think the administration possesses infinite patience to indulge impunity and that they can graduate from lower levels of lawlessness to ever spiraling heights of arbitrariness will surely be nudged to have a re-think.

    It is also not impossible that the seeming indifference, even complicity, of civil society elements including the media, intelligentsia and Civil Society Organizations to Daura’s alleged serial violations of the rule of law may have fuelled the sacked spymaster’s contempt for the law, democratic tenets and constitutionalism. When he raided the residences of Supreme Court justices or refused to release detainees on court orders, for instance, there was largely silence from these quarters. The conventional wisdom in public discourse when a few voices raised questions about the dangers of not fighting corruption within the framework of the rule of law was that such a notion was a luxury as corruption had to be vigorously and frontally tackled.

    The problem is that until the extant 1999 constitution is changed, it is only the law courts that can validly determine who is guilty of corruption or not. Anti-graft agencies under the control of the executive cannot just label individuals or groups as corrupt and unilaterally go ahead to indict and punish them. This indulgent posture of mainstream civil society may easily mislead those in positions of state authority to the conclusion that arbitrary and extra-judicial ways of fighting corruption enjoy popular support.

    One notable exception was frontline human rights lawyer, Mr. Femi Falana (SAN) who never ceased to advocate strenuously, for instance, for the release of illegally detained persons by the DSS under the watch of Daura. This, of course, is not to exonerate or say that those senior lawyers who seem to have made it their trademark to defend virtually all allegedly corrupt persons in the courts of law and employing all the tricks in their books to prolong the trials of their clients undulydo not frustrate the efforts of fighting corruption within the law. But that cannot be an excuse for the resort to arbitrariness or self-help by a government fighting corruption. In any case, it would appear to me that the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) has substantially taken care of these sorts of issues with some high profile cases successfully brought to a closure with indictments and prison terms following.

    Another factor that could have encouraged Daura in his National Assembly misadventure is the perceived widespread opprobrium with which the body is held by many Nigerians. He may have calculated that Nigerians hold the legislators in so much contempt that nobody would raise a finger at his atrocity. Yes, it is true that we may dislike, even absolutely condemn the way the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Senator Bukola Saraki and Honourable Yakubu Dogara, respectively, emerged as leaders of the National Assembly at the beginning of the 8th session as this column has severally done. Saraki has gone further to compound matters by defecting back to his former party, the PDP, without giving any indication of his willingness to relinquish the office of Senate President. The National Chairman of the APC, Comrade Adams Oshiomhole, has forcefully pointed out the absurdity of the Senate being led by a member of the minority party in the chamber.  Indeed, as it were both the Senate President and his deputy, Ike Ekweremadu, would now both come from the minority PDP. It is an unpleasant scenario.

    What we have on our hands, however, is in my view a matter of morality and not legality. Once the ruling party could not get its acts right at the commencement of the 8th cycle of the National Assembly due to the ill advised indifference of the President and the inexplicable impotence and lethargy of the erstwhile party leadership, the dynamics of balance of political forces within both chambers determined the outcome of their leadership contest. The challenge for the Oshiomhole-led National Working Committee (NWC) of the APC is to find a way of achieving its desired reconstitution of the leadership of the Senate to reflect the numerical strength of the parties in a manner  that is not inconsistent with the tenets of the constitution.

    No less galling, and justifiably so, to millions of Nigerians is the humongous allowances of between N13.5m and N15m that the legislators take home monthly in a badly impoverished country like ours. On this issue, I believe that the President can utilize the powers of his office to obtain all necessary information on the allowances of the legislators and lay all the facts before the public. He would thus be using the ‘bully pulpit’ of his office to mobilize public opinion in forcing the legislators to drastically cut down on their opulence.

    But to persistently denigrate the credibility and integrity of the legislature as an institution, in my view, does not bode well for democracy.  True, the notion of Separation of Powers as well as checks and balances is not meant to constitute a constitutional gridlock against the smooth running of government. But it would be a sorry day indeed in which the legislature becomes a rubber stamp to the executive at the national level. In the final analysis, the fate of any errant legislator rests with the electorate to determine through free and fair elections.

