The Nation Newspaper

Category: Sunday

  • War against indiscipline (?): Some areas to interrogate (2)

    War against indiscipline (?): Some areas to interrogate (2)

    If you discover someone on phone lying about his location: shout change #

    It his first coming as head of state in ‘84, with his stern-faced deputy, General Tunde Idiagbon, standing ramrod by his unsmiling self, General Muhammadu Buhari launched what one now hopes would be only the first phase of his War Against Indiscipline (WAI1). If  WAI was in 1984 conceived  as a crusade,  essentially against general indiscipline, and targeted, essentially, at the problem of  idleness in the  work place by public servants and to address  some social laxity amongst the citizenry at large; which then resulted in Nigerians queuing up at bus stops,  a Second Phase War Against Indiscipline, in the year of our Lord  2015, when Nigeria has turned  full scale, a Sodom and Gomorrah –no thanks to PDP’s  congenital profligacy spanning 16 years – must be much deeper, more encompassing and  must interrogate far more areas than it did in its first coming. It must enlist all, and every Nigerian, and have no go areas even if it appeared to dovetail into the functions of some other agencies of government.

    In the article: ‘Nigerians Talking About The Change We Need’ (Sunday 12 April, 2015), I showcased those things that could be regarded as WAI’s underpinning fundaments and they can very well be repeated here; though there are much more as we shall see shortly:

    CHANGE STARTS WITH US:

    When somebody in the car ahead of you throws wastes on the road, drive next to him, roll down your window and shout, “change!” ,#ChangeNigeria.

    When you are on a queue and someone tries to force his/her way in front of you, scream “change!!”. #ChangeNigeria.

    At the point of entry, either at an air or sea port, or at a border with our neighbours, a custom or immigration official shows up asking for bribe, shout Change. # Change Nigeria.

    If you see display of fake products in a supermarket or drug store or spare parts shop: shout Change. #Change Nigeria.

    To any lecturer that is hell bent on collecting bribe, in cash or in kind:  harass him with Change. # Change Nigeria.

    To any public/private servant stealing from our national heritage, shout Change! # Change Nigeria#

    When a police officer stops your car and says “Oga, anything for the boys?” tell him, “change!” #ChangeNigeria

    When you walk past any Nigerian who throws paper or banana peel on the floor, stop him and tell him, “change!” #ChangeNigeria.

    If the church opposite your house is using a loud speaker to disturb the neighbourhood, visit the pastor & say, “change sir!” #ChangeNigeria

    If you are in a bus and the driver is driving like mad, shout “change!” #ChangeNigeria.

    If the mosque opposite your house is using a loud speaker to disturb the neighbourhood, visit the Imam & say, “change sir!” #ChangeNigeria.

    When somebody is trying to jump a queue either at the bank, fuel station or at an ATM stand: shout Change. #Change Nigeria #

    When an electricity official cuts your light unjustly, trying to extract a bribe: shout Change. # Change Nigeria#.

    If you discover someone on phone lying about his location: shout change #

    If you discover a man or a woman cheating on the spouse: whisper CHANGE!

    When a fuel attendant wants to under dispense fuel into your vehicle, remind him about “Change” #Change Nigeria#

     Nigerians, in all spheres of life, must be ready to talk, even shout, when we observe any acts of indiscipline and, in particular, when agencies of government, are seen to be under-performing or their chief executives are committing serial acts of illegality as I have personally done in the past concerning some agencies and would also do in this piece about another high profile agency.

    In the article:  ‘Defending  Bigotry  And  Cant  At  INEC  And FCC’ ,  (September 16, 2012 ), I took  the  two commissions  to task over  a series  of  issues relating to membership of committees in INEC.  Though it must be stated early that Professor Atahiru  Jega reacted  very quickly to the issues raised  by immediately re-jigging the committees, the culpability of the latter commission remains  till date because, as I shall show  below, other agencies of government are still neck deep in nepotism – which was, of course, not the problem with INEC. In the article under reference, I had written as follows: ‘ … INEC and the Federal Character Commission have to do more to convince Nigerians that they have no ulterior motives. Nothing can be more indicative of the synergy between the Independent National Electoral Commission and the Federal Character Commission in their determined bid to protect inequity at INEC than the fact that while Prof Jega had caused Kayode Idowu, his Chief Press Secretary, to do a lengthy defence of INEC’s indefensible management composition, Prof Oba has, himself, resorted to granting newspaper interviews to achieve the same result. But only the unwary can be deceived by either of these two professors who head very vital, indeed strategic, national institutions’.

    I expect  that when I cite another public agency, allegedly  committing, and has committed, massive irregularities in its employment  system, the Executive Chairman of the Federal Character Commission would have a different explanation from what he said in the INEC case. Said Professor Abdulraheem Oba then: “the Federal Character Commission is essentially focused on the public service recruitment at the entry point only. That is when we ensure equity of opportunity of all persons to be able to enter into an establishment by drawing the benchmark for merit.” Speaking further, he said: “at the management level, we encourage all establishments that when it comes to management positions, there must be a practice of equity of distribution of offices among the various interest groups in Nigeria. Our circulars say that that for all establishments, all management positions must be advertised and made public.”

    If the above position is true, then he must be ready to explain to Nigerians something about the veracity, or otherwise, of the following information which has gone viral on the internet as it concerns the National Communications Commission (NCC). Readers should please not rush to the conclusion that I am affirming what, as at now, is only an allegation. And, if of a fact, the named Chief Executives committed those out rightly illegal acts, they will, in my view, not be more guilty than those in charge of the Federal Character Commission for permitting such impunity as none was known to have been reprimanded or punished during their tenure. It should therefore be appreciated if the named, former and serving NCC Chief Executives, and the Federal Character Commission, would respect Nigerians, and take time out of  whatever it is they now do, to  react to the following  allegations contained in an e-mail captioned:  ‘The Shocking  Roll Call Of  Nigeria Communications  Commission’s  (NCC) Executive  Vice Chairman’s/CEO’s’.

