It IS not an issue that should generate so much heat. Political appointees abound all over the place and they know themselves and what they do. So, why the fuss? A political appointee is hired and fired by the head of the executive at the federal or state level. He does not seek appointment into the civil or public service in the same way as career civil or public servants. He holds his appointment at the pleasure of the President or governor.

These appointees, however, work in the bureaucratic set up of the civil or public service. The only difference between them and the career civil and public servants is that they have a tenured appointment tied to the term(s) of office of their principals. They are unlike the career civil or public servants who leave after a 35-year service or upon attaining the retirement age of 60, whichever comes first.

Career civil or public servants are subject to civil or public service rules, which guide their appointment, discipline,promotion and retirement. Political appointees, on the other hand, are in a world of their own, by virtue of being the President’s or governor’s staff. At times, they are deployed to work with Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs). These staff of the President or governors have become people of interest in the countdown to the 2023 elections.

The National Assembly led by Senate President Ahmad Lawan and Speaker Femi Gbajabiamila has barred them under Section 84 (12) of the Electoral Act from participating in parties’ primaries. The provision says: No political appointee at any level shall be a voting delegate or be voted for at the convention or congress of any political party for the purpose of the nomination of candidates for any election. The provision did not go down well with President Muhammadu Buhari. He delayed assenting to the law until he extracted a promise from the lawmakers to expunge the provision from the Act.

The lawmakers passed the law without doing his bidding when it was returned to them. The executive then surreptitiously went to a Federal High Court in Umuahia, Abia State, to get the provision voided as well as an order that it should be expunged from the Act. The National Assembly, which was not joined in the suit, has since appealed the decision. With the elections drawing near and the parties getting ready for their primaries, the burning questions are: who is a political appointee? Section 84 (12) does not say. It assumes that he is known. Should such political appointees resign before the primaries, as stated in the Electoral Act, or the general elections, as contained in the Constitution?

The definition of a political appointee can be deduced from the Constitution under which the National Assembly derives its power. The President’s contention is that Section 84 (12) contravenes the constitutional provisions on election matters. According to Sections 66 (1)(f), 107 (1)(f), 137 (1)(g) and 182 (1)(g), a civil or public servant must resign, withdraw or retire from service at least 30 days before election into the Senate or House of Representatives, a House of Assembly, the office of President and the office of governor.

Herein lies the problem. Section 84 (12) talks of political appointees, while the Constitution mentions civil or public servants. Are political appointees civil or public servants as envisaged under the  Constitution? Can civil or public service be taken as one and the same thing? The second poser is imperative because of Section 137 (1)(g) of the Constitution which specifically states that a presidential candidate must quit civil or public service at least 30 days before election. For one, the Constitution talks of election and not primary which Section 84 (12) dwells on.

Second, the issue is under which category do political appointees fall in the Constitution? Part II of the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution seems to answer the question. As a layman, I may be wrong. My own understanding is that they are public officers like their principals who appointed them. The schedule lists public officers for the purpose of the Code of Conduct as the President, Vice President, governors and their deputies, National and Houses of Assembly members and staff, all judicial officers and court workers, all ministers, armed forces, police and other government security agencies’ members, Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Head of Service of the Federation and their counterparts in the states  and the workers.

They also include ambassadors, high commissioners and missions’ staff abroad, workers of universities and other colleges and institutions and chairmen, members and workers of statutory agencies. It is evident that political appointees, like public servants, are subject to the declaration of their assets on assuming and leaving office under the Code of Conduct. Is it then just and fair to other contestants to allow these appointees to remain in office till 30 days before an election in which they are candidates before resigning?

The lawmakers as politicians know the consequences of that. They know what their fellow politicians in the executive arm can do with their power and enormous resources in determining who gets a party’s ticket. This is why they came up with that provision, even though they too would act as the political appointees, who are busy declaring interest in one office or the other, if the shoe is on the other leg. Many are doing so, while still holding their political jobs, and their principals are encouraging them.

