The Nation Newspaper

Category: Lawal Ogienagbon

  • Remembering Dele Giwa

    Remembering Dele Giwa

    How time flies? Today makes it exactly 37 years that founding Editor-in-Chief of Newswatch magazine, Dele Giwa, was killed by parcel bomb in his Adeniyi Jones, Ikeja, Lagos home. Time virtually stood still that Sunday, as news spread of his death. Sympathisers rushed to his residence and the Newswatch office then at Oregun to condole with his family and colleagues.

    Giwa was a colourful journalist. After returning home from the United States (US), he landed at the Daily Times, where he made the features pages a delight to read. He crossed over to Concord Group of Newspapers to edit the Sunday paper. Giwa wrote with passion. He threw himself into his job and when he and his three friends started Newswatch in 1985, magazine publishing came of age. Giwa’s forceful nature gave Newswatch its outlook.

    Read Also: ‘Why Dele Giwa’s doctor left home after Newswatch editor’s death’

    The circumstances surrounding his death remain as hazy as they were when he was bombed in 1986. Who killed Dele Giwa? This is the question his family, friends and colleagues have been asking since his death. The question remains pertinent today, just as it was in 1986. The Ibrahim Babaginda-led junta under which he was killed pledged to fish out his killers. It failed to do so despite the linking of some of its top officials with the dastardly act.

    Will Giwa die in vain? Will we continue to ask the question: Who killed Dele Giwa? Or will the latter change to: Revealed: Those who killed Dele Giwa? For his children and grandchildren, finding Giwa’s killers and bringing them to justice is the only way to bring closure to the matter. May he continue to rest in peace.

  • Agbakoba’s ‘moral high ground’

    Agbakoba’s ‘moral high ground’

    I wiped my eyes several times when I stumbled on the story in this paper on Tuesday. The reason for my action would be obvious to the discerning: I did not believe what I was reading, so I wanted to be sure my eyes were not deceiving me. Agbakoba slams debates on cases before Supreme Court, said the headline of the story.

    Which Agbakoba? I wondered. But inside me I knew that there is only one Agbakoba who can make such newspaper headline. But could he be the one taking offence to his colleagues’ comments in the media on cases before the apex court? Who started it all? Was he not the one? Olisa Agbakoba, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) and activist, took his activism too far shortly before the February 25 presidential election. 

    When you see the name Agbakoba in the media, you know instantly that it could only be Olisa. Olisa Agbakoba’s romance with the media did not start today. It started over 35 years ago when he and Clement Nwankwo founded the rights group, Civil Liberties Organisation (CLO). The organisation has grown in leaps and bounds since then, but Olisa and  Clem have gone their separate ways. The story of their break up is for another day.

    The duo have made good for themselves in their common field, enriching human rights and civil liberties advocacy, with their campaigns on different platforms. Clem now runs the Policy and Legal Advocacy Centre (PLAC). He is the convener of the Civil Society Situation Room under  which the group works with the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) during elections. In the run-up to the last elections, Agabakoba started a campaign, the kind that had never been seen since the country has been holding elections followiing the return to democratic rule in 1999.

    Read Also: Nigeria, others ask IMF, World Bank for debt relief

    His evidently self-serving campaign on scoring 25 percent of the votes cast in Abuja as a requirement for winning the presidential election set the tone for the rancour over the poll. It was as if Section 134 (2) of the Constitution had just been inserted, with the way Agbakoba took the matter. It turned out that he was only paving the way for a bitter ending to the election. Thanks to him and his ilk, the nation is still reeling from the acrimony over the election.

    What was Agbakoba’s angst? He wanted to know if a candidate could be declared winner of the election,  if he did not score 25 percent of the votes cast in Abuja? He said he was just raising the issue ahead of the election to avert crisis. But, he was wittingly preparing the ground for a crisis. His swift reaction to the September 6 verdict of the Presidential Election Petitions Court (PEPC), which held that a winner did not require to poll 25 percent of Abuja votes, gave him out.

    Hardly had the tribunal finished delivering the over 12-hour judgment that he texted an Arise News newscaster on air, wondering why the Justices took virtually the whole day to give the verdict. The newscaster, who revers Agbakoba, then turned to her guest after reading the text to ask him whether the tribunal should have sat that long, I have a text from Agbakoba, the Agbakoba himself (and that was reporting!), saying the tribunal should have summarised its judgment within 30 minutes or so instead of keeping people that long in court.

    Unknown to Agbakoba, it was because of people like him that the tribunal took that step of televising the judgment and reading it to the hearing of all to avoid being accused of bias. Yet, some people are not satisfied. They are still calling their Lordships names for not conferring Abuja with a ‘special status’? In the aftermath of the verdict, Atiku (or is it Sadiq?) Abubakar has turned to ‘Ajala travel all over the world’ looking for ‘after-discovered evidence’ to upturn it at the Supreme Court?

