Category: Dapo Fafowora

When President Jonathan formally hands over power to the President-elect, retired General Muhammadu Buhari on May 29, in Abuja, it will be the first time ever in Nigeria that such a peaceful handover of power has taken place at the centre between a defeated ruling party and the opposition party. At the states level such transitions have successfully taken place in Osun, and Ekiti states, among others, but not without some acrimony and rancor.

In the case of the current transition from the PDP Federal Government to the incoming APC Federal Government , it has gone on better than most people would have imagined, or expected, but not without some strains. This should not be altogether surprising as the presidential election was bitterly fought and hateful. The stakes involved were very high. But once Jonathan conceded defeat to Buhari it reduced political tension in the country and mitigated any fears that Jonathan might find a way of not handing over to Buhari, even if the handing over is grudging and rancorous on the part of the outgoing PDP Federal Government . But, despite the current strains between the two parties over the transition, steady progress is being made towards the handing over. The PDP Federal Government  should not be expected to hand over its ‘black box’ and financial secrets to the incoming APC Federal Government . These will be concealed as much as possible and Buhari will have to go looking for them by the necessary probes after he has been sworn in. But as far as President Jonathan is concerned there is really no evidence that he is reluctant to hand over to the President- elect, Buhari. As I write this piece, it has been reported that President Jonathan and his family have moved from Aso Rock, the president’s official residence, to the adjoining Glass House, to enable the necessary refurbishing of the residence to be done. So, the transition is on course.

However, there have been some complaints from the APC, particularly by Lai Mohammed, its spokesman, that the PDP Federal Government  has been dragging its feet on the transition and has not extended to the APC the cooperation needed and expected for a smooth handing over of power. Specifically, Lai Mohammed was reported last week as saying that only two meetings had been held between the two transition teams, and that the transition process was not as cordial as it should be. Basically, the transition process should involve the outgoing PDP Federal Government  handing over to its APC successor the critical information required about national security and the state of the economy. The APC incoming Federal Government  needs to know the true state of the national security and the economy to enable it fully comprehend the challenges ahead of it. If this vital information is being withheld from it barely weeks before it takes over, then the APC has every right to complain, particularly as the state of the economy now appears to be worse than was known before the March elections. Buhari will inherit a terrible economic legacy.

President Jonathan has also been widely criticised for making some hasty and morally questionable appointments on the eve of his departure from office. Among these are the confirmation of the appointment of Mr. Solomon Arase as the new Inspector General of Police, in replacement of Mr. Suleiman Abba, and the new CEO of the Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA), Mr. Sanusi Lamido Ado Bayero, two powerful public institutions. Let me add that I have absolutely nothing personally against these two gentlemen whom I have never met. But I consider the timing of the appointments questionable. In addition, it was reported that President Jonathan had directed the relevant Federal Government  agencies to relocate the $500m LADOL oil and gas project in the Lagos Export Free Zone to Agga in Bayelsa State, even though it is really a private sector project. A federal high court has ruled against this order; an embarrassment to the President which he brought on himself by the unjustified order.

These hasty and spiteful decisions by President Jonathan and his inflammatory comments at a recent Church service in Abuja that he expected that he and his ministers would be persecuted by the new APC Federal Government  on leaving office at the end of May are deeply regrettable as they send the wrong message and signals to his officials involved in the transition arrangements. The loss of power can be traumatic particularly where, as in this case, it was not really expected. In that situation his officials would be led by the President’s comments to withhold from the APC Transition team information vital to the success of the incoming APC Federal Government. They would try to cover up financial and other misdemeanours for which they could be punished or held responsible by the new government.

As far as the recent critical public appointments by President Jonathan are concerned, the PDP has argued that, until May 29, when he officially hands over power to General Buhari, he is in charge of the Federal Government , and still enjoys the power and privilege of making such powerful appointments. That constitutional position is correct. It is within his purview and competence to make such appointments. But his critics will be right in arguing, as they have done, that making such critical appointments a few weeks before leaving office, is improper. If Buhari is so disposed such appointments by Jonathan can be easily reversed after he assumes office in two weeks time. It will equally be both legitimate and constitutional and it is only the officials concerned that will suffer the consequences involved.