The intention of Section 84 (12) is clear. It is to stop the use of executive power to frustrate the chances of strong and popular aspirants at primaries. Only those with bad intentions will oppose such law which is meant to create a level playing field for all aspirants. People should look at the message and not the messengers, who are fighting to protect their own selfish political interests by using their legislative powers to check the influence of the executive to determine the outcome of the shadow elections. Sadly, those who should know better and endorse the provision are shooting it down. But, the public looks up to the court to save the day and our democracy.

WHENEVER he speaks, people listen. So, the man needs no introduction. Pastor Enoch Adejare Adeboye’s take on the elections billed for 2023 is scary. Scary because of the way he put it. The General Overseer (GO) of the Redeemed Christian Church of God (RCCG) said God had not told him yet whether the elections would hold. He emphasised the word ‘yet’ before mischief makers would seize the space and say Daddy GO, as he is popularly known, has predicted that the elections would Adeboye was not saying anything new. Some Nigerians from different walks of life had expressed similar sentiments at one time or the other. They have not stopped expressing that fear. Although there is a caveat to Adeboye’s position on the issue, others have spoken with certainty that the elections would not hold, citing the prevailing economic hardship, social disharmony and insecurity.

These are plausible reasons which could hinder the conduct of the elections. Long before now, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) too raised the alarm that insecurity could jeopardise the elections. The electoral umpire spoke in the wake of the destruction of its facilities and sensitive election materials in some parts of the country, especially the Southeast . Those expressing doubts over the conduct of the elections cannot be blamed. The portents are not good, contrary to the picture that the government is painting.

The government may have given security its best shot, as it is wont to say, but it appears that its best is not good enough. It seemed the government came to power, underestimating the security problem. Insecurity is not tackled by mere words of mouth. It is addressed by employing tact, strategy, equipment and well trained personnel. Security is key to the social harmony of a country and where it is missing, there cannot be peace, progress and unity. When all these ingredients are not there, elections cannot hold.  Who can talk of elections in an atmosphere of fear, death and destruction?

Adeboye is not a politician, as he rightly pointed out. The public knows him as a pastor, a calling in which he has excelled. He spoke out of concern for what he has been seeing and which all of us are seeing, except those who want to bury their heads in the sand like ostrich. Despite all the fears over 2023, many cannot wait for the elections to come and go. Ask them why, they will reply without batting an eyelid that the present administration has not delivered on its promises.

If possible, they even want the government to leave now. But why are many afraid for 2023? It is mainly because of insecurity. Forget the rising food prices, the spiralling cost of cooking gas, diesel, kerosine, aviation fuel and petrol and the abject proverty in the land, it is insecurity that is gnawing at the back of people’s minds.

The government promised to take 100 million people out of poverty. With the situation of things today, it is rather driving millions into poverty. There is, therefore, nothing to cheer about the report that India has taken over from Nigeria as the world’s poverty capital. Reason: India has a population of 1.38 billion, as at 2020, which is over six times that of Nigeria, which is put at 210.87 million as at 2021.

The government brandishes its record in roads development and modernisation of the rail system.

These gains are being eroded by insecurity. The rail, the air and the road are no longer safe. Look at what happened on the Abuja-Kaduna rail route on March 28. More than one week after the incident, many are still unaccounted for. The most worrisome of it all is that the Nigerian Railway Corporation (NRC) does not know the actual number of passengers on board the ill-fated train. People look at things like this and thunder: “you are talking of 2023; which 2023?”.

Those who think elections will hold in 2023 and those with contrary view agree on one thing though –  the present administration must go and “the sooner it leaves, the better”. 2023 is eight months from now. The elections will hold in nine, 10 months time. Between now and the hand over of government on May 29, 2023, we have close to 12 months. It is still a long way to go before the dawn of a new government. What will happen between now and 2023 is in the hands of God? Will there be elections in 2023? I believe that the elections will hold. I am an incurable optimist when it comes to Nigeria. We have survived bad times before and these harsh times too shall come to pass right before our eyes.