    The outcome of the fishing expedition has become a subject of debate everywhere, and Agbakoba, who started it all, is disturbed. He should not be. He should be happy that at street corners, football pitches and bars, people gather to debate the matter.  They muse at the American trip to confirm if the certificate President Bola Tinubu submitted to INEC emanated from Chicago State University. More worrisome for Agbakoba is that lawyers have joined the debate bandwagon in the media. He wants the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) to sanction such lawyers. Really!

    Agbakoba cannot mean that. He started this fire and he should not be seen crying fire! fire!! fire!!! after  it becomes a conflagration that can consume everything along its path. If only he knew, he won’t have started this raging inferno. The issue is beyond the comments, as sickening as some of them may be, but the audacity with which some of the commentators are threatening to bring down the country, if things do not go their way. As Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Kayode Ariwoola observed on October 4 at the swearing in of some new Federal High Court judges, court decisions are not based on public opinions, but law.

    The danger in the fire Agbakoba started is that nobody knows how it will be put out, even after the Supreme Court decides the appeals arising from the PEPC verdict. What, with all manner of comments on the issue, both by lawyers and non-lawyers. When a shoeshine boy stops you on the road and tells you pointblank that without getting 25 percent of Abuja votes, a contestant cannot win the presidential election, then you know that there is fire on the mountain. Lawyers, as Agbakoba whose father was a Justice of the Court of Appeal knows, make their submissions in court and not on air and pages of newspapers.

    When they start parading the media, as he did, when he began the contrived debate on 25 percent of Abuja votes, something must have informed it.  Agbakoba used the media to sell his own agenda, now he does not want his fellow lawyers to enjoy the same privilege. He cannot stand on moral high ground on this matter. He is as guilty as those he wants the NBA to sanction. As Fela will say, teacher no teach me nonsense!

  • The Diezani makeover

    The Diezani makeover

    People like her always make news. Whether in good or bad health, there is always a story on them. It is in their nature for activities to be created around them. She left office since 2015, but she has not left public eye. All eyes have been on her since she fled home for London where she has been staying for some years now.

    To avert this public scrutiny, her minders came up with an ingenious plan, which some will describe as evil. What was this plan? They came up with the story that she has cancer. Cancer? Yes, cancer of the breast. She also confirmed it at a time, describing it as “the most aggressive form of breast cancer”. She gave its name as “Triple Negative Cancer”, adding that it started towards the end of President Goodluck Jonathan’s tenure in 2015. Does Diezani Alison-Madueke really have cancer? Perhaps, the poser should now be: did she have cancer?

    The latter may be appropriate because the Diezani her compatriots saw on television on Monday as she appeared before the Westminster Magistrates’ Court in London did not look like a cancer patient. Better put: she did not look like the scarecrow her countrymen and women saw back home in 2015 in the picture that illustrated her cancer story then. In the photograph, she was not anywhere near the Diezani we all know.

    She cut a sorry picture, with her bald head and a scarf thrown around her shoulders. She looked pathetic, but she got no sympathy. Nigerians could not care less, if she had cancer or not. They were more interested in the recovery of the loot she is believed to have stashed abroad. They saw her, though a woman, as the Man Friday of her principal, then President Jonathan under who she served as transport minister and petroleum resources minister.

    Diezani was a powerful member of the Jonathan cabinet and she rose to great heights as petroleum minister, becoming the first woman president of the Oil Producing Exporting Countries (OPEC) in a male-dominated cartel. The cancer story did not fly. Instead of prayers, it earned her curses. The people’s bitterness showed through at a moment she thought she could get some sympathy from them.

    “Did she sympathise with us when she was in government?” “What did she do to ameliorate our sufferings?” Cancer ko, cancer ni! Many said, without feeling as they reacted to the story. In the story anchored by a well known publisher some of whose actions in the past strengthened the unbelievability of the report, he wrote inter alia:

    Read Also: £100,000 bribe trial: UK court slams tough bail terms on Diezani

    “The Diezani before me was not the ebullient woman I used to see on television and in newspapers. Her head had become a Sahara Desert of sorts almost totally bald with a sprinkle of freshly growing hair, all grey. She requested to sit on a classroom chair as her back was hurting badly and she could not sit so low. Wow, what a terrible time she must be having, I almost screamed out but cautioned myself. Sitting across from me was a woman who was a shadow of herself, almost like an apparition or ghost”.

    “Awon Journalists sha! Someone blurted out after reading what he perceived as an image laundering job, wondering the need for the story at a time she was wanted back home to answer some questions relating to her enormous wealth. She is still wanted and some of her properties found to be proceeds from crime have been forfeited to the government. She is being tried in London for receiving bribe by Britain’s National Crime Agency (NCA).