    The unfortunate Lawal Daura affair also brings to the fore, once again, the perceived immersion of security agencies in politics on the side of Any Government in Power. This, of course, has always been the case even before the commencement of this civilian dispensation in 1999.  This is one area where the ruling APC can initiate positive change to bequeath to the nation a security architecture that enjoys relative autonomy from the suffocating grip of any incumbent government.

    Really, the excesses and over zealousness  of some of the security and anti-corruption agencies can only be of negligible political value to PMB. Whatever may be the  challenges the ruling APC is facing and the perception of its level of performance as regards its change agenda, PMB still retains sufficient popular goodwill because of his own personal moral qualities to comfortably win the next election. The security agencies should not compound his problems through unsolicited partisan zealotry.

  • NSITF: No easy battle against impunity

    Nothing illustrates vividly the utter reign of impunity within the All Progressives Congress (APC) and its government at the centre than the face-off between the national chairman of the party, Comrade Adams Oshiomhole, and the Minister of Labour and Employment, Dr Chris Ngige, over the long delayed inauguration of the board of the Nigeria Social Insurance of Trust Fund (NSITF).  President Muhammadu Buhari had announced the constitution of the NSITF board in September, 2017, with respected labour leader, former General Secretary of the National Union of Petroleum and Natural Gas Workers (NUPENG), and redoubtable pro-democratic activist, Comrade Frank Kokori, as chairman. Despite the vehement clamour in diverse quarters including labour unions and the House of Representatives for the inauguration of the board, Dr. Ngige has continued to stall on the issue offering all kinds of untenable excuses for his inaction.

    Signaling that his tenure will not be reminiscent of the lethargic and indifferent leadership offered the party under the chairmanship of Chief John Odigie Oyegun, Oshiomhole on assumption of office fired a memo to Ngige giving him a time frame to constitute the NSITF board. When it became obvious that the minister was bent on persisting in his intransigence, Oshiomhole threatened not only to ensure Ngige’s suspension from the party but to also prevail on the President to drop him from the Federal Executive Council (FEC).  “If the president condones disrespect to his office, I will not condone disrespect to the party’, an exasperated Oshiomhole had declared.

    Was this a mark of disrespect for the president as mischievously insinuated in some quarters?  Certainly not. Placed within its proper context, the party chairman was clearly concerned with not only restoring discipline within the ranks of the APC, but also ensuring that all party members, no matter how highly placed, respect the office of the President. Oshiomhole had earlier lamented that some ministers were taking advantage of Buhari’s patience and ‘fatherly disposition’ to abuse their offices and disregard his directives.

    Ngige retorted that he was not scared of being suspended from the party saying “How (suspension)? In a party that we formed and brought them in? The man is talking out of ignorance”. It is utterly immaterial whether or not Ngige was the sole founder of the APC. He is not superior to the party on which platform his boss, the President was elected and thus enabled to appoint him as a minister. ‘Something cannot stand on nothing’ as the lawyers would say.

    Ngige, in responding to the party chairman’s memo had stated that he was unable to constitute the board of NSITF “because of cases of financial malfeasance, which have put the agency under investigation by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC)”. Specifically, the minister claims that his delay in constituting the board was to enable an Administrative Panel of Inquiry probe the alleged misappropriation of N48 billion at the Fund with N5 billion disappearing in one day without vouchers.

    This is a serious allegation most certainly. But Ngige does not explain in what way the inauguration of the new board would hinder the work of the investigative panel. Should the sins of the previous board, if proven in a court of law, be visited on innocent members of a newly constituted board? If such alleged gargantuan fraud could be perpetrated with a board in place, who knows what atrocities may be taking place right now without the existence of a board and the minister effectively functioning as sole administrator of the agency?

    Indeed, will the battle against the alleged fraud at the NSITF not be enhanced by the functioning of the board headed by a man with the moral integrity and impeccable pedigree of Frank Kokori? In any case, the United Labour Congress (ULC) has debunked claims by the minister’s spokesmen that those indicted in the fraud include nominees of the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) and Nigeria Employment Consultative Association (NECA). In the words of General Secretary of the ULC, “This is contrary to the fact that as we speak, six former directors of NSITF have been charged to court by the EFCC including NECA representative and there is no Labour man in it. Only the minister can tell Nigerians where he got his own conclusions from”.