    1. Engr. C. IROMANTU(1993 to 1999)-6 yrs from S/EAST..he employed 168 new staffers..149 from S/EAST

    2. Engr Emmanuel NNMA(1999 to 2000) 6months; from S/EAST..he employed 79…66 from S/EAST.

    3. Engr Earnest NDIKWE(2000 to 2010)10 yrs; from S/EAST..he employed 310 …288 from S/EAST

    4. Dr. Eugene JUWA (2010 to date)5 yrs; from S/SOUTH..he employed 188..110 from S/SOUTH, 60 frm S/EAST!

    5. From 1993 to date ALL major Contractors, Consultants, Contracts & Interventional Capital Projects are 90% tilted in favour of S/EAST & S/SOUTH

    Let me quickly say that whoever knows where Chief Executives from other parts of the country have done, or are doing the same thing, he/she should kindly, very quickly, inform the columnist so we could also advertise their iniquitous and  shameless behaviour. It is also my sincere hope that this unfair treatment meted out to Nigerians from other parts, and perpetrated by individuals from sections of the country at the helm of affairs in not less than 70 percent of regulatory agencies in President Jonathan’s  Nigeria, is not symptomatic of what is happening in  the other agencies.

    It is also hoped that in the new spirit of CHANGE, this write-up will not be subjected to the usual scurrility which the likes of Sam Omatseye, Chairman, Editorial Board of this newspaper, and, lately Ambassador Bade Afuye (Retd), and Remi Oyeyemi were subjected to by Igbo readers for doing no more than express their opinions on matters that concern us all.

  • Implications of Change Manifesto (3)

    Implications of Change Manifesto (3)

    The ethic of change requires that those who fought murderously against change are not allowed to become decision makers in the party of change

    Last week, we concluded that fighting corruption would require addressing the facilitation of corruption by a political structure that creates utter alienation between the citizenry and government, in particular the destruction of the country’s tradition of federal governance and installation over the years of a unitary governance structure and culture. We also warned the new president against surrendering to any effort to blackmail him by those who want to be seen as heroes of the Jonathan national dialogue of 2014 and of the cosmetic devolution in the constitutional amendments recently rejected by President Jonathan.

    The argument in this respect is that recommendations from the Jonathan national conference and the amendments from the departing legislature lack proper democratic participation by citizens, especially that both lack opportunity for citizen participation by the way of referendum. Following the axiom of “What is worth doing at all is worth doing well,” the president should be given the opportunity to employ a proper process and move away from the notion that any respectable federal system can be sustained with federal allocation to federating units from rents collection. The column today will continue the discussion of implications of Change Manifesto for the way the country is governed by the new president and the All Progressives Congress in the next four years.

    Given the mass defection from the PDP to the APC since the presidential election, it is important for the new president and his party to be cautious about politicians who are afraid of opposition and thus need to rush to every new party that is in power. It is normal for the wary to pay attention to the rush to the new governing party by those who served as cheer leaders in the last sixteen years to the PDP in its personalisation of the state.

    A Yoruba proverb: Agbara ojo ko nioun o nii w’ole, onile ni ko nii gba fun un (Flood from rain does not shy away from destroying houses, it is the landlords that must guard against this) is worth the attention of the new president and his party. Those who participated in encouraging the PDP to disregard and misjudge the citizenry to the point of losing citizens’ confidence may not be coming to the president’s party because they believe in the platform of change. The exodus from the party of yesterday to the party of today may be because the defectors or carpet crossers, to put it euphemistically, are afraid of not having immediate access to a new political patronage network. The ethic of change requires that those who fought murderously against change are not allowed to become decision makers in the party of change. Defectors would need to be watched, not necessarily by leaving them with “empty stomachs” as President Jonathan has feared while APC members are overfed from the loot of office, but principally because there should be no room for feeding even APC party members from what in normal circumstances is meant to be used to make life easier for all citizens.

    It is reassuring that the president-elect has already announced to those running around Abuja, Kaduna, and Daura for ministerial positions that he will require that every minister in his government declare his or her assets. But care must be taken to go beyond asset declaration as a mere symbolic action. Each candidate for ministerial position must be made to show proof of how he or she came about the assets declared. This should include proof of taxes paid by candidates for ministerial positions. Many of our ministers and governors in the past had declared assets without showing any proof of source of the property they claimed on their asset declaration forms. Such requirement is likely to keep those who had benefited from corruption in the past from becoming major public policy makers in the government of change.

    Since the most visible aspect of governance by the PDP in the last sixteen years has been the rule of impunity as distinct from the rule of law, the new president must lead by the power of example, rather than the example of power, which was the core characteristic of PDP’s governance style from Obasanjo to Jonathan. There should be no room for the politics of vindictiveness and marginalisation in the government of President Buhari. Regardless of who voted for whom, General Buhari has become the president of Nigeria the moment he had the majority required for gaining that office. No section of Nigeria must be made to experience the marginalisation that the Yoruba region experienced in the last six years in particular.

    In the character of democracy, every citizen has a right to have a preferred presidential or gubernatorial candidate. But once a leader has been chosen by a majority of voters, the leader is obligated constitutionally and morally to govern for the benefit of all citizens. But nothing in being president of and for all requires the president to form a nebulous government of national unity that many PDP politicians have been canvassing for during their visits to congratulate General Buhari. A government of national unity may bring benefits to individuals calling for it but it is dangerous for the polity, as it is capable of leading to a one-party system that suffocates or muffles political opposition necessary to keep the governing party on its toes.

    A PDP governor in the Southwest has been quoted by one of his aides as whispering that what appeared to be desperation during the campaign was necessary to prevent an opposition party from becoming the party in power and with the opportunity to use power the way PDP had used it in the last four years. It is therefore conceivable that those begging for a government of national unity and those rushing to obtain APC membership cards during the interregnum are doing so in order to avoid experiencing a negative use of power by the Buhari/APC government. Without doubt, such persons have very little understanding of the politics of change. The new president and his party cannot afford to imitate the government they have displaced electorally. Citizens are still around to take note of such unwholesome governance. A party that is committed to change knows more than any other group that it needs to be in power for more than four years, if it is to be able to make sustainable changes to a polity and economy damaged by personalistic and patrimonial governance in the last few years. The toxic character of the polity in the last six years requires a responsive governance capable of healing the country, instead of a continuation or a variant of a government that pumps venom into the polity.