    Bribery and corruption are the bane of our public service. People go into public service not to serve but to enrich themselves and when the bubble bursts, they blame it all on pressures from family members, friends and peers. Diezani has been named in serial allegations back home for which she is wanted for trial. These allegations are not different from those now levelled against her in London.

    What she is running away from at home has caught up with her abroad. It is just a matter of time before she is repatriated home to also stand trial for the myriad allegations against her. Eventually, justice will be done to the satisfaction of the people, the state and the defendant herself, whether or not she has cancer. But her cancer appears to be in remission considering the way she was looking gay and bright when she appeared in court on Monday.

    Lucky Diezani, she is getting well from her ‘cancer’, but Nigeria is not that lucky. The country is still bleeding from its years of pillage by public servants like her. There can be nothing more cancerous than the blind theft of a nation’s commonwealth by those in charge of its affairs.

  • A tale of two deputies

    These are not the best of times for the deputy givermors of Edo and Ondo states, Philip Shaibu and Lucky Aiyedatiwa. Both of them are fighting the political battles of their lives. The duo were well favoured by their principals before things went awry. When the going was good, the deputies enjoyed their governors’ confidence.

    There was nothing Governors Godwin Obaseki and Rotimi Akeredolu did that their deputies did not know about. They wined, dined, played and fought their perceived enemies together. They were always on the same page so much so that no political godfather could come between them, as was witnessed during Obaseki’s 2020 reelection bid.

    Obaseki was singlehandedly made governor by his predecessor, the now Senator Adams Oshiomhole, in 2016. Before Obaseki completed his first term of four years in 2020, they had fallen out. Getting a second term seemed bleak in that circumstance, but Obaseki, with the support of Shaibu, who stood by him as a loyal deputy, overcame the Oshiomhole threat. They won without Oshiomhole’s support.

    It was a roforofo fight into which they threw everything. The pair fired barbs at Oshiomhole, but the dimunitive senator is a man that cannot be corked, notwithstanding his petit size. Obaseki and Shaibu saw Oshiomhole as their common enemy and in the past three years of their administration, they have kept him at arm’s length. As they popularised the song pepper dem o, oya, oya, pepper dem, with which they mocked Oshiomhole, their own relationship blossomed. But, not anymore.

    Aiyedatiwa was the deputy in who Akeredolu was well pleased after his bitter experience with Agboola Ajayi. Ajayi was a thorn in Akeredolu’s flesh. He almost ran the governor out of office because of his strong political connections which he used to ‘pepper’ Akeredolu, who tried to no avail to get him impeached. Akeredolu’s search for a loyal deputy for his second term led him to Aiyedatiwa. The party is now over.

    Why is it that governors and their deputies in most cases fight before the end of their tenure? There is no straight forward answer to this question. The response differs depending on which side you are. The governors will accuse their deputies of disloyalty, while the deputies will allege that their governors treat them with disdain. This was not the intention of drafters of the Constitution. The Constitution envisages that governors and their deputies will work together, not at cross purposes.

    Read Also: How I will tackle inflation, naira, forex crises, by Cardoso

    The Constitution joins them together as Siamese twins. A governorship candidate cannot contest election without nominating someone as his running mate who will hold office as deputy governor, if the candidate wins. The candidate is the one running as governor. Does that make his running mate his appendage?

    The Constitution does not say so. It also does not provide specific functions for the deputy, thereby leavng him at the whims and caprice of the governor. Is this what governors have been exploiting to treat their deputies as spare tyres as someone once described them. The Constitution does not say that they are spare tyres. It may not have accorded them specific roles too, but it treats them as alternate governors. Going by the Constitution, without one, there cannot be the other.

    But, as in every human relationship, the governor has the upper hand because of the powers conferred on his office by the Constitution. Everything revolves around the governor. He is the be-all and end-all. Whatever he says upheld by all. The deputy governor either takes it or leaves it. Many deputies, who realise this fact early, know how to navigate the waters to avoid being thrown to the sharks. But Shaibu and Aiyedatiwa seemed to have learnt nothing from their closeness to power.

    Power is a game of chance. They should have known from their closeness to their governors how to play their cards in order to get what they want. They want to succeed their principals. But the governors have other plans. Did the deputies sound out their governors first on their ambitions? If their relationships were cordial, the issue would have been treated as a family matter. It would not have reached public domain, with the parties going for one another’s throat.

    There is nothing bad in a deputy seeking to succeed his governor, but it should not resort to brawling, if the matter is properly handled. The frequent fights between governors and their deputies over the issue of succession are an ill-wind that blows no good. They only overheat the polity and halt governance in states in dire need of development long before the tenure of the outgoing administration lapses.