However, such blatant and politically motivated public appointments by Jonathan, and Buhari’s probable response by reversing them, tend to undermine the integrity of public institutions and the public’s confidence in such appointments. For instance, in justifying the removal of his former IGP, Suleiman Abba, Jonathan was reported as claiming that Abba could not maintain discipline in the Nigeria Police. But he only discovered this lapse in Abba after he lost the presidential election. When the PDP won the state elections in Ekiti and Ondo with the blatant help of the Nigeria Police Abba kept his job. Jonathan was highhanded in this particular case, as in several others, in removing senior public officials in such a cavalier manner. Public officials are there to serve the public interest, and not the personal or political interests of those who might be in power temporarily.

Nigeria needs strong state institutions. Despite its enormous resources, Nigeria is still a weak state with weak public institutions. It is a weak state because of the fragility of its public institutions, the integrity of which is constantly being undermined by its leaders for reasons of political and personal expediency. A modern state has to be based on the rule of law which requires the stability of its public institutions and respect by the politicians for the professionalism and security of its officials. As shown by the recent regrettable actions of President Jonathan, this vital lesson has not been learnt by Nigeria’s leaders over the years as they continue to bend public institutions to their own political preferences and predilections. In this matter, I write with some experience and authority as I have watched sadly over the years how the Nigerian diplomatic service, in which I spent a greater part of my public service, including serving as Ambassador at the UN, is being progressively weakened and destroyed by one Federal Government after the other, both civilian and military. A once proud and competent diplomatic service, the envy of many African states, has been brought to its knees by persistent political interference and humiliation of its key officials. The new APCFederal Government  will have to start thinking of how these state institutions can be rebuilt in the coming years.

But the strains observed in the current transition process are also due partly to the absence of an agreed standard procedure which the two parties are obliged to observe during the transition. Part of the difficulty here is that while Nigeria has adopted the US presidential system, its bureaucracy still runs largely on the lines of the British civil service that it inherited at independence. For instance, in Britain, unlike in the US, an outgoing government is not under any real obligation to prepare any handing over notes to its successor. British succession of political power is surgical and brutal, without any intervening period of handing over. Once a government is defeated, the prime minister immediately tenders his resignation to the Queen, who promptly invites the leader of the party that appears to her to have a majority in the House of Commons to form a new government. If he is able to do so, he moves immediately into 10, Downing Street, the official residence of British prime ministers. There is no formality about handing over by the outgoing or defeated prime minister who simply disappears through the back door of 10, Downing Street, while the new prime minister enters the residence through the front door.

Moreover, before elections, the official records of the outgoing government and its ministers are kept sealed in the archives by the heads (permanent under secretaries) of the various ministries. The incoming government and ministers are actually denied access to them. They cannot be compelled, except by a court ruling, to release these records and documents to an incoming government. Instead, the new government is given briefs based on its party manifesto and programmes on which the heads of departments will have prepared a critique. The whole idea is to let the new government make its own decisions and mistakes as the old one and to protect the confidentiality of advice previously given by the top civil servants to the outgoing government. This is the source of the integrity and great powers enjoyed by top British civil servants who remain in office while the politicians come and go. This is what accounts for its famed stability.

In the case of Nigeria, it is now necessary to review the transition process to determine the range of records and information that an outgoing government should make available to the incoming government. It is not necessary or desirable that this should be done by law or legislation. Instead, it should be done by convention developed over the years.

The Development of a Welfare State

•The following article by me on the APC manifesto was first published in The Nation in March 2014, over a year ago. The APC, newly formed, was then in opposition at the centre. Now, having won the recent presidential elections, retired General Buhari of the APC will be sworn in next month as president. The article is being repeated, without any amendment or revision, to remind the APC leaders of their promise to the nation.

Last week, the All Progressives Congress (APC), the main opposition party, unveiled its manifesto in Abuja, highlighting its social welfare vision for Nigeria.  As I have not yet seen or read the full document, my comments on it are based on media reports on the manifesto that highlighted a social welfare vision of the party for our country. This includes the party’s strategies on job creation, the fight against rising public corruption, the poor and deteriorating social and physical infrastructure, the creation of states police, widespread insecurity in the state, and greater transparency in government. It is definitely time for change in Nigeria and the urgent resolution of these long standing challenges is critical to Nigeria’s future progress and stability.  The manifesto is wide ranging and should enjoy mass electoral appeal in the country.