    The ULC also asserts most tellingly that “We are also not unmindful of the implications of setting up an administrative panel in a matter already investigated by the EFCC which to us is a clear indictment of the EFCC. Was the Minister passing a vote of no confidence?” Responding to Oshiomhole’s argument that arbitrariness in running the affairs of the Fund, including award of contracts, could be perpetrated in the absence of a board, Ngige contended that neither the minister nor the board have the authority to award contracts in the NSITF or any other federal agency.

    According to him, “For the purpose of clarity, the Ministerial Tenders Board (MTB) for the award of contracts in any ministry; is made up of the Permanent Secretaries as Chairman and his directors. In the parastatals, the Parastatals Tenders Board consists of Chief Executive Officer (Director-General or Managing Director) and his directors”. Surely, this is pure sophistry. In reality, no contract can be awarded in any MDA without the full knowledge and involvement of the Minister who alone sits at the FEC. Even then, is Ngige insinuating that boards of parastatals have no meaningful functions and thus should be scrapped?

    It is pertinent to note that the Association of Banks, Insurance and Financial Institutions (ASSBIFI) had in February called on President Buhari to stop the alleged secret recruitment of additional 350 senior managers into the NSITF by the minister in the absence of a board and despite the financial difficulties confronting the Fund. Surely, these kinds of unhealthy speculations, allegations and insinuations can be curtailed with a board in place that guarantees greater managerial scrutiny, accountability and transparency.

     

    Unremitted stamp duty: Disrespecting PMB

    The issue of the unremitted Stamp Duty amounting to over N20 trillion, which ought to have accrued to the Federation Account since 2012 through the Nigeria Inter-Bank Settlement System Plc (NIBSS) has been in the public domain for some time now. It has been the subject of intense media focus through news, analyses, commentary and editorials. The House of Representatives as well as the Nigeria Governors Forum (NGF) have also intervened in the matter urging that the fund be paid into the Federation Account for distribution among the severely cash-strapped   levels of government as required by law. As holder of the intellectual property right on Stamp Duty recovery collection and remittance, the School of Banking Honours (SBH) through its Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Tola Adekoya, met with former President Goodluck Jonathan on the issue to no avail.

    However, in line with his legendary disdain for corruption, PMB on 12th of October, 2017, intervened decisively in the matter and directed the then Acting Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Dr. (Mrs.) Habiba M. Lawal to communicate the following decisions to the SBH “(i) That you are jointly mandated to recover over N20 Trillion from Nigerian Inter Bank Settlement System (NIBSS) to the Federation Account in line with your patent right, now in force. (ii). That your consultancy fee is 7.5% of the total amount recovered as against 20% earlier agreed in the Master Services Agreement with the Nigeria Postal Service (NIPOST). (iii).That the Federal Government of Nigeria will provide you and your partner (International Investment Law & Arbitration LLC) with adequate security during the assignment. (iv). That your services, along with your partner, are now being retained as standing Consultants to vanguard stamp duty collections to the Federation Account on behalf of the Federal Government of Nigeria”.

    To underscore his seriousness, PMB issued necessary directives on the matter to the Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Mr. Godwin Emefiele through a letter (Reference; SGF. 45/XII/71) signed by Dr. (Mrs.) Lawal stating among others “I write to inform you that Mr. President has approved the appointments of Messrs. School of Banking Honours and International Investment Law & Arbitration LLC, as Consultants to recover the sum of N20.0 trillion Stamp Duty unremitted by Banks and other Financial Institutions into Government Coffers, through the Nigeria Inter-Bank Settlement System Plc. (NIBSS). (2). The consultants will introduce a sustainable template to meet the CBN directive of 3rd December, 2012, for Messrs. School of Banking Honours to sweep Stamp Duty accruing from banks and other financial institutions into Government coffers, as patented under the law. (3). The Consultants are to report directly to Mr. President, through the Secretary to the Government of the Federation. Consequently, you are hereby required to direct the Management of NIBSS, Banks and other Financial Institutions to cooperate with the Consultants to access all records relevant to the success of the assignment”.