    As for Shaibu, why did he start a fight that he could not finish? Now, he is begging after the governor sent him to Siberia! I thought he was made of sterner stuff. Edo does not need such a political paper weight as governor. Aiyedatiwa is in court challenging his planned impeachment by the House of Assembly. He has won the first round, with the court putting the process on hold for now. Is that how far he will go?

    The likely end of the matter is well known. In impeachment matters, the assembly and not the court has the last say, as long as the laid down constitutional procedure is followed. Aiyedatiwa may yet survive if he can reenact the Ajayi magic which saw him frustrate the assembly’s impeachment plan some four years ago. Can he do that?

  • On the world stage

    On the world stage

    It was late in the night of Tuesday, September 19, in Nigeria. But in New York, United States (US), the sun was just setting. Inside the United Nations (UN) Headquarters, where the 78th General Assembly (GA) was taking place, the audience was gathering in ones, twos and threes. It was a significant date on the calendar for Nigeria.

    President Bola Tinubu was among the distinguished participants at the the 78th UNGA. It was his maiden outing. He was billed to speak on the occasion around 7p.m., New York time, which was around midnight local time. Tinubu did not disappoint as he faced the world in the plush settings of the UN Headquarters.

    There was pin-drop silence as he began to read his 46-point address. It was vintage Tinubu on display. The President was in his elements as he spoke in measured tones. The speech was well written and well delivered. His delivery brought out the message succinctly. In a calm and composed manner, he spoke in a hard way, without hurting feelings.

    He spoke about Nigeria and the kind of relationship that his country seeks with others, especially the developed nations of the world. He did not forget Africa, his continent which resources he noted had been exploited for centuries by the developed world. He was in virtual pains as he noted that Africa’s natural resourcess were pillaged, leaving it in poverty and penury.

    If Africa is backward today, the developed nations are liable. How Europe underdeveloped Africa, a book written by Walter Rodney, remains a rich text on the witting exploitation of the continent’s endowments by its colonial masters. Africa has not recoverd from that wicked act and may never do because it still goes on till today in one form or the other in some parts of the region.

    Tinubu’s call for an end to the pillaging of the continent’s wealth echoes the inaugural address of former U.S. President J.F Kennedy, who in 1961 called on “citizens of the world to come together and see what we can do for the freedom of man”. Africa has since been free from the shackles of colonialism, but its growth and development remain stunted because some colonial masters have refused to let go in countries where they still mindlessly mine mineral resources, treat the citizens as slaves and reptriate the profit back home.

    What kind of freedom is that when most people in those parts of the continent are still in servitude? Tinubu hit the nail on the head when he spoke of how blessed the continent is, but yet sufferings suffuse the land. “In fundamental ways, nature has been kind to Africa, giving abundant land, resources and creative and industrious people. Yet, man has too often been unkind to his fellow man and this sad tendency has brought sustained hardship to Africa’s doorstep.

    Read Also: UNGA: Tinubu’s speech reflects pan-African agenda – Olisa Agbakoba

    “To keep faith with the tenets of this world body (peace, security, human rights and development) and the theme of this year’s Assembly (Rebuilding trust and reigniting global solidarity…), the poverty of nations must end; the pillage of one nation’s resources by the overreach of firms and people of stronger nations must end. The will of the people must be respected. This beautiful, generous and forgiving planet must be protected. As for Africa, we seek to be neither appendage nor patron. We do not wish to replace old shackles with new ones”, Tinubu said.

    He was not done. Like the late JFK, Tinubu extended a hand of fellowship to all: “To the rest of the world, I say walk with us as true friends and partners. Africa is not a problem to be avoided nor is it to be pitied. Africa is nothing less than the key to the world’s future”. It was a great speech which resonated long after he finished speaking. With the speech, he heralded his entry into the UN Hall of Leaders, creating a name and place for himself and Nigeria in the hearts of other world leaders.

    Tinubu did not disappount his compatriots watching him at home. “Nigeria”, he said, “welcomes partnership with those who do not mind seeing Nigeria and Africa assume larger roles in the global community… Nigeria is open for business. The question is how much of the world is truly open to doing business with  Nigeria and Africa in an equally, mutually beneficial manner”.

    Yes, we were created equal and have inalienable rights, which one side, no matter how strong, should deprive the weaker party of.

  • …The Alpha President

    …The Alpha President

    Thank God for former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, the people now know how brilliant their President is. In his quest for evidence to dent President Tinubu’s image, Atiku went on a fishing expedition. He thought he would make a big catch!

    His ‘catch’ shocked him and his sheepish followers. Last week, the Chicago State University (CSU), which he has been haranguing for the President’s academic records, released Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s transcript while in school.