    With or without loss in revenue from petroleum, the governance of the country for the past few years has been marked by waste, greed, and disregard for sustainable policies on remuneration for political appointees and lawmakers at the three levels of government. It is not just the severance benefits for state governors that need the attention of the new president; more than this, the existing severance benefits for the president, vice president, and lawmakers are plainly irresponsible. This is the time for the practice of paying fat salaries and benefits (too fat for legislators to acknowledge publicly) to be re-examined and pruned down. There is no reason why the lawmaker should earn more than a permanent secretary. There is no justification for lawmakers’ constituency allowance that is not subjected to the process of accountability. Lawmakers should just be made to do oversight for the executive and create laws to improve governance and the welfare of citizens; they should not be saddled with community projects which are basically part of the functions of the executive branch of government. This is also a good time to reconsider what is referred to in political or bureaucratic vocabulary as security vote for those in political office. It is difficult for citizens to understand why huge sums of money are given monthly to local government chairs, governors, and presidents as security votes in a country that has military intelligence group, SSS, national intelligence service, regular police etc., not to talk of owning the largest military in sub-Saharan Africa. Any funds given to political office holders that are not subjected to periodic scrutiny and accountability by impartial auditors smack more of pork and should be discontinued in the era of change and accountability.

    It is not enough to diversify the economy and thus increase the sources of revenue to the government. It is important that revenues that accrue to the government(s) are not wasted or thrown as pacification inducements at political appointees, civil servants, and lawmakers. Revenues that flow to government coffers belong to all the citizens and should be used to improve the welfare of all. That is what the manifesto of change is expected to do.

    To be continued

  • Jonathan battles withdrawal symptoms

    Jonathan battles withdrawal symptoms

    Few things are more addictive than tobacco because of the chemical – nicotine – that it contains. Once it takes a hold on the smoker it requires super-human effort, even divine intervention to break free.

    In that transitional period between the decision to quit and total abstinence, the repentant smoker’s body begins to make the forced adjustment to tobacco denial. The internal chemical reactions as a brain that wants to quit battles a body that longs for its normal nicotine fix results in anything from irritability, anxiety, insomnia to depression – a collective known as ‘withdrawal symptoms.’

    Like tobacco, power is an even more addictive opium. It produces in men changes that the most mind-warping chemicals can’t. It is not for nothing that the famous English writer and politician Lord Acton wrote: “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men.”

    Those addicted to exercising power don’t give it up easily – even if hanging on could cause them to wind up in a casket. That addiction is what has produced the likes of Robert Mugabe who has been president of Zimbabwe since 1980. Cursed with uncommon longevity he has outlived a long line of conspirators and conspiracies. If he had his way he would probably want to govern from the grave.

    It was the power addiction that drove Laurent Gbagbo to do stupid things in Cote d’Ivoire after it became evident that his rival, Abubakar Ouatarra, had defeated him in the elections. Rather than go quietly his supporters tore the result sheets on national television.

    It was the same thing that seduced former President Olusegun Obasanjo to succumb to the third term scheme. He only gave up when the whole fraudulent arrangement collapsed on the Senate floor. Many still argue that his reluctance to surrender power led him to install Umaru Yar’Adua who he thought would be a pliant president – allowing him to drive things from the back seat.

    Now in outgoing President Goodluck Jonathan we see the classic case of withdrawal symptoms manifesting. In the last four weeks we’ve seen two sides of the man manifesting. First, he meekly surrendered and conceded victory to the All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate, General Muhammadu Buhari. The implication of that act was that he had accepted the outcome of the elections – warts and all – and was willing to allow the process play out in the national interest.

    In the last two weeks, however, a totally different side has been unveiled. It is that of an irritable and angry man. As the reality of losing the power of almost life and death sinks in, he’s suddenly having second thoughts about the results of the March 28 polls.

    We can make our guesses about a man’s thoughts and body language, but when he begins to verbalise his innermost feelings then it is time to take him seriously. While receiving the report of the Dr. Ahmadu Ali-led Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP) Presidential Campaign Organisation at Aso Villa, Abuja, Jonathan said: “the Peoples Democratic Party couldn’t have got those kinds of scores” it had in some places.

    This sort of statement isn’t something to be dismissed lightly. For while his concession phone call has been credited with dousing tension that had built up as the nation followed the long-drawn process of releasing the presidential election results, this latest outburst not only draws a cloud over the transition – it restores some of that dissipated anxiety.

    It doesn’t make sense that a man would aspire to wear the toga of statesman and at the same time be doing things that make him no better than the average politician driven only by selfish interests. What exactly is Jonathan trying to achieve with his recent actions and statements?

    Briefing journalists after the Federal Executive Council (FEC) meeting, last week, National Planning Minister, Abubakar Suleiman, accused the APC leadership of trying to stampede the administration out of office because of some terms of reference given to the transition committee of the incoming government.

    To underscore the depth of anger felt by the current regime, the minister warned that the president’s ‘magnanimity should not be mistaken for cowardice.’ Anyone reading those words would think that Buhari and Jonathan had a wrestling match scheduled for the village square.

    But nothing that entertaining is on the agenda this May. The issue at stake is managing a transfer of power from a lame-duck administration to its successor. So what does ‘magnanimity’ have to do with it? Since the minister is educated his choice is very revealing.

    Has the president been magnanimous in constituting a transition committee to interface with that of Buhari? Whoever thinks so needs to be reminded that 2015 isn’t the first time power has changed hands between administrations in Nigeria, and whenever this has occurred teams from both sides have dealt with the business of the hour without drama.

    In what way does conceding defeat translate to magnanimity? Was this a personal favour from Jonathan who owns the presidency as a birthright to Buhari the undeserving? Isn’t there the little matter of the expressed will of millions of Nigerians that must be respected and upheld by all? Some may suggest that the minister misspoke but I am unconvinced. This sort of misplaced arrogance has been evident in PDP ranks for months. We’ve heard some of its governors boasting before the elections that they would not hand over power to ‘blackmailers and supporters of terrorism’ – whoever they meant by that. In that loose talk there was no room made for voice of the ordinary voter.

    After March 28 Jonathan always had two choices: accept defeat or contest the results. For me, he chose the first option in his best interest. Even if he had decided to challenge the outcome the sky wouldn’t have caved in over Nigeria.

    It wouldn’t have been the first or last time a loser would challenge the result of a Nigerian election. From the late Chief Obafemi Awolowo over the twelve two-thirds verdict in 1979 to Buhari in recent years, candidates have contested poll outcomes and the system always resolved things. Even when 1,000 plus were killed following post-election violence in 2011, there was a resolution and the country moved on.