    Despite these explicit directives conveyed to the NIBSS by the CBN, the former has blatantly refused to comply. And in seeming reward for this insubordination and impunity, President Muhammadu Buhari has nominated the Managing Director of NIBSS, Mr. Folashadun Adebisi Shonubi, for the position of CBN Deputy Governor; a nomination awaiting the confirmation of the Senate. Surely, there is something seriously amiss. This column urges the National Assembly to diligently investigate this issue before confirming the nomination.

  • Not yet his finest hour

    From his native Isan-Ekiti to Ado-Ekiti, capital of the ‘state of the virtuous’ the eruptions of joy and celebration that greeted the electoral victory of Dr. Kayode Fayemi of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in last Saturday’s governorship election in Ekiti State was reminiscent of Christ’s triumphal entry into Jerusalem at the height of his earthly acclaim. Of course, it is no surprise that the losing and sulking incumbent governor, Ayodele Fayose, claims that there was no celebration after the declaration of Fayemi’s victory wondering why this should be so if the latter had indeed won the votes of the majority of the electorate as claimed by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). It is only natural that the understandable gloom and mourning of his defeated and deflated supporters would blind Fayose to the ecstatic jubilations of the winning side.

    Only four years ago, Fayemi had suffered a most humiliating electoral crucifixion on the painful Golgotha of the hardy and rugged hills of Ekiti’s political terrain. A highly acclaimed performing incumbent had lost to his often exuberant, uncoordinated and unfocussed challenger in all 16 Local Government Areas of the state. It was thus not surprising that many had begun to sing the ‘Nunc Dimitis’ of Fayemi’s political career.  One of the formidable nails used to secure Fayemi’s 2014 electoral crucifixion was the massive deployment of security agencies by the PDP-controlled Federal Government to intimidate, disorient, demoralize and disorganize the opposition. Another was the disbursement of billions of Naira to induce the electorate while preventing Fayemi’s ACN from deploying its own resources.

    All of these were critical factors in Fayemi’s 2014 loss. But no less contributory to his electoral crucifixion, were Fayemi’s self-inflicted nails of political aloofness, complacency, exclusion and perceived intellectual haughtiness that alienated his government not only from the general populace but also from critical segments of his own party in Ekiti. And this was despite his undisputed admirable performance in the sphere of governance, which impacted the state positively in diverse areas including roads and infrastructure, education, social welfare, health, tourism and industrialization to name a few. This is why there was not the least whimper or protest at Fayemi’s incredible loss or the PDP’s electoral atrocities anywhere in Ekiti State at the calamity that had befallen the ACN in 2014.

    Last Saturday in the Ekiti election, Fayemi and the All Progressives Congress (APC) executed what was the political equivalent of Christ’s resurrection from the dead.  The huge stone blocking the entrance of Fayemi’s perceived political grave was rolled away. A triumphant Fayemi rose from the political dead and is set to be sworn in as the elected governor of the state for the second time. It sounds like a fairy tale. But it is all too true. Yet, the cerebral, industrious and dignified candidate of a party that proclaims its moral Puritanism from the hilltops had no choice but to claw his way back to power using the same depraved and perverse ethical tactics and methods of the much despised PDP.

    It is perhaps not the APC’s fault that, while it hates the faeces of corruption with all its might, it had no choice but to feast on the maggots of security intimidation and abuse as well as alleged massive vote buying in what the inimitable Tunde Odesola of The Punch describes as ‘Ekiti’s political stock market’. Of course, this column does not engage in starry eyed political idealism. Even President Muhammadu Buhari recently lamented the humongous amounts of stolen money available to the opposition to buy votes in contemporary Nigeria. Only a ruling party intent on losing power to an amoral opposition would seek to play the saint during elections and demonstrate an aversion to vote buying in an underdeveloped political culture like ours worsened by pervasive and dehumanizing poverty.

    The danger, however, is that the APC is not unlikely to have to resort to these odious tactics reminiscent of the PDP to retain power at the centre in the 2019 elections. If he gets a second term in office as is highly probable, PMB will thus most likely spend eight years in office with his much admired personal integrity hardly making a dent on the country’s perverse and decadent social and political values that formed the core of the APC’s change mantra.