    Read Also: BREAKING: Tinubu rings closing bell of NASDAQ stock market

    Of the 18 courses he took, he made 13As (alpha), 4Bs and 1C. This makes him an A student. He consequently became an A governor (between 1999 and 2007 in Lagos) and right before the eyes of all, he is becoming the Alpha (A) President, no matter the distractions by mischief makers. Can Atiku make his own academic records public too for comparison? He dares not! We already know of  Peter Obi’s grades. They do not come near Tinubu’s. But these are not things that excite the President. He is interested in working for the common good. Will they allow him to work?

  • From the Bishops’ court!

    Their Lordships had hardly finished delivering the judgment when the comments started flying. Suddenly, everybody was talking law. It was no longer the exclusive preserve of lawyers. Expectedly, the petitioners and their lawyers were the first to fire salvoes. Right from inside the court, the lawyers made known their dissatisfaction with the verdict. They wasted no time on niceties as one of them, Chris Uche (SAN), stood up to ask for a copy of the judgment.

    He shunned the decorum of first commending their Lordships for a job well done, even if they did not, before making the request. He spoke in a bland tone. When the Presiding Justice Haruna Tsammani tried to draw him out by cracking jokes, the senior lawyer did not respond. One of his colleagues on the other side, however, followed tradition by praising the justices for doing a good job.

    But their Lordships were in a hurry to call it a day after the exhaustive session.  For over 12 hours, the Justices sat, breaking for only 15 minutes. It was the second longest verdict to be given in the nation’s history. The first, according to renowned judiciary reporter, Richard Akinnola, who should know, was the famous treason trial verdict of Chief Obafemi Awolowo in 1963. In the heat of the comments by experts and laymen, another issue came up. It was a non-issue, but the petitioners tried to make a mountain out of a molehill.

    After collecting a certified true copy (CTC) of the judgment, President Bola Tinubu’s lawyers scanned and watermarked their copy before circulating it. That was all the petitioners needed to allege that the judgment was not written by the Presidential Election Petitions Court (PEPC). Why will any sane mind think that of their Lordships? Well, this has been the stock-in-trade of the petitioners and their supporters since the February 25 presidential poll.  

    If the social media crowd and the hangers-on of Labour Party’s Peter Obi and Atiku Abubakar of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) are that mischievous, should priests, who are perceived as God’s elect not know better?  Priests are no just anybody; they are men with divine inspiration who are expected to lead others along the right path. The last elections revealed the true colour of many of these so-called men of God, who have turned to gods of men.

    Their sheep call them ‘daddy’, but they do not act like one. The daddy tag comes at a price – a priest is a father to all and must not discriminate among any of his children. Sadly, these priests are dividers and not unifiers. Whether of the Pentecostal or the Orthodox faith, they are the same. They have brought priesthood to a low, making themselves subjects of ridicule. The public has lost its respect for them.

    Read Also: Lagos West: APC’s Adebule floors Aeroland at Appeal Court

    Instead of being sober, they have embraced vulgarity. This may be why the church and state were at loggerheads in medieval Rome. Their Lords Spiritual would rather play politics instead of feeding God’s lambs, which is their primary assignment. Many members of their flock have gone astray today because of their flamboyant lifestyle. The last elections exposed them for who they are. They openly flirted with Obi. His loss was a big blow to them and their woes were compounded by the PEPC verdict.

    Certain matters are beyond their ken, but they are not ready to let go. It is expected that when priests speak on politics, it will be to help move the country forward and not to heighten tension. But no, that is not their way. At the opening of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Nigeria (CBCN), its president, Archbishop Lucius Ugorji, berated the PEPC. According to him, the court’s position on the electoral umpire’s failure to upload some results of the presidential election on the IReV portal in real time suggested that it was wrong to expect the agency to keep its promise to do so or obey its guidelines on transmitting results electronically.

    Ugorji may be ‘My Lord Spiritual’, that does make him a judge in the mould of their Lords, Justices of PEPC. Has he read what their Lorships said on results transmission? There is no law that says results must be electronically transmitted. It is an option which INEC can adopt, if the means are available. If unavailable, results can be manually transmitted. What is a guideline to the electoral law? They are incomparable. A law carries the force of legislation by a properly constituted parliament, a guideline does not have such weight. Ugorji should know better. He should not criticise their Lorships for criticism’s sake. Did they follow the law? Yes, they did. So, Ugorji erred.

    The bishops cannot hold court over the PEPC verdict. They are priests with their duties cut out for them. If they wish to engage in politics, they know what they do. They cannot seek to play politics in cassock through the backdoor. We have had many priest-politicians in the past. We also have one in this dispensation, who is a governor and a Catholic like them. Priests should always refrain from remarks capable of questioning their integrity and pitting them against the government. That is my piece of advice to them. They are at liberty to accept or reject it.

    It also does not lie in Ugorji’s mouth to tell the Supreme Court not to ‘’neither bend the law nor seek to satisfy the whims and caprices of any party…’’ His insinuation is not lost on political watchers. Is he saying that the PEPC bent the law…?  Does he have any proof? Would he have said the same thing if the court had ruled in Obi’s favour? In times like these, certain people, especially priests, should be mindful of their words, for we never know which angel may be passing by.   