    Let’s stop making a monument out of Jonathan conceding victory. He wouldn’t be the first to do so neither would he be the last in Nigeria or on the African continent. I have pointed out on this page that former Ekiti State Governor Kayode Fayemi conceded after losing the gubernatorial election last year.

    All the self congratulation over tension that was doused by the singular act of concession is just overdone. Elections always generate tension and anxiety anywhere. A people’s temperament could result in this occasionally spilling into violence. But even then this tension never lasts forever. Such situations are not sustainable and people invariably return to peace and normalcy.

    In any event it is not too late for Jonathan to recant. Instead of boring us with his bellyaching he can still take his grievances to the tribunal. He’s still well within the 180-day window for doing so. If he truly has the courage of his convictions he should be consulting his lawyers now.

    At the same event where he questioned Buhari’s victory, the president expressed his belief that PDP was still the ‘dominant’ power and would bounce back in 2019. There’s nothing wrong with dreaming. Politics, on the other hand, is a game of numbers.

    How can you be the dominant party when you opponent now controls 22 of the nation’s 36 states – leaving PDP and APGA with 14 states between them. How can you claim to dominate the landscape when APC now has a healthy majority in the Senate, and a bomb-proof difference in the House of Representatives?

    The president also sniffed at the 2.5 million votes that separated him and Buhari when the dust settled on March 28. He’s within his rights to do so. But even if the gap had been 2,500 votes – as long as the APC candidate met the constitutional requirements in 24 states, he was duly elected.

    It is not only when the difference is 10 million votes that a mandate is valid. In the 2000 United States presidential election, the Republican candidate George Bush didn’t win the plurality of votes. However, because his then Democratic Party’s rival Al Gore didn’t win the Electoral College contest Bush was still adjudged the winner after a recount and legal challenge at the Supreme Court.

    In the light of all of the ruling party’s well-documented shenanigans and attempts to hang on to power, 2.5 million votes is enough to secure this country a fresh start.

    A final evidence of Jonathan’s battle with withdrawal from power is the frenzy of sackings and appointments of the last fortnight. The only thing he’s not done is name a cabinet for Buhari just to prove that he’s still in charge for the next four weeks.  But the president also knows that everything he’s doing can be undone in a couple of weeks by the man taking over. So what’s the point?

    After his dignified conducted in the days after the presidential elections, it looked like Jonathan wanted to exit office with his head held high. But we appear to have misread his intentions once again: with every new move and utterance the man seems determined to ride into the sunset as the caricature of a president.

  • Jega, Ekiti-Gate and the highly suspicious election results from the South-south and the Southeast

    Jega, Ekiti-Gate and the highly suspicious election results from the South-south and the Southeast

    In response to last week’s column, I got a long email from one of our country’s most respected professors of law and an eminent voice for egalitarian democracy in Nigeria. In essence, in his email this legal and civil rights luminary expressed great dismay at the praise I gave the INEC Chairman, Atahiru Jega. He drew my attention to the murderous violence and charade of the elections in Rivers State. How could Jega have accepted the results of the elections in that state, my dismayed interlocutor asked me? And what of the open, crude and barbaric rigging of votes in Akwa Ibom states, as shown in many video clips that have indeed gone viral on the internet? What of the absurdly inflated results from many of the South-south and Southeast states that gave PDP winners million-plus votes and opposition parties losers a few hundreds or thousands of votes? As a final expression of his great dismay, the writer of this email to me posed the following question : given these happenings and circumstances in Rivers and Akwa Ibom states in particular and many other states of the two identified zones in general, how could I have gone ahead to shower praise on Jega in last week’s piece in this column? In this piece, I am making public and expanding the scope the response that I gave to this passionate email that raised many issues concerning the recent presidential and gubernatorial elections that we cannot ignore.

    In the first place, the column last week quite deliberately linked Jega with the late Senator Uche Chukwumerije, thereby – I had hoped – giving an indication that the piece was dealing with an issue that is much bigger than the 2015 election cycle. In essence, that issue is this: how have Nigerians who have let it be known that they belong to the Left and have committed themselves to values and practices that work selflessly for equality, social justice, peace and unity between our peoples and communities, and the interests of the majority of the looted and disenfranchised in our country, how have such Nigerians actually behaved when they have found themselves in the moral and psychological wasteland of our political elites, especially since the end of the Nigerian-Biafran war? My unequivocal answer to this question was that consistently, such Nigerians have found themselves isolated in the morass of the values, attitudes and behavior of our political elites. As a result of this isolation, these otherwise idealistic and dedicated Nigerians have often been overwhelmed by the problems and crises that they have confronted.

    This was the essential issue that I explored with a great deal of moroseness in last week’s column. Thus, everything that I said both in praise and in criticism of Jega concerning his performance before and during the recent elections was framed by my concern with this larger issue. Permit me to now concretely and specifically deal with how this very broad issue pertains to the specific issues of murderous violence and blatant and crude election rigging that took place in some parts of the country during the recent elections. Specifically, we might ask the following questions: What could or should Jega have done about the violently murderous election charade in the Rivers State? Why was Jega not only silent about the revelations in the Ekiti-Gate scandal, but actually went ahead to assure the nation and the world that the 2015 elections would be free, fair and credible when the revelations of Ekiti-Gate gave clear indications that the same electoral malpractices and atrocities would be repeated in 2015? Finally, why was Jega silent about the crude voting charades involving collusion between INEC officials, the police and PDP thugs that the whole world saw on the internet in the Akwa Ibom elections, with the INEC Chairman actually accepting the results declared by the Resident Electoral Commissioner of that state?

    In a literal understanding of the term responsibility, the only person who can and perhaps hopefully will one day answer these questions is Jega himself. While we await that possibility, we can only speculate. For myself, I divide my speculation philosophically between the imperatives of “ought” and the actualities and limitations of “could”. In life, in lived experience while we are constantly and forever beset by the imperatives of what we “ought” to do, we often settle for what we “could” do among a variety of options. For the most morally upright among us, this constitutes a real dilemma. Unfortunately, most human beings of past and living generations easily settle for options available to them beyond the imperatives of what they “ought” to do. In societies dominated by political elites who operate with impunities of brutal, callous and cynical predatoriness, the scope for doing what one “ought” to is severely restricted to the point that it becomes almost non-existent in official or institutional settings. Which country in the world typifies this state of affairs in which “ought” has been almost completely eliminated from official affairs than the Nigeria of the PDP era?