    If the federal government spokesman, Alhaji Lai Mohammed, is to be believed, Fayemi’s victory in the Ekiti governorship election was a referendum on the performance of the Buhari administration. For Lai Mohammed, the election is an indication that “Nigerians have spoken about their perception and acceptance of President Muhammadu Buhari’s administration”. This kind of simplistic mono-causal explanation of the outcome of the Ekiti elections is as superficial as Fayose’s  claim before the polls that the contest was between PMB and himself. It was nothing but delusionary.

    Going by Lai Mohammed’s postulation, Fayose and the PDP certainly have every cause to congratulate and pat themselves on the back for their performance in Ekiti last Saturday. For, it means that the APC despite the celebrated integrity and credibility of its President, the intensity of its chest-beating on its anti-corruption war,  the party’s self-assessed admirable performance and the humonguous funds it allegedly expended only managed to defeat a morally damaged PDP and a glaringly non-performing Fayose with a margin of less than 5% of the votes.

    What if Fayose had been a more credible and competent incumbent or if he had given the PDP candidate, the more cerebral, credible and restrained Professor Kolapo Olusola-Eleka, the chance to be his own man and campaign on his own merit ? The story may well have been different. APC certainly has serious cause for worry and much redemptive soul-searching.

    However, one of the spokesmen of the presidency, Mallam Shehu Garba, thankfully offered a more nuanced and well considered appraisal of the pertinent factors in the APC victory in Ekiti. These include Buhari’s steadfast support, Fayemi’s own inclusive, measured and mature campaign; the unanimous support of APC South-West leaders inspired and energized by Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu as well as the fidelity of Fayemi’s co-aspirants at the primaries to their pledge accept the outcome of a free and fair intra-party process and remain loyal to the party and its candidate.

    On its part, the PDP has attributed the APC’s victory in the election to massive rigging of the vote and outright announcement by INEC of fake results. It remains for the PDP to prove its claims through the judicial process as it has the constitutional and democratic right to do. But it is doubtful if it will make much headway. Fayemi’s victory with the APC winning in 12 of 16 Local Government Areas including Fayose’s local government appears more credible than PDP’s 16-0 victory in 2014.

    PDP’s claims of rigging sound as preposterous as the chimera of the ‘photocromic’ rigging mechanism dreamed up by the leaders of the defunct ACN to explain the party’s trouncing by Fayose in 2014. Rather, the PDP should look to Fayose’s insufferable arrogance, his utter indifference to the number of leading members of the PDP that left the party in droves largely due to his perceived high handedness, his government’s inability to showcase any meaningful performance and his childish, uncouth utterances and theatrics that negatively affected the chances of an otherwise brilliant, modest and likeable PDP candidate.

    Last Saturday’s outing was undoubtedly a fine hour for Dr. Kayode Fayemi. His swearing in come October will be an even finer hour for the scholar, politician and statesman. But the challenges ahead of the governor-elect are daunting. He ran an inclusive campaign. It will be an even more gargantuan challenge running an inclusive administration that carries not only his party but even the opposition along. Yet, that will be crucial to the success of his second coming. He has already whetted the appetites of the people of Ekiti by his post-election statements that not only evince maturity and a conciliatory spirit but are also redolent of preparedness, sure footedness and a readiness to pursue the ‘greatest happiness of the greatest number of the people.’

    Fayemi’s finest hour will come when he has been able, through the requisite maturity, wisdom, political tact and sagacity, generousity of spirit and large heartedness, return Ekiti to the pathways of peace, progress and prosperity thus enabling his party, at the end of his tenure, to produce a successor to build on the foundation he lays. I wish him luck and God’s guidance.

  • PMB and the limits of loyalty

    Loyalty is unquestionably a key element of President Muhammadu Buhari’s political philosophy even if he has not espoused any systematic or coherent set of principles or ideas that guide his politics. Buhari is enamoured of loyalty and seemingly finds those who proclaim their fanatical commitment to him from the rooftops particularly endearing.  But then, Buhari is not alone in this. Most political leaders in history, across time and space, have cherished the loyalty of their aides and associates, above all other virtues.  Many great historical personages have been undone, sometimes fatally, by the treachery and betrayal of those in whom they reposed much trust.