  • Of technocrats and public office

    Of technocrats and public office

    The use of technocrats in government is an age-long practice, but no store was placed on it because there was no need to. It was seen as something that should happen since after all, technocrats are like any other citizen of their country.

    From the natural progression of things from which they hitherto evolved, technocrats are now being seen in a different light, in a messianic hue, if you like by people still grieving about the outcome of the last elections.

    They talk about technocrats with such reverence that you begin to wonder if this was not the same class of people that ran the country in the past.  Their electoral loss has blinded them to the fact that there is no magic wand that their so much fancied technocrats can weave if they are opportune to serve the country.

    Read Also: Nigeria eyes regional hub with new ports’ modernisation

    Many of those who contested the last elections at different levels were technocrats. They left their well-paying jobs for politics not because they were failures in their callings, but to answer the call to serve. If in the past, some professionals missed it along the way, that does not make them less a technocrat than their colleagues who are not in politics.

    Clamouring to bring these saints into politics now under the claim that only technocrats can successfully run a government does not fly in the face of what we all know. I say no more.

    Technocrats abound in every field of human endeavour. A professional in whatever field is a technocrat. Those making a case for technocrats in the newly formed administrations at the national and subnational levels must convince others that their

     campaign is altruistic and not self-serving. If their candidates had won the elections, will they make this kind of special case for technocrats in the scheme of things?

    From when Nigeria became independent in 1960 to date, technocrats have been in government. The nation’s first and only ceremonial president, Dr Nnamdi Azikiwe, was a technocrat, who left his flourishing media empire for public office. Prime Minister Tafawa Balewa was a teacher, who left the classroom for politics.

    Former President Shehu Shagari too left teaching for public office, his deputy, Vice President Alex Ekwueme was a renowned architect and lawyer. How more technocrat can a public office holder be than this? Coming to this dispensation, former President Olusegun Obasanjo (1999-2007) was a military technocrat before he joined politics. 

    His successor, Umoru Yar’Adua (2007-2010) was a lecturer. Goodluck Jonathan (2010-2015) was also a lecturer. Muhammadu Buhari (2015-2023) was also a military brass like Obasanjo. 

    There is no odd man out among all these people. The thing they have in common is being technocrats first before taking public office. Technocrats are experts in their respective fields. This is the expertise they are required to bring to bear on governance.

    You do not need a degree in industrial relations to be labour minister or a  certificate in aeronautics to be aviation minister. 

    Technocrats have served before as minister, commissioner or board chairman. So, the hue and cry for them now seems to be self serving, especially at the national level. 

    They are not doing it because of love for their country, they are doing it to paint the winner of the election as incapable of running the country.

    If they are calling for technocrats, is Bola Tinubu who won the February 25 presidential election not one? They know his antecedents, yet they do not appreciate his innate leadership qualities. He worked at the multinational company, Mobil Oil, and rose to become treasurer before leaving to join politics. He was in the Senate between 1992 and 1993. He was governor of Lagos State between 1999 and 2007.

    The pro-technocrats in government group has a different definition for technocrats. What is more, Tinubu’s executive council as governor was filled with technocrats.

    Ironically, today, as President, he is being harangued on the need for technocrats in his cabinet. What those in the pro-technocrat league know, but do not acknowledge, is that Tinubu appreciates what technocrats can do in and for government. The pro-technocrat in government group is now making it look as if without technocrats, nothing good can come out of government.

    There is tension in the country today because of the issue. For instance, Lagos, a cosmopolitan state, is facing a crisis never before experienced in its history. The House of Assembly, which declined to confirm 17 of Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu’s 39 nominees for commissioner, is livid about issues raised in some quarters over the exercise of its power on the matter.

    What irks the lawmakers most is the claim that they are playing politics with it because most of the nominees are technocrats.  The pro-technocrat people do not understand that a technocrat is also a wielder of political power.

    Being an expert in your field and a wielder of political power make you a complete technocrat. This is why people like Azikiwe, Obafemi Awolowo, M.K.O Abiola and Tinubu, among others, sought political power.

    A technocrat without political acumen is a mere tool in the hands of seasoned politicians. These politicians know what power means and can do anything to acquire it. Unlike technocrats, they do not wait in the wings to be called upon to take power, which has been said, is not served à la carte. Otherwise, we will all go to the restaurant to make our order. Technocrats should not wait on politicians, who are beholden to their loyalists that do all the dirty work, to invite them to take public office after the election.

    A technocrat who is interested in public office should also be interested in the political frays that line the route to power. This was what Speaker Mudashiru Obasa was trying to say about technocrats and power, while explaining why the nominees were not confirmed. 