But there are some inexplicable and puzzling gaps in the manifesto. Omitted from it are such contentious but crucial issues as fiscal federalism, a parliamentary versus a presidential system of government, federal-state relations, and the frightening rot in the energy and oil sectors of the economy.  The manifesto is also silent on the need for the political restructuring of the country and on the need for a review of revenue allocation between the centre and the states. Evidently the party could not reach a consensus on these controversial issues. We eagerly await the manifesto of the PDP, the ruling party, which has been in power since 1999, during which its performance has been less than satisfactory, and well below the expectations of even its own supporters. But the APC manifesto remains only a promise of what the party will do if it wins next year’s general elections. This promise cannot be fulfilled if the APC loses next year’s presidential election.

In states controlled by the APC in the South-west, most of the strategies outlined by the party in its manifesto are already being implemented with positive results. The physical transformation in those states, particularly in Lagos and Edo, is quite impressive. There can be no doubt that in those states there is a far greater commitment to developing a better infrastructure and laying a solid foundation for the future economic progress and social welfare of the people of the states. Outside the South-west, a few other states have shown a similar commitment to promoting economic growth and the welfare of the people. Northern governors announced recently, but somewhat belatedly, that secondary education in their states would now be free. It should have been made free long before now. A greater spread of this commitment by the states is necessary for the overall development of the nation.

However, the leaders of the APC still have a lot of work to do on their manifesto to make it more credible. The cost implications of the political agenda have to be carefully worked out to ensure that it is sustainable and that the resources for implementing the social welfare aspects of the programme are available. All the governments of the federation are facing a severe cash crunch caused by declining oil revenues, massive scams in the critical oil sector, and colossal financial mismanagement at the centre. A few weeks ago, Governor Fashola of Lagos State complained publicly that, due to the fall in the revenue of the states, specifically the federally allocated revenue on which virtually all the states depend, he was short of funds to continue with some of the critical social and economic programmes of Lagos State. Virtually all the states governments find themselves in this situation and, regrettably, have had to cut back on their public spending, even for laudable projects. Some states have already cut their wage bills by half.

There is a high probability that this deplorable financial state of affairs will continue for some time. The nation depends mostly on its revenue from oil exports. But some twenty percent of this possible revenue is currently being lost to oil bunkering and other scams in the oil sector. The NNPC has remained largely unaccountable. So, revenue from oil exports is not meeting the set target, despite the rise in global oil prices. Though commendable, the APC will need to look carefully again at some aspects of its social welfare programme to ensure that the financial resources to implement them are available. Specifically, I refer to the plan of paying the poorest 25 million people in the nation a monthly allowance of N5, 000, and the payment for a whole year of ex-Youth Corp members who are unable to find jobs. Together, this will cost the nation over N2 trillion or nearly half of the total federal budget for 2014. These are quite impressive proposals which have some electoral appeal. But the cost involved will be quite staggering and unsustainable. The APC will need to review this proposal more carefully.

Of course, it will be argued that the needed financial resources are available, that the economy is growing, and that what is required at all levels of government in Nigeria is less public corruption and a better and more prudent management of our financial resources. But the same objective of reducing the prevailing mass poverty in the country through the proposed financial handouts can be realised by promoting economic policies and strategies that will lead to the creation of more jobs in the private sector, through increased foreign investment in the country. This can be achieved by improving the woeful infrastructure, and by promoting a greater transparency in governance in the country. The same objective of reducing the widespread mass poverty in the country can also be achieved by reducing the widening income gap in the nation between the rich and the poor, particularly in the public sector where income disparities are immense. The ratio of minimum and maximum wage in the public sector is as high as 1: 1,000. And this does not even include the opportunity for graft and unearned income to which highly paid public servants and the rich have easy access. In the rich countries the ratio is 1:5.

At less than US$3 per day, minimum wage in Nigeria is very low. Fresh university graduates get a little bit more. Unemployment is estimated at over 30 per cent. There is no moral or even economic justification for this huge income gap. Governments in poor countries tend to deliberately keep labour costs low in the expectation that this will lead to increased demand for labour and attract more foreign investment. But experience in poor countries where labour is generally cheap does not support this view. Cheap labour is just one of several factors that attract foreign investment into a country. In fact, such a strategy constrains productivity. It leads to frequent labour strikes and these impede economic growth. The APC should pursue an alternative strategy on public wages. It should increase the minimum wage and reduce the remuneration of highly paid officials in the public sector, particularly the pay of those in the executive and legislative branches of government. Better pay for the workers will increase their spending and stimulate the economy.