    PMB has personally experienced the painful thrusts of treachery and disloyalty when the military regime he headed alongside the late General Tunde Idiagbon was overthrown in 1985.  The forceful change was effected through a palace coup conceptualized and executed by insiders in the top hierarchy of the regime right in the inner recesses of state power.  But then, it could be argued that the logic of forceful seizure of power by the military is that those who assume office through the barrel of the gun can also be forcibly removed legitimately by the barrel of the gun. It is not a question of morality.

    In the aftermath of his 1985 ouster from power, Buhari was in forced incarceration for about three years. That experience, some suggest, may subliminally be responsible for PMB choosing the heads of practically all security agencies from his part of the country and with all of them also being of the same religious faith. The implication is that these are the heads of our security architecture that PMB can feel safe and secure with. Of course, there is no way to prove this. But PMB’s greatest strength and defence, he should know, lies not in force of arms through the military but rather in the support of millions of ordinary Nigerians who admire his asceticism, discipline, simple outlook on life and his relentless onslaught against corruption.

    In 1985, PMB and Idiagbon were patriotically fixated on fighting corruption but remained absolutely impervious to loud outcries from the populace on the excruciating impact the regime’s policies was having on them particularly in the areas of human rights violations. Nobel laureate, Professor Wole Soyinka, was forced to declare at that time that the public seemed to be talking to a deaf and dumb government.  Of course, the wily and politically astute Ibrahim Babangida and his collaborators took advantage of the situation to seize power.

    Today, PMB once more wields power legitimately acquired through the ballot box within the context of constitutional democracy.  But again, just as during his earlier coming as military Head of State in 1984, the PMB administration is frontally and aggressively fighting corruption while remaining utterly indifferent to outrageous public outcry on diverse issues. These include, unlawful detention of persons despite court rulings to the contrary, rampant nepotism, non-inclusive governance, alleged double standards in the war against corruption as well as the unprecedented and manifestly dangerous appointment of heads of the various arms of the military as well as those of paramilitary and security agencies from the North with most of them being Muslim to boot.

    This time around, the danger is not military intervention. Nigeria has thankfully evolved beyond that stage in the process of our political development with 19 years of unbroken civilian rule over the last 19 years. However, the All Progressives Congress (APC) must realize that it is not immune from the kind of electoral tsunami that swept away the PDP in 2015, following the latter’s arrogance, insensitivity, unconscionable corruption and the complacency arising from its delusion of being ordained to be in power indefinitely irrespective of the will of the people.  The APC must be wary of treading that path, which it unfortunately is doing now, unless it plans to remain in office in 2019 in spite of, rather than as a result of the freely expressed will of the people.

    One admirable feature of PMB’s leadership style is his fierce and uncompromising loyalty to his appointees and associates. This can be a positive strength but it can also be a great weakness. It might inspire some to work hard, always going the extra mile to compensate for the loyalty of the boss and his faith in them. For others, it might encourage a sense of lethargy, indolence and complacency in the belief that they are untouchable and can do no wrong as far as their principal is concerned.

    The spate of sustained killings across the country particularly through the nefarious activities of ‘unknown herdsmen’ has elicited widespread calls for the appointment of new service chiefs. However, PMB has remained stoically impervious to and absolutely unperturbed about this demand from large sections of the citizenry.  Rather, he has extended the tenure of the service chiefs twice upon the expiration of their statutorily stipulated terms in office. This column does not believe the service chiefs should be sacked because of the security situation in the country.

    They certainly have tried their best and made some impact especially in substantially caging the Boko Haram monster in the North East. Even if PMB removes the service chiefs today, it will not necessarily bring about an automatic end to the diverse security challenges confronting the country. No less critical is the need to urgently and radically re-configure our entire security architecture to achieve greater operational and functional efficacy in a culturally diverse, politically complex, ethnically plural, geographically vast and supposedly federal polity like ours.