    From these abstract musings, let me come to very concrete observations. Let us not be complacent in our thinking on these issues. The most that we can say in criticism of Jega’s effective non-response to the violent and fraudulent electoral charades in Rivers and Akwa Ibom states is that he “could” have stated his regrets and dismay about them more forcefully than he did. Beyond that, if he had rejected the results from these and other states “won” by the PDP where the “victories” were laughably suspicious, he would have played into the hands of the PDP hawks that had control of the party and wanted nothing more than the scuttling of the entire cycle of the 2015 elections. The organized calls by official PDP spokespersons and paid hacks, the protests and demonstrations all alleging Jega’s partiality against the PDP and asking for his removal were deliberately calculated to make use of any “blunder” by the INEC Chairman. And nothing would have served more as a “blunder” than Jega’s rejection of the victories claimed by the PDP no matter how absurdly improbable the “victories” were. The Ekiti-Gate revelations constitute the ultimate proof of this assertion. Didn’t Fayose admit that his voice was the one heard in the audio clip of Ekiti-Gate and didn’t he declare that there was nothing anyone could do about the rigging revealed in the audio clip?

    For me, one of the most crucial fictions of the recent elections was the belief, the faith that Jega, as INEC Chairman, was in control of things and as such would or could completely deliver on his promises and desires for clean, fair and credible elections. How much Jega himself believed in this fiction, I do not know. But INEC was and is not located in a netherworld in which the institutional bases exist for delivering promises made for credible and fair elections; INEC was and is still located in PDP’s Nigeria in which the entire institutional order is in an advanced state of decay. This was reflected in many of the surprising shortcomings of INEC in its organization of the recent elections, especially the considerable delay in production of the PVC’s and glitches that occurred with the card readers. To this day, I am still in great shock as to why Lagos, one of the world’s most populous cities with an estimated population of 21 million, recorded votes that were fewer than the votes returned in many states that have less than a quarter of the population of Lagos. These are all signs of the fact that INEC is a part of the dysfunctional institutional order in PDP’s Nigeria. And in a way, most of the things that baffle us about what Jega could do and did not do as INEC Chairman pertains to this perverse institutional context.

    I have been deliberately using the term “PDP’s Nigeria” in this piece. This is because I believe and hope that significant institutional reforms should and can be made in a post-PDP Nigeria. As part of such wide-ranging reform, INEC can and should become completely insulated both from control by incumbent governments and intimidation by the police, the army and their agents. This in fact will be one of the cardinal indicators of the genuineness of the APC’s promise for change and reform: will it let go of all forms and expressions of control or manipulation of the electoral process in our country or will it stick to what every single government in this country has always done, that is use incumbency in one way or another for electoral advantage over its opponents?

    Meanwhile of course, there remain the concrete and unacceptable cases of what happened in Rivers State and the revelations of the Ekiti-Gate scandal. They must not be allowed to stand as evils that we have to live with as relatively tolerable prices we had to pay for the overall victory of the sound defeat of the PDP. I suggest that their cancellation, through due judicial processes, should be first signs of the reforms that we demand and hopefully will get in the months and years ahead.

    Erratum:

    In last week’s column, I erroneously stated that I arrived at the University of Ibadan as an undergraduate in 1968. 1967, not 1968 was my year of matriculation. I have no idea where this error came from as my class of 1967 is actually the most dynamic and vibrant among all the sets of the alumni of UI. It was my friend, Dr./Chief/Chairman Yemi Ogunbiyi who arrived at UI in 1968. Perhaps I was thinking of him because he has been accorded honorary membership of our class of 1967 through sponsorship by his wife, Mrs. Sade Ogunbiyi and myself. Apologies to my co-members of the class of 1967; I have not migrated to the class of 1968!

    Biodun Jeyifo

    bjeyifo@fas.harvard.edu

  • Ifeanyi Ubah: weeping for his sins

    Ifeanyi Ubah: weeping for his sins

    If only babies could talk’, that was the catchphrase of a popular advert in the country sometime ago. If only we could have access to Ifeanyi Ubah’s mind, then we would know the real reason he wept like a baby during the submission of the report of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) Presidential Campaign Organisation to President Goodluck Jonathan, at the new banquet hall of the Presidential Villa on Thursday. According to Daily Sun in its Workers’ Day (May 1 edition) , Ubah started weeping after President Jonathan’s address, which drew a thunderous applause and standing ovation from the audience.

    The report added that he wept uncontrollably such that at a point, he had to excuse himself from the gathering, after some party chiefs had taken turns to console him, to no avail. Apparently, those party stalwarts must have understood the reason for his weeping. The report added that Ubah was sweating like a Christmas goat (please pardon my embellishment) at the occasion. When a billionaire weeps or sweats profusely in public, it is not a laughing matter.

    Chief Ubah is the founder and chief executive officer of Transformation Ambassadors of Nigeria (TAN), the body that was at the vanguard of the president’s reelection campaign. That organisation meant nothing to most Nigerians and if it had any meaning at all, it was to those making money from it in the PDP and deceiving President Jonathan that the whole of Nigeria was behind him. As a matter of fact Ubah and Co. claimed they had 12 million signatures of Nigerians who wanted Jonathan to continue in office, after travelling all over the 36 states of the federation. In Nigeria, cooking figures is one of the easiest things to do.

    Ubah, lest we forget, is also the chief executive officer of Capital Oil. He and his firm have been in the centre of several messy deals, the most notorious being their involvement in the oil subsidy scandal. In 2012, Cosmas Maduka, President of Coscharis Group, accused him of duping him of N21bn in the course of some business transaction.

    In saner climes, the First Citizen would keep people like Ubah at an arm’s length. But, in a country of anything goes, and under a man like President Jonathan, the Ubahs called the shots. They are the president’s frontline allies. This is a man that we knew little or nothing about until he turned 40 a few years ago and celebrated his birthday in almost all the newspapers in the country; some of which gave out their front page for the vainglory.