This is not simply a moral issue. Better wages for workers will improve productivity in all sectors of the economy. Economic growth in Nigeria will be even faster. A prosperous, stable and secure state cannot be built on the foundation of such economic injustice. It is this injustice that accounts for the high crime rate in the country, and why our homes and streets are no longer safe. It is the source of murders, kidnappings, and armed robberies in our country. In a way, even Boko Haram is a manifestation of this social injustice. It is no accident that it is in the Northeast of Nigeria, the poorest part of the country, that it has had some appeal and success. Religious extremism feeds on wide spread poverty and income inequalities. These tend to attract the poor. Religious fanatics and extremists use these social and economic inequalities in the state to foster social grievances.

A national consensus on the need for the creation of state police has emerged. This will improve state security and reduce the coercive powers of the Federal Government. This is an agenda item that the APC should encourage its delegates at the National Conference to pursue vigorously in concert with the delegates of other states in support of the idea of a state police.  As I write this, the APC has not yet nominated its two delegates to the Conference. But it is well represented by APC delegates from the states controlled by the party. They should not compromise on this issue. Whatever it may think about the prospects of the national conference, the APC, as the main opposition party, should seek to be more actively involved in its deliberations. It should be at the table when critical issues on the new Nigerian Constitution are being debated.

As a blueprint for social and economic development, the APC manifesto is sound. But as the leaders of the APC should know from Nigeria’s recent political history, party manifestoes do not necessarily win elections in Nigeria. If it is any guide, the experience of Chief Awolowo and his UPN is instructive. Given the ethnic character of Nigerian politics, local issues, even at the state level, as well as political alignments, are far more critical in winning elections than a manifesto, no matter how appealing and promising it is. That is where elections are won or lost.

After three failed and agonising attempts, retired Army General Muhammadu Buhari of the All Progressives Congress (APC) won the recent presidential election with a resounding victory over the incumbent President Goodluck Jonathan of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

It was a well-deserved victory and we should all offer him our congratulations. He waited patiently for 30 years, for the right moment, to regain the power he lost as a military ruler in 1985 when he was ousted by his military colleagues.  Buhari, previously considered locally by many as unelectable, beat President Jonathan by a margin of over 2 million votes of the 28 million votes cast. He won in 16 of the 19 states in the North and five of the six states in the Southwest. As expected, he did poorly in the polls in the Southsouth and Southeast regions both of which were easily swept by Jonathan.

Buhari won because he ran a strong, determined, courageous and focused campaign, skillfully and brilliantly exploiting the weaknesses and failures of the Jonathan PDP Federal Government. It was a bitter and hateful campaign. The stakes were high. But it was relatively peaceful with only a few regrettable fatalities. And the elections were considered free and fair by both local and international observers. The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) team, particularly Professor Attahiru Jega, its chairman, must be fully commended for their political neutrality in the conduct of the elections. After 16 years of drift under the PDP Federal Government, it was definitely time for change. The electorate decided to vote for change instead of the continuity offered by the PDP that led the nation to nowhere.

President Jonathan must be commended for his gracious and magnanimous statement, promptly conceding defeat to Buhari. It was a rare display of statesmanship in the annals of Nigeria’s political history for which he will always be remembered. It was the first time in our country that a ruling party had been defeated at the centre. Had President Jonathan disputed the results of the election, political agitators and roughnecks in the PDP would have taken advantage of that to inflict mayhem and violence on the country. By that singular act of conceding defeat to Buhari, Jonathan averted needless violence in our country. We must be grateful to him for his sense of decency and fair play. In victory Buhari too has been gracious. That is the way it should be in a mature democracy.

Now that Buhari has reached the top of the greasy pole, he must know that our country is gripped by high and rising expectations after a decade of drift. A few days after the election, one could see that business activities have resumed almost fully in the country. There is an air of cautious optimism in the nation about the future. The value of stocks has increased by nearly 25 per cent after the election. There will be renewed confidence in the business community here and abroad about Nigeria’s political and economic future. Investments in the economy that are currently on hold due to economic and political uncertainties will be reviewed favourably. The fact is that despite our current economic difficulties, Nigeria is still the largest economy in Africa with far greater economic potential than any other African country. It should be the first destination in Africa for foreign direct investments. Its middle class is growing faster than that of any other African country as is its population, the largest in Africa. Its work force is one of the best in Africa and the entrepreneurial spirit of its people is unmatched in Africa.