    This column believes there are three reasons why PMB should urgently allow the service chiefs to bow out honourably and let fresh hands take their place. Firstly is the fact that statutorily, their tenures have expired and PMB must maintain his reputation as a stickler for due process. No matter how well they may have done, others should also be given an opportunity to showcase their abilities and bring fresh ideas into the struggle to confront and contain the country’s sundry security challenges. Secondly, the continuation in office of these service chiefs beyond their statutory terms creates the impression that they are indispensable and that there are no competent hands to take over from them. This will certainly have serious implications for morale, sense of fulfilment as well as self-confidence down the hierarchical chain of command. Thirdly, PMB can utilize the opportunity of appointing new service chiefs to address the very serious issue of the obvious ethno-regional and religious skewing of security appointments in favour of the north – an issue that is daily eroding the President’s good will.

    Buhari, El-rufai and Yaya Bello
    Buhari, El-rufai and Yaya Bello

    In any case, what exactly is loyalty? Are many of those proclaiming themselves to be fanatical ‘Buharists’ today, doing so because they love him or because of the benefits they are reaping from his present position? Let us take Governor Nasir el Rufai of Kaduna State for instance. Today he poses continuously as an unrepentant ‘Buharist’. Yet, is this not the same el Rufai, who as head of the Bureau of Public Enterprises, endlessly sang former Vice President Atiku Abubaka’s praises to high heavens claiming that Atiku never interfered in the privatization process?

    When Atiku fell out with President Obasanjo, el-Rufai, made a 180 degrees turn and began his new swan song portraying his new benefactor, Obasanjo, as a saint and Atiku as  corrupt villain. Today, el Rufai is at the fore front of the ‘Buhari is our Messiah’ orchestra. Where he will be tomorrow on the political spectrum will certainly not be a matter of principle or honest conviction but one of expediency, opportunism and personal aggrandizement. This is a perfect example of chameleonic loyalty.

    Or take my governor, the youthful and ebullient Yahaya Bello of Kogi State.  Here was a man who was at the forefront of the advocacy for the extension of the tenure of the Chief John Odigie-Oyegun-led National Working Committee (NWC). When he saw that PMB was unbending in his resolve that the APC constitution must be adhered to and congresses and the convention held, Bello quickly made an amazing somersault. He told an obviously astonished and startled Oyegun at a party meeting at the APC national secretariat that he was prepared to dive into fire if that was PMB’s wish.

    Pronto, the next time we saw Bello, His Excellency was on crutches, his right foot heavily bandaged. The inimitable Azu Ishiekwene, publisher of The Interview and columnist, speculated that Bello may have sustained the injury while rehearsing the art of fire diving. I am reliably informed that some citizens of Kogi State have since embarked on intensive prayer and fasting to influence PMB to request his beloved son to take a dive into a blazing inferno.

    There is no doubt that this kind of prayer is being uttered with undisguised ‘malicious and malignant’ intent (apologies to T.M. Aluko). PMB should certainly be wary of Bello’s kind of acrobatic loyalty. As for Mr. President, your loyalty should, first and last sir, be to the constitution and people of Nigeria and not to those who proclaim their love for you from the hilltop for selfish gains.

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

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

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

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

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

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

    My favourite chapter in this book is titled ‘Africa’s Development Crisis in Historical Perspective’ by the late Professor J.F Ade-Ajayi; a chapter in which a scholar I had assumed to be essentially of a conservative cast traces the developmental travails of the continent to the legacy of foreign conquests such as the Arab and Atlantic slave trade, colonialism and neocolonialism. That chapter reminds one of the immortal Walter Rodney in his ‘How Europe Underdeveloped Africa’. Writing about the legacy of colonialism, for instance, Ajayi perspicaciously observes that “The interest of the European powers in Africa was to disrupt existing lines of intra-African trade, and channel all effort into the production of primary crops required for export, and encourage importation of European goods even if it meant destroying local manufactures, crafts and industries. Thus, it has been said, Africa learnt to produce what it did not consume and to consume what it did not produce”.

    Professor Ajayi points out that our inability to genuinely decolonize after independence meant a failure to confront the past and make genuine amends. Consequently this implies “a carry-over of the disabilities from the slave trade era to the colonial period, and from the colonial period into the period after independence. This often involved a loss of self-esteem, an undue willingness to substitute dependence on charity for self-confidence and self-reliance, an attitude sometimes referred to as evidence of “colonial mentality”.

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

  • Towards a farewell to poverty

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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