     He used strong words as he allowed his emotion to overtake him, but the message was clear.

    “They say we are placing politics ahead of technocrats! What technocrat? What do you mean by technocrat? Who is not a technocrat in this hallowed chamber?… We gained power since 1999 and we have to sustain it… So, I am trying to protect my party… We will not sacrifice service to our people in the name of technocrats. We are politicians, and if not for us, the technocrats won’t be appointed…”

    Truly, politics is all about interests and as Obasa said, the lawmakers’ interests lie with their party and constituents.

    There is a lesson in this for technocrats and their backers. Call it Politics 101, if you like. We are in a democracy and not technocracy.

  • Immortal truth

    There are some truths that many people do not want to hear, especially when they do not fit into their set ways. Once, they have made up their minds on any issue, they close their minds to other views.

    Life is all about alternatives; it is either-or. There is nothing on earth without an alternative. Death is the alternative to life; illness, wellness; injustice, justice; lie, truth, and so on and so forth.

    Truth is constant; it is the balm that salves the conscience. This is why no matter how far a lie travels, truth will catch up with it one day.

    The nation should be in the process of healing now, but those aggrieved with the outcome of the February 25 presidential election are fanning the embers of discord. They keep fouling the air with lies and half truths.

    Despite exercising their right to go to court, they still want to be the judge in their own case, contrary to the age-long principle of justice. They must win at all costs. If they do not, then it is miscarriage of justice. 

    A good case is backed by facts, concrete facts. Without solid evidence, a case has little or no chance of succeeding. No amount of blackmail by the litigant or his lawyer can help a bad case. Also, a case is won and lost in court and not by calling a press conference in the open market.

    There is nothing, no matter how sweet a lawyer says outside the court that can help his client’s case, if he did not say it in the courtroom. The present day practice, now common among lawyers, both young and old, of addressing reporters outside the court after the day’s proceedings is not known to law.

    Read Also: Nigerien coup and President Tinubu’s challenges

    What is the use of such press conferences when they do not form part of the court’s record? A lawyer who has made his point succinctly in court does not require any other extra-judicial means, which these arranged press briefings are, to state his case.

    But lawyers do not care as long as the end justifies the means. This says a lot about people who are supposed to be ministers in the temple of justice. There is no other case in recent times than the presidential poll dispute that has suffered from this kind of antics. The petitioners, their lawyers and supporters have come to see the court as standing between them and justice!

    Rather than look inwards and check if they have a good case, they prefer to engage in clout (read as shadow) chasing, as the social media people will say. Long after the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) reserved judgment, they are still fishing for evidence abroad to use in the case! Of what use will that be? Are they planning to arrest the judgment so that they can bring their new evidence, if ever they get one?

    This resort to a voyage of discovery did not start today. As far back as 2008, election disputants played the same game, provoking stern reaction from the late Justice Niki Tobi, who was on the PEPC panel that heard the Buhari versus Yar’Adua case. “The Court of Appeal cannot collect evidence from the market overt… On the contrary, the court has to wait for evidence in the court building…

    “Courts do not go on a frolic or on a journey to collect … evidence… they deal only with evidence before them. For the avoidance of doubt, I am not saying… that all was well with the presidential election conducted in 2007. What I am saying is that there was no evidence… to dislodge Section 146 (1) of the Electoral Act”, Tobi said in apparent anger to the criticisms of that panel.

    Part of his conclusion was that: “Nigeria is a country where suspicion of wrongdoing is the pastime of the citizens. Nigerians should realise that some public officers should be trusted to do the right thing. Why not the judges?” Yes, why not the judges? Why can the Justices handling the Atiku, Obi petitions against President Tinubu not be trusted to do the right thing? Why?

    Have the petitioners discharged the obligation in Section 135 (1) of the Electoral Act 2022 (as amended), which was hitherto Section 146 (1) in the 2006 law cited by the late Justice Tobi, in their bid to void President Tinubu’s election? I leave the Justice Haruna Tsammani-led PEPC to answer the question.

    Section 135 (1) states: An election shall not be liable to be invalidated by reason of non-compliance with the provisions of this Act, if it appears to the Election Tribunal or Court that the election was conducted substantially in accordance with the principles of this Act and that the non-compliance did not affect substantially the result of the election.

    One thing is certain: Blackmailing the Tsammani panel will not work just as it failed to move the Tobi panel in 2008. As the late Justice Tobi said: “I regard all the comments, some of them doubting our integrity to do justice according to law, as blackmail and I will not succumb to blackmail”. 

    Judges are not known to succumb to blackmail and I do not see the PEPC bowing to it in the Atiku, Obi petitions, no matter how many #AllEyesonElectionTribunalJudges billboards these politicians commission.