But the President-elect, Buhari, has to contend with a legacy of grave economic and social problems, such as the prevailing massive public corruption, the mass unemployment, particularly of university graduates, the fall in the price of oil and the consequences of this for the national revenue that has declined by nearly 50 per cent, the Boko Haram insurgency, the continuing threat to public safety and law and order, the rising cost of public administration and the decaying infrastructure, all of which constitute major impediments to our overall economic growth. All these will have to be vigorously tackled by the new Buhari APC Federal Government. It is a tall and formidable order.

It is unlikely that Buhari will be able to solve all of these formidable economic and social problems in the short period of his four years in office as president in the first instance. And considering his advanced age, he may not be disposed to run for a second term in office by which time he will already be 76. Time is therefore of the essence. He must hit the ground running immediately. There is no time to be wasted. But he will need to prioritise his reconstruction agenda and concentrate on those problems that he can best solve in the time frame of four years. Of these, public order and safety is the most critical for political stability. Next to this is a massive review of our current economic strategy that has grown the economy but has failed to create jobs. Since 1986, we have religiously followed the prescriptions of the World Bank and the IMF in the restructuring and management of our economy. Some success in economic stabilisation has been achieved in this regard, but this was made possible more by the favourable international economic and financial climate, particularly the staggering rise in oil revenue, still the mainstay of the economy. But our economy is still not yet mature. Our efforts to diversify the structure of the economy away from its dependence on oil exports have not quite succeeded, leaving us still utterly dependent on the vagaries of an economy based largely on oil exports and revenue.

As President, Buhari will need to consider other viable and sustainable alternatives to the existing World Bank/IMF economic and financial strategies that have failed to create the jobs the country needs for its social, economic and political stability. He will need to change the nation’s entire economic management team that, after six years, has simply run out of ideas, and replace it with more imaginative and innovative economic planners and managers. The aim of economic planning in the new dispensation must be strong economic fundamentals in an economy driven largely by the private sector, with the government creating a fair playing ground for all investors. I am thinking here of the Chinese, Indian and possibly Brazilian models. In these three countries, billions of people hitherto stricken by poverty have been pulled out of their misery by an economic strategy that has as its focus the creation of jobs on a massive scale. In less than a generation, the Chinese leaders lifted over one billion of their people (about the entire population of Africa) from poverty into the middle class. They have created the largest middle class ever known in the world’s economic history. This accounts for China’s social and economic stability in recent years. It is not a question of ideology. Rather, it is one of visionary leadership that has been lacking in our post-colonial history. Of course, to achieve this economic revival and growth, public corruption must be stamped out ruthlessly. Without doing so, no economic strategy will work in our country.

Nigeria needs a strong, effective and competent Federal Government to accomplish all these. But it also needs a compassionate government; one  that will place the welfare and economic well-being of the poorest in our nation above all other considerations, or narrow selfish interests. A nation’s real wealth is not measured by the size of its economy, or its GDP growth rate, or the opulence of a tiny minority of its people, but by the welfare and living conditions of the vast majority of its people. This is no time for political recriminations and rancour. The incoming APC Federal Government and the new PDP federal opposition must work together harmoniously to move our country forward. Failure to do so will be very costly. Unless great care is taken, the large and growing army of the unemployed will constitute a far greater danger to our national security than the Boko Haram insurgency that also has its root in mass poverty.

On Saturday, March 28, two days from now, the electorate will again have the opportunity finally to go to the polls to elect a new president. This is after a contrived delay of six weeks by the Jonathan PDP federal government in holding the elections. The choice is between President Jonathan of the PDP, and retired General Buhari of the APC, the main opposition party. While President Jonathan has called for  continuity, his opponent, General Buhari and his party, the APC, have called for change in the country. For nearly three months now, both candidates have conducted a long, difficult, and tiring campaign, criss-crossing the country to lobby the electorate for support. The election will go down in history as one of the most contentious in our nation. It could mark a turning point in Nigeria’s political future.