    As a major player in the oil sector, Ubah must have been instrumental to the oil and gas sector’s donation of N5billion to the Jonathan campaign. Meanwhile, these are people, like the power sector owners, who are complaining that they have problems accessing funds for their operations and that banks are not granting them loans again. I wonder which responsible bank would give loans to such unserious characters who can only be successful business men in Nigeria because of our warped sense of doing business.

    So, contrary to the newspaper report that Ubah wept over President Jonathan’s loss in the election, it is possible that the man was weeping over his personal loss arising from the president’s defeat at the polls, and more importantly, over the questions he may, including others like him, have to answer regarding oil subsidy, which only a complicit government like President Jonathan’s could have treated with kid gloves. Add to his long list of woes, his ambition to become Governor of Anambra State is now gone with the winds.  It is possible that was one reason he was so close to the president.

    Otherwise, why would he be the one to weep over the president’s loss? What is his own? Why would he weep louder than the bereaved? Even President Jonathan who lost the election is not weeping; at least not publicly. Not even our own ‘Mama Peace’, his wife. Not even those close aides of the president.

    So, I must be dead right when in my piece immediately after President Jonathan conceded defeat, I wrote that he must have consulted no one or only a few persons before taking that decision. President Jonathan confirmed that much when receiving the campaign organisation’s report. “Yes, I did not consult anybody before I made that phone call (conceding defeat to Gen Buhari) but I made that phone call on behalf of all of you and on behalf of the PDP”, he said. You can imagine what would have happened if the president had sought the opinions of the likes of Ubah on the matter! So, the question again, what is Ifeanyi Ubah’s own? I won’t want to speculate far into why the emergency oil mogul wept, but I am sure President Jonathan is not deceived that he was weeping for him (Jonathan). The man must be weeping for himself. The newspaper got it wrong when it said Ubah wept because he “could not contain his emotions”.

    My people will say ‘owo jona’ (money goes down the drain!) If Ubah and his fellow money-miss-road who donated more than generously to the PDP campaign made their money through a dint of hard work alone, they would have been cautious in the way they gave cheerfully, even if subversively. There are thousands of their fellow Nigerians out there who cannot boast of where the next meal would come from, their own generosity does not extend to such people. Apparently, Ubah must have been thinking of where to recoup the investment he made into the president’s failed reelection bid. He must have been weeping internally for long only for him to weep in the open when he could no longer contain it. There are many like him who are in such tears now. And they will weep for long because it is the ordinary Nigerian that they are putting in pains to have their comfort. Some of them will soon start to visit hospitals abroad to have their blood pressure examined. Some of them will, like our Andrew, check out of the country to seek asylum abroad. And there is every cause for them to worry when a new government that is not likely to condone granting them access to the kind of easy money that they stumbled on is about coming to power.

    Ubah cannot imagine that he would now be an outcast at the Villa that he used to enter and exit at will because the day the incoming president is seen with people like Ubah, that is the end of Nigerians’ trust in him. And I am sure General Muhammadu Buhari knows that. “Show me your friends, and I will tell who you are”.

  • The loveliness of the long distance trekker

    There is no killing the Nigerian spirit in its sheer indomitability. While officialdom is squabbling about the niceties and nuances of what is becoming the political equivalent of a hostile takeover, while a nasty dogfight about the details and dark spots of regime change appears to have commenced, Nigerians are not about to let go of the euphoria of seeing off a deadly political scourge. There is still magic in the moment. The national feel-good mood has received adrenalin shot in the arms. It has never felt better to be a Nigerian.

    Or fellow country people, how else can one explain the hype and hoopla, the whooshing  and swishing over  Suleiman Hasheem, the long distance trekker and latest hero to descend from the famished pantheon of national heroes?  If this is a stunt, it is a typically brilliant Nigerian stunt full of bravura  and a hint of chutzpah. By the time the Katsina indigene arrived in Abuja last week to swooning adulation and rousing public reception, he had seized the national imagination of a land looking for heroes.

    The outline of the heroic saga is as curious as it is compelling. In a fit of abrasive confidence, the itinerant construction worker had vowed to trek to Abuja were his hero, General Mohammadu Buhari, to win the presidential sweepstakes. The unexpected and unexpectable suddenly became extant reality. Without any further prompting, Suleiman decided to make good his promise. Taking a leave of absence from work, the hardy fellow who might have been foolhardy to the bargain, began his arduous slog towards Abuja from Lagos.

    It took him just under twenty days. Give or take, at seven hundred and seventy eight kilometers, that is like doing an average of thirty something kilometer per day. Snooper is wondering whether Suleiman employed the services of a crack Yoruba herbalist and the ancient potion known as kanako, or space constrictor,  a heady concoction which dulls sensory perceptions and induces a hallucinatory conquest of pains and physical exhaustion.

    On the way, according to Hasheem, he encountered the hospitality and generosity of total strangers who gave him shelter and encouragement; fought off wild beasts bent on making a meal of him and a gang of penitent armed robbers who gave him money upon discovering who he was. On the whole, he expended six pairs of canvas shoes. Words went ahead of him as he arrived at every historic milestone.

    In the event, it was an incongruously fresh-looking and ruddy-faced Suleiman who arrived in Abuja to wild public adulation and jubilation even as he swigged from a bottle of water. Everybody loves a hero who has conquered the threshold of pains. What a lovely way to enter the history books! On his own terms, Suleiman has entered the Nigerian Hall of Fame.

    There are curious gaps and enigmatic silences in this heroic saga, and it takes a generous suspension of disbelief. But what does it matter?  It is an ancient morality play, a delectable yarn brimming with heroic resolve and a typically Nigerian can do spirit; a labour of love and admiration which ought to serve as an inspirational motivation for generations to come. Unhappy may be the land that needs heroes but if Suleiman does not exist, we might as well invent one as a trope for the redemptive resources available to this country, warts and all.

  • Okon commences a walk to Daura

    As it is to be expected, the Hasheem example has spawned many imitators and overweening wannabes. The Red Cross is hereby placed on Red alert. Among the imitators is the fey and impossible Okon who barged into snooper’s room late on Friday with his trademark basket brimming with mischief and gamey humour.

    “Oga, I wan begin dem trek to dem  Daura make man give dem Buhari man dem fura de nunu and dem kulikuli. I go buy dem oranges when man reach Fiditi”, the mad boy announced.