    Justice Tobi may be dead, but his immortal words on the provisions of Section 146 (1) now Section 135 (1) on election invalidation, as being like a Rock of Gibraltar, solidly standing behind and for a respondent to an election petition, remain the truth and nothing but the truth. As the erudite jurist noted, the law was made by the National Assembly and not judges. So, on who should alleyes be?

  • In bad taste

    In bad taste

    Call it an act of desperation, and you may not be wrong. Their desperation has made them to lose every sense of reason; they cannot pause and consider the consequences of their actions. In their eyes, they are doing what is right, and anybody who tries to correct them becomes an instant enemy, no matter his status.

    How can a set of people be so patently wrong and yet see themselves as right? It is either their own way or no way. It all started before the 2023 general elections. The emergence of candidates for the February 25 presidential election on the platforms of the various parties was in itself a tug-of-war. It was full of pulling and tugging. With the primaries over, a clearer picture of the contenders and pretenders in the race emerged.

    Read Also: BREAKING: Tinubu assigns portfolios to Ministers-Designate

    By then, the air had been polluted by the politics of ethnicity, religion and bitterness. The youths, the highest demographic group in the over 93 million voter’s list who ought to know better, fell into the hands of manipulators, who used them to achieve selfish ends. But the election did not go their way, despite all the contrived polls which said their candidate would win. Truth be told, Peter Obi had no chance in that election.

    But he put up a good showing, as he and former Vice President Atiku Abubakar ate into each other’s votes in places where either of them could have won hands down, if they had run together. Their self-inflicted error became President Bola Tinubu’s gain. They have refused to see it this way since their loss in that epochal race.

    There has not been peace since the election was won and lost on March 1. The clerics and the pundits who gave the election to Obi, their preferred candidate, rather than accept the result in the spirit of true sportsmanship, have transferred their bitterness with the President to the court which is adjudicating on the electoral dispute.

    Just as they called the President names before, during and after the poll, so are they now tagging the judiciary. The country has never seen a thing like this before. Even the June 12 debacle was not this bad. Though the Abimbola Davies’,  the ‘Dr Atkins’ and the Arthur Nzeribes’ of this world used the court to truncate the electoral process, they did not descend so low as to call out judges in public and accuse them of misdemeanour as we are witnessing today. 

    Supporters of the first and second runners-up in the February 25 poll are taking out their candidates’ loss on the judiciary. Is that the way the losers will win their cases before the Presidential Election Petitions Court (PEPC)? Blackmail cannot help them. Blackmail has never helped any litigant. Rather, it ruins their case. Why?

    No court will watch and allow its integrity to be dragged in the mud. What has the supporters of Obi and Atiku not done in their desperation to pressure the PEPC to see things their own way? Election and litigation are mutually exclusive. So, you cannot employ the same tactics in fighting them. While you can deploy blackmail in election, you cannot easily do same with litigation and have your way.

    Everything they threw at the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Kayode Ariwoola did not stick. Their trick is to get him out of the way before the case gets to the Supreme Court, where it will eventually end. As we all know, as CJN, he may choose to head the panel that will hear the appeal that is likely to follow the PEPC judgment whenever it is delivered.

    Rather than sheathe their swords as the nation awaits the judgment with bated breath, the losers’ crowds are busy doing what they know how to do best – making wild allegations all over the place in order to pull the wool over people’s eyes. The other day, they claimed that a member of the five-man PEPC had resigned, and followed it up with the allegation of Justice Ariwoola’s meeting with the President. Before then, it was that he was seen disguised on a wheelchair at Heathrow Airport in London.

    His features were visibly clear in the video that went rival in social media that there was no mistaking who he is. And now through a billboard, they want to put the PEPC on the spot ahead of its judgment. The#AllEyesonTheElectionTribunal Judges billboard is obscene. It was obscenity at its worst. The message was not lost on the public. It was a direct attack on the integrity of the Justices, who have been through a lot over the Atiku and Obi petitions.

    Why all this alarm and fear? If these noisemakers are sure of their candidates’ cases, they should allow the Justices to do their job in line with their oath “… to dispense justice without fear or favour, affection or illwill”. After all, after PEPC, they still have the Supreme Court to approach, if they are not satisfied. That advert was in bad taste. As bad as Donald Trump is, he will not go to that length to denigrate the American judiciary.

    Those who approved the advert were insensitive, too insensitive to the tense socio-political mood in the land. They should have seen through the advertisers’ ploy to use the billboard to whip up sentiments and throw the Justices under the bus. The clock is ticking and very soon, we will all know where the pendulum swings. One thing is sure: justice will be served. It cannot be otherwise because justice is blind, bold, fair, equitable and just to all that come before it. At the end of the day, the joke will be on the advertisers.

    Approving that billboard for them was a great disservice to the nation, no matter the amount they paid. Everything should not be about money, money, money.