Now, it is time for the electorate to decide which of the two candidates should lead the nation as president for the next four years. Which way will the voting go? Which of the two candidates will win the presidential election? Some extant local and foreign polls have predicted an easy electoral victory for General Buhari, the APC candidate. There is no doubt he deserves to win. His campaign has been impressive, convincing, credible, and based on the relevant issues. It is far better than that of his PDP opponent, President Jonathan, whose campaign has been openly divisive and hateful. His chief propagandists have hurt him politically more than his opponents. In contrast, in his own campaign, Buhari has sought to define and focus more on the critical issues of the election, namely, the general state of insecurity in our nation, the pervasive public corruption in the country, and the colossal mismanagement of the national economy under President Jonathan’s watch. In normal circumstances, Buhari should win the election easily. Most of the polls show him as the favourite. But given the peculiarities of Nigeria’s politics, in which most of the voters are not swayed by merit but by primordial sentiments and bribes, no one can be absolutely certain that General Buhari will win the election, as he should, if it is free and fair. There are no reliable public opinion polls in Nigeria. Even where they exist in the mature western democracies the polls are sometimes wrong in their predictions. Such was the case in the recent Israeli elections in which the Israeli Prime Minister, Netanyahu, won totally against the forecast of the public opinion polls in Israel. In Nigeria, where there are no reliable public opinion polls, one can only speculate about the probable outcome of the presidential election on Saturday.

From what one can see of trends in the campaign, the presidential election will be decided by the voting in the South West, which has become a major electoral battle ground between Jonathan and Buhari. This is where most of the marginal votes are. Whoever secures the South West is likely to win the election. In the 2011 election, President Jonathan beat Buhari handsomely because he was able to carry the South West along. The South West was also in support of Jonathan in 2009 when a northern cabal tried unfairly to stop him from succeeding the late President Yar’Adua when he died tragically in office prematurely. Traditionally, the South West has generally supported the political aspirations of the so-called minorities. This was why the region voted massively for Jonathan in 2011. But since then Jonathan has, by his poor performance in office, lost the goodwill of the South West. It is not simply a case of marginalization. The South West wants the best possible central government for our country. Both candidates realize this fact and, in the final weeks of the campaign, have focused more on the South West than on any other region of the country, in which ‘captured votes’ predominate. In this election, the votes in the South West will be more fractured. But the probability is that General Buhari will carry the day in the South West. He is quite strong in the North. If the margin of his victory in the South West is sufficiently large, then he is likely to win the presidential election. President Jonathan will win in the South East and most of the South South. But victory in those two regions and possibly some parts of the North Central will not be enough for him to win the presidential election outright.

In his campaign, fuelled and driven by hate, President Jonathan has not made any new promises to the electorate. He is offering continuity instead of change; more of the same inept and floundering government. He is like the captain of a sinking ship assuring his passengers that they are safe, until the ship hits the rocks and sinks. He has nothing new to offer our country. He is exhausted and totally overwhelmed by the existing grave challenges of economic development. And what does this continuity he is offering consist of? It is abysmal failure in all respects. Unemployment, particularly of fresh university graduates, has reached record heights, never seen before in our country. It is estimated that the rate of unemployment now is over 60 per cent nationally. Youth unemployment is a good breeding ground for crime which has increased significantly all over the country, particularly in the urban areas. Boko Haram is not the only threat to national security and public safety. The large horde of the unemployed and idle youths is also responsible for such social crimes as kidnappings, murder, and arson. It is outrageous that despite the recent impressive growth rate of the economy, averaging 7 per cent in the last decade, the unemployment situation has continued to worsen, as has the level of mass poverty in Nigeria. Social and economic inequalities in our country have widened. The economic strategy of the Jonathan PDP federal government has failed to create the jobs needed for social and political stability in our country. The recent devaluation of the Naira by over 30 per cent will lead to price increases and the loss of foreign and local investment and more jobs. Our economic fundamentals have been gravely weakened. How about the woeful and crumbling infrastructure? What progress has his inept government made in this respect? Very little. In fact the infrastructure deficit has worsened considerably under his watch. None of the cross country roads he promised have been built. Electricity generation and supply have been at their lowest since he came to power. Nigeria needs to grow at 10 per cent annually. It has the natural and human resources to reach this target. But its poor infrastructure is a major constraint on this growth target of 10 per cent being attained.