    “I see, but what are the papers in the basket?” snooper asked with mirth and incredulity.

    “Na dem NNPC audit report. He get one Oyinbo man who come give Okon. He get names of all dem oil thieves and dem petrol ponsanponsan as Sikira him mama dey call am”, the crazy boy crowed.

    “I thought you were a Jonathan supporter”, snooper asked the boy.

    “Oga, I been dey support am before before but if him hand dey dis roforofo make dem Buhari flog am well well. Man pikin no be man pikin for dis one”, the crazy boy screamed.

    “But you took money from the transformation ambassadors?” snooper queried.

    “But dem transformer come burn”, the boy retorted.

    “Do you know General Buhari?”

    “Ha na my man for dem civil war. I come trek from Itigidi to Biakpan, to Ohafia , small time man reach Uturu Junction and Afikpo. Naim I come reach am for Abakaliki.” The boy sang.

    “You say you are thirty six and the civil war ended forty five years ago”, snooper chortled.

    “Ha oga, official age no be facial age. Obudu monkey dey sweat na hair dey hide am”, the mad fellow crowed.

    “Okon tell me your real mission to General Buhari”, snooper demanded.

    “Ha oga, I wan make him consider Okon for him kitchen cabinet. Abi no be dem people who dey cook for kitchen be kitchen cabinet?”, the boy asked with a sheepish mien. It was at this point that the mad boy was chased away.

  • Of crooked brains and flabby brawns

    To consider the comforts of only the politicians … is as good as saying that the larger populace in the country works to keep the very few (politicians) in their cups and comforts. We will do well to remember that it was situations like those that bred (and buttered) French, Russian, etc., revolutions in Europe

    When I heard about the Three and a half billion Naira severance pay that this nation’s foremost executive members had awarded themselves – president, vice-president, etc., — I literally did a flip. Now if you know me, I do not know how to do a flip, plus I consider that I am greatly disadvantaged by age and weight factors. So, you can imagine that what will make me do a flip must be a very serious thing indeed. This one was. Listen now while I tell you how it was.

    Two days ago or so, I was in another city in Nigeria. Not being very familiar with the terrains of the place, I had to do most of my commuting by public transport. You remember what one wise man said: those who do much travelling are not given to sainthood. I’m sure I have muddled it up but never mind. If you want to retain your sweet temper about life, stay in your house. That reminds me of something else someone said: the only one not stepping on anyone’s toes is standing still.

    Anyway, there I was walking down the road when, right in front of me, was this old woman. Normally, on their days out, old women carry little faded handbags, flat sandals, and shawls flung loosely around their shoulders as they wander around visiting those family members who insist on forgetting they are still alive. On the way, they could stop to admire the traffic in consternation as it whizzes past them and make comments about how you couldn’t get such things in their days and also wonder whether these things are as dangerous as they look. They might also offer pieces of advice to passersby who care enough for them, the advice that is, not the old women.

    You are right; I am talking about how I would like to see the average old woman in Nigeria. Unfortunately, that is not the reality. The reality is rather like the one I saw that day. She was old, bent, thin, raggedly clothed and had on her head a tray of yams which she was hawking from door to door, street to street, and nothing to comfort her poor feet. I felt bad for my country. Now, we all know good yams are heavy; and I felt whatever had this woman at her age hawking these miserable things around (a dissipated youth, her care-free children, a childless condition) was not half as bad as what her country was doing to her.

    Yes, she was at her job, plying her trade, but in no less way than Jonathan was doing. So what made her to qualify for less than what Jonathan got as president and now as out-going president? You could tell me she had no brains or brawns or even opportunities. I could very well tell you that most of us are probably not half as intelligent and definitely not as strong as that woman was. What you and I are enjoying wherever we find ourselves are opportunities dropped on our laps by Lady Providence, and you know how blind she is. Now, my problem is, how is it that we forget this as soon as we find ourselves occupying these somewhat exalted positions? Not only do we fail to do what we are expected to do there, we forget the core ethos that supports the spirit of the society: there is only one way to do a job – the right way. This is what makes the other credo meaningful: to do an honest day’s work for an honest day’s pay. However, after providence has visited us in Nigeria, most of us prefer to do a day’s work for a decade’s pay.

    Our cities are unfortunately filled with (old) women and men earning their livings in ways that do not pay compliments to our sanity. The situation represents our national shame and horror story when you contrast it with the incredibly humongous pay earned by our politicians because they know how to be elected and lie down by their swimming pools. And, oh yes, because they know how to do the midnight meetings thing too, when all human beings are asleep.

    How on earth are we expected to improve our work ethos in this country when each day brings in more shocking revelations about what the leaders at the top are doing with the nation’s money? The labourer is worthy of his hire, not more. Yet, we all are not equitably remunerated according to the day’s work. The national assemblymen who have awarded and obviously continue to award themselves unimaginably huge pays in spite of all the national and international cries against them are really showing us how not to work.

    Last week, on the 1st of May, we celebrated all workers; and that means celebrating us all, since we are all workers, from Jonathan down to the old woman. But we cannot celebrate our work attitude. People have repeatedly noted how this country is going under mostly because people are not doing their work. People are going around chasing things that they have no business chasing because those responsible are not doing their work; mostly because, I don’t know, flabby brawns?

    The other day, someone reported that he had spent the entire morning of a day he was sure he would never get back staying at home to supervise the people who had come to sink a well for him in his house. The reason was simple. Water had never as much as spluttered into his pipes since he built the house. Some people on his street have water from the public mains all right; it was just that the water works decided to stop the supply at a certain point, just as public works department distributes amenities to only ‘big men’. Someone somewhere did not do his work.

    I have always believed that national remunerations should be in full consideration of the comforts of both the least earning power and the highest grossing power to keep the economy balanced. To consider the comforts of only the politicians (because they have the ability to hold midnight meetings) to the detriment of the larger economy is grossly unfair. It is as good as saying that the larger populace in the country works to keep the very few (politicians) in their cups and comforts. We will do well to remember that it was situations like those that bred (and buttered) French, Russian, etc., revolutions in Europe. If it happened before, believe me, it can happen again.

    Yes, that’s true, it happened on March 28th; but that was a revolution of the ballot box. We can have worse ones like the revolution of the gun. We pray it will not come to that. You and I both know that prayer is not enough. The country must find ways of helping the people at the top realise that their needs are no more special than those of the old woman in our story just because they have access to the tap controlling public funds and she doesn’t.

    The way they think at the moment (the politicians at the top that is) gives me the impression that there are too many crooked brains in our midst. So, there we are, floating between crooked brains and flabby brawns without a leg to stand on. I think our main job now, with Buhari fully on board and all, is to find how we can make all them crooked brains straight and flabby brawns strong. Let’s get down to business. Happy Workers’ Day.

  • Let journalism thrive

    Having a cordial relationship with the media is a must for any government, organisation or individual who occupies a public or private office.

    The popular definition of public relations by Frank Jenkins aptly captures what is required – the relationship must be deliberate, planned and sustained.

    You don’t have to like journalists or what they publish and broadcast, but you must learn to savour good reports about you, when you are reported the way you want, and tolerate what you consider occasional excesses.

    I dare say that the media can sometimes be a necessary “evil” that has to be understood for the important role it plays in informing, eduating and entertaining the public.

    The recent controversy over the ban on the African Independent Television (AIT) which has been resolved is an example of the need for restraint in reacting to perceived negative reporting by the media.

    Whoever gave the instruction that AIT should  “step aside” from the coverage of the official assignments of the President- elect to resolve “ethical and security issues” concerning the organisation, without clearance from Gen. Mohammadu Buhari committed a major blunder.

    It was a needless controversy which even before being sworn in has given the wrong impression that the new administration may not be tolerant of criticisms.

    AIT’s broadcast of the infamous hate documentary titled: The Real Buhari, is particularly reprehensible and could be enough justification to be wary of the organisation, but not to ask its staff to stay away from the public functions of the President-elect.

    Indeed, AIT was not the only organisation that was guilty of ethical breaches in the coverage of the just concluded elections.

    Virtually every print and broadcast organisations in the country violated the code of conduct for election coverage and advertisement for political, ownership, commercial and other reasons.

    Apart from AIT and Nigeria Television Authority (NTA) that aired the controversial documentary, the Nigeria Broadcasting Commission indicted several other government and private stations.

    According to the NBC, “the contraventions include breaches of the rules on the broadcast of sponsored electoral campaign materials, which must conform to the standards of truth, decency and good taste, and requiring the sponsor to be clearly identified.”

    Some of the adverts published in some newspapers couldn’t have been approved for publications if they had been screened by the Advertising Standard panel.

    My verdict on the election coverage is to quote the bible verse that all have sinned and come short of the ethics of the profession on this matter.

    I am not sure what the penalty for the NBC indictment is, but it has to be really punitive enough to prevent reckless violations in future. Aggrieved persons have to be sure that broadcast stations will not easily get away with defamatory and false broadcasts as it seems in the present situation.

    As much as the media should be free to continue to enjoy the freedom to publish and broadcast without any government restriction, they should do so within the limits of the law and ethical demands of the profession.

    If journalism is to continue to thrive in accordance with the theme of the World Press Freedom Day marked today, (Let Journalism Thrive) there will be need for better reporting based on the principles of truth, fairness, objectivity and respects for the rights of those being reported.

  • The tragedy of the black person

    The tragedy of the black person

    These are not the best of times to be a Black person. They have never been. The phrase man’s inhumanity to man pales into utter insignificance when put side by side with the other proposition: Blackman’s inhumanity to the Blackman.  This is the crying shame of all Black people.

    Throughout recorded history and ancient mythologies, through the gradual differentiation of the human species into separate racial categories, the worst enemies of the Black race have been their own people. Either as colonial slaves or post-colonial serfs, either in outright captivity or coded confinement, Black people have been the worst tormentors of their own race.

    The Black race has been particularly stricken by a failure of leadership. The worst specimens of the race often end up as leaders. Among the half-mad, it is the comprehensively insane who are often the most self-assured. It is the iron law of human society.

    Among African leaders of the past half a century, there are at least four documented cases of certified cannibals: Marcos Nguema of Equatorial Guinea, Jean-Baptiste  Bokassa of Central African Republic, Samuel Doe of Liberia and Idi Amin Dada of Uganda who famously noted that human flesh is just a little bit saltier than normal venison. It is not enough to eat up their countries and their resources, they must also consume the flesh of the best and the brightest.

    This past week as horrid tales of xenophobic fury from South Africa gripped world attention, the global media were also beaming pictures of thousands of helpless and hapless Africans openly drowning from sinking flotillas in an attempt to reach salvation in mainland Europe. Many of them who fled Africa in search of greener pasture would never be seen again.

    It is a scathing indictment of post-colonial Africa and its laggard leadership. The unfolding tragedy of South Africa is a searing rebuke to the post-apartheid Black leadership and its failure to provide solace and succour to the South African multi-racial underclass after the millennial misery of White separatist and supremacist rule.

    Xenophobia naturally takes over when ordinary people find it difficult if not impossible to make ends meet or even to feed. As it so happens even in the most advanced nations, whenever utter scarcity prevails, immigrants are often the target of furious resentment boiling over to insensate violence. Hell is indeed the Other and the new order.

    It is now over twenty years since apartheid rule formally ended in South Africa. To be sure, it was not going to be easy. It takes time and arduous planning to overcome centuries of entrenched inequity and inequality. The poorly educated and psychologically repressed cannot become captains of industry and industriousness overnight.

    But it would seem that the ANC ranking leadership have been too obsessed with taking over the perks and perquisites of the former apartheid masters rather than working for the true emancipation of their people and the amelioration of the plight of a populace on the verge of despair and despondency. In the event, they have only succeeded in creating a new Black super elite while deepening inequality and socio-economic anomie in South Africa.

    Yet by the same token, the failure of the South African post- apartheid elite also beams unflattering light on Nigeria, the other potential African giant, and its failure to fulfill its manifest destiny as a welcoming Mecca of the Black race and a transforming economic hub for the continent. Had Nigeria become an economic success rather than a poster boy for thieving incompetence, it would definitely have relieved the pressure on South Africa. In default, Nigeria has become a nation of absconding refugees at the mercy of xenophobic South Africans.

    Luckily, it is morning yet on day of salvation. Nigerians have just gifted themselves a rare chance of a new beginning. In the light of the national mood of expectation, we publish this morning a piece which was written about a decade ago which directs attention to the plight of the Black race.