Again, President Jonathan is not really committed to seriously tackling the widespread public corruption in the country which has widened considerably under his watch. In fact, corruption has become an instrument of state policy to keep Jonathan in power through the spread of political patronage. He has tried clumsily to make a distinction between corruption and stealing, both sides of the same coin. A clear example of this is the recent award of contracts to some ethnic militias in the country ostensibly to protect the oil pipelines. This is the most cynical abuse of power by any government in our recent political history. It is like paying a burglar to protect the property he has burgled. It is astonishing that President Jonathan does not really understand that these contracts he has awarded to the ethnic militias will eventually lead to the proliferation of weapons and the emergence of warlords in our country. Why doesn’t he give the funds to our security agencies, particularly the police and the military to undertake this task? The simple reason is that he intends to use the ethnic militias to prosecute his political agenda. Already in Lagos, the so-called Odua Peoples’ Congress (OPC), fully armed, is being used to terrorize those perceived to be opposed to the PDP and President Jonathan. This method of intimidation is counter productive and is bound to fail as it will turn the electorate in Lagos and the South West totally against his government. To borrow the words of Edward Gladstone, a former Whig British Prime Minister in the 19th century, in his attack on the Tory government over Ireland, this Jonathan government is looking increasingly like ‘a negation of God erected into a system of government’.

It is definitely time for change. Nothing can be worse than the economic and political quagmire into which the Jonathan government has driven the country. If Jonathan is re-elected, it will be more of the same. After nearly sixteen years of PDP government at the centre, Nigeria will have become a one-party state and Jonathan more authoritarian. Our lives will be ‘shorter, nastier, and more brutish’. After nearly 16 years of ineptitude and massive failure under the PDP federal government, it is definitely time for change. We cannot afford the drift in our country any longer. A vote for Buhari and the APC offers us the change the country needs so badly. Like many others, I was once wronged by General Buhari when he was in power as military ruler. But national interests, not personal interests, are now paramount and needed to move our country forward.

Next month’s presidential election is exciting and vastly more important than any previous election. Our nation is floundering and in a desperate plight. It is facing many grave challenges. Nigeria’s future is at stake in this election. The choice is between continuity and change. After 15 wasted years of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP)-led  Federal Government, it is time for a change. It is crucial that we get it right to ensure Nigeria survives. There is no longer any room now for religious or ethnic bigotry in our country. The electorate have to make a critical choice between President Goodluck Jonathan and General Muhammadu Buhari on the basis of the following issues.

National Security

The Boko Haram insurgencyis by far the greatest threat to our national security and survival. Large swathes of the Northeast of our country, larger than many African countries, are under siege by a violent Islamic jihadist insurgency that has claimed an estimated 13,000 lives, including the abduction of over 200 Chibok girls. Over one million of our people have been displaced by the insurgency. Economic activities have been virtually paralysed in much of the North by Boko Haram suicide bombers. Kidnappings and abductions have become rife in other parts of our country. With its immense resources, Nigeria should be the natural leader of Africa. Instead, under the blundering and floundering President Jonathan, foisted on the nation by former President Olusegun Obasanjo, who has now disavowed him, it is looking increasingly more like a hobbled elephant, a giant with clay feet. Not since our civil war from 1967 to 1970 has the future survival of our nation and its peace and security been under such a direct threat. We must regain our pride as a nation by throwing out this dithering and weak PDP Federal Government.

President Jonathan has been far too indecisive and tentative in tackling Nigeria’s numerous challenges at every level and sector. Yes, he met a lot of challenges when he came into office. But he has not solved one of them. Instead, he has compounded them by inaction or wrong policy choices. Even his most rabid and ardent supporters now consider his procrastination over the Boko Haram  insurgency embarrassing. Nine months after, and despite strong public complaints, he has not even thought it necessary to visit the family of the abducted girls. The insurgency did not start with him. But under his watch, the insurgents have gained more confidence and ground. He has lost control of the Armed Forces and security agencies. The situation calls for a change of government. We need a stronger leadership, or else the insurgency will widen.

His main opponent in the election, retired General Buhari of the All Progressives Congress (APC) offers a better alternative to the weak and inept Jonathan government. He has his own faults too. He can be rash and impatient for a change. But he is more decisive and more likely to tackle the insurgency more effectively. With his impressive military record, he will bring a greater sense of urgency to the task of crushing the insurgency more expeditiously. He is in a better position to restore confidence and discipline to the Nigerian Army, gravely weakened by indiscipline and massive corruption among its top echelon. He is more likely to bring the Armed Forces under greater political control and improve on its professional competence and capability. He will restore to the Nigerian Army its old glories of which the nation was once proud. Under Jonathan, the Army has virtually disintegrated. Under-funded and ill-equipped, it is no longer willing to fight the insurgents.

The scourge of massive public corruption

Increasing public corruption is tearing this nation apart and destroying its social and economic fabric. Corruption is so deeply embedded in Nigeria today that it is virtually impossible to do any business in Nigeria without gratification. Corruption undermines economic growth and reinforces the vast social and economic inequalities in our country. Nigeria has been consistently listed by Transparency International as one of the most corrupt countries in the world. This is morally reprehensible and unacceptable. Scorn and rage boil in the land because the people have been deceived for so long. Nigeria has been made rich by oil, but the vast majority of its people remain poor. They have not benefited from its oil wealth. Never before have so many been impoverished by so few. Nigeria needs a compassionate but strong leader, one who will make the welfare and needs of the poor his priority. Under Jonathan, corruption has acquired a culture of impunity, to the extent that the former discredited military ruler, General Ibrahim Babangida, who once ran one of the most corrupt regimes in Nigeria’s post colonial history, could claim that, compared to the Jonathan PDP Federal Government, he and his military colleagues who looted the nation, were saints. Jonathan is reluctant to fire corrupt public officials. Under his watch, the vast system of cronyism and political patronage has fuelled corruption. It has assumed frightening proportions and this is going to constrain our economic growth. Foreign investors have recently been divesting from the Nigerian economy steadily due to corruption and growing uncertainties about the economic future of our country. Jonathan has lost the moral authority to govern. His vaunted and highly publicised Transformation Agenda has become a huge joke. Unless the vast network of corruption is tackled vigorously, no new economic strategy will work in Nigeria. If he is re-elected it will be more of the same as far as corruption is concerned.

Recently, the media reported that the vast sum of N21.7 billion was raised by the PDP acolytes for Jonathan’s campaign, at a time of falling oil revenues. This is both vulgar and obscene in a country where 70 per cent of its people live below the poverty line of $1 per day. The sources and identities of these faceless donors should be fully probed. The vast and immoral campaign funds will lead to political jobbery and ineptitude in the government, as political debts have to be paid. This accounts for the bloated bureaucracy in Nigeria. Both the federal  and state governments are under increasing strains to meet their financial obligations. The excess crude oil funds, intended to cushion the pains of falling oil revenues, have been virtually depleted, even long before the recent falling oil revenues. Evidence of the crushing mass poverty in Nigeria abounds everywhere. But President Jonathan does not seem genuinely bothered about this mass poverty, a stain on our country. We need a government that will fight corruption in our country.

His opponent in the presidential election, General Buhari, has a far better record of personal integrity and abhorrence of corruption. When he was in public office, he obviously did not enrich himself. He is believed to own only two houses in Nigeria, one in Kaduna, and the other in Daura, his home town. He does not own any property abroad and is known to be disdainful of wealth accumulated corruptly. If elected, he can be relied upon to tackle the vast and massive public corruption more effectively. Unlike Jonathan, he is not politically or financially indebted in any way to anyone. He has only managed to raise a paltry N58 million for his electoral campaign. He has no godfather, or mentor, or political debts to pay. If elected, he will be politically far more independent than Jonathan. He will be his own man and will not be dictated to.

Respect for the Judiciary and the Rule of Law

Our fledgling democracy is being subverted by the PDP Federal Government. There is no respect for the rule of law or the Judiciary. We have seen in recent times the growing abuse of power by the Jonathan government. If he is re-elected we will have to contend with the increasing prospects of a one party dictatorship and an authoritarian government. The PDP Federal Government will have been in power for nearly 20 years. We need to strengthen our democracy by voting in an alternative and more effective government. This will make our governments more transparent and more accountable. Under Jonathan it will be more of the same.

When he was in power in 1984-85, Buhari tended to be high- handed and authoritarian too. In his quest to clean up the country, he was hasty and took some rash decisions that portrayed him as ruthless and a budding dictator. But that was under military rule. If elected president, he is likely this time to be more restrained and less rash in his approach to governance. In any case, if he shows any tendency to be dictatorial, he will face a revolt from his party.