To those anxious over 2023, Nigeria has never seen worst times than this. This is why the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) is gloating over what it calls the misgovernance of the All Progressives Congress (APC), which wrested power from it in 2015. Indeed, people are benumbed by what they have seen under the APC government. They invested high hopes in the party, believing that it would show PDP how to run a country. Sadly, the joke today is on APC rather than PDP. Be that as it may, Nigerians should not lose hope. Our destiny lies in our hands.

Must our choices be limited to either APC or PDP? We should look beyond them if our country must come out of the cocoon to which it has been consigned by these two parties in the last 24 years. We deserve something better than APC and PDP. So, our aim in 2023 should be to vote in a party that can turn the fortunes of the country around. We have been stuck in one place for 24 years because we limited ourselves to choosing between six and half a dozen. What is the difference?

The butcher in Bucha

RUSSIAN President Vladimir Putin has got more than what he bargained for in Ukraine. When his country launched what he called a ‘special military operation’ in Ukraine on February 24, it was meant to be a short and sharp invasion. More than a month after, his army has not succeeded in taking over Ukraine. They are winning in the air, but losing on the land. His soldiers have been bombing apartment buildings, schools and hospitals, killing children and the elderly and maiming many others, but the Ukrainian army has stood firm on the ground.

The most bestial act of the invasion happened in a town called Bucha, on the outskirts of Kyiv, Ukraine’s capital,  where the butcher went on a killing spree. The world is revolted by the pictures of the massacre so far released. Our people can now see what a massacre or genocide really is. Bodies littered the streets of Bucha. Some were headless and limbless. It was a gory sight to behold. These war crimes should not go unpunished. Otherwise, another, worse than Putin may rise again. If Putin could attempt to set the global community on the path of another world war despite what happened to Adolf Hitler, who caused World War 11, then a good example must be made of him to deter his ilk.

RAIL has become many people’s first choice of travelling since its modernisation began under the Buhari administration. Travellers, who hitherto avoided the rail like plague, now troop to train stations for a ride to their destinations. Good things have, no doubt, been happening in the rail transport subsector in the past few years.

The Abuja-Kaduna route, especially, has become the talk of town, not mainly because of the tragic incident along the axis on Monday and Tuesday, but for its large volume of patronage. The route is the traveller’s delight because of the danger that the Abuja-Kaduna road has become. The road is a no-go area having beeen seized by bandits and terrorists despite the numerous military/police checkpoints there.

These Checkpoint Charlies, if they can be called that, have failed the people. They are there for the show and not the work, with the innocent traveller paying the price for the security operatives’ laxity. The recourse to rail was essentially informed by travellers’ need for safety. It is not for the fact that they would get a good service. Fear drove travellers to use trains, but unfortunately, what they fled from on the road has become their nightmare on rail. Since the opening of the Abuja-Kaduna route, other rail services have also been running in other parts of the country.

The Lagos-Ibadan rail service stands out among them. Those who have used the service, praised it to high heavens. But like its Abuja-Kaduna counterpart, all is also not well on that route. It is one day, one trouble. It is either a train is breaking down in the bush or running out of fuel, thereby endangering passengers’ lives. We may not have a situation where bandits or terrorists are waylaying trains on the Lagos-Ibadan route, but what is happening there is not different from what we see around Abuja-Kaduna.

As it is now, people travel with their hearts in their mouths. No means of transportation is safe. The air, the road and the rail appear jinxed for travellers, who go into prayer and fasting and even do vigil before embarking on their trips. Until now, the air was the safest means of travelling. It is no longer so because of the activities of bandits, terrorists and herdsmen. The road too has become impassable for fear of kidnappers and herdsmen. Rail is no longer the odd one out as things are as bad there as they are in the air and on the road.

Anywhere travellers turn to, there is no comfort. They are besieged at home, on the road, rail and in the air. By now, the Federal Government should have found a way round the security issue on the Abuja-Kaduna route, which from day one has been a source of trouble for travellers. Since service  started there, travellers have not known peace. They travel on the route in trepidation. As a people of faith, what they do is to commit their journey to God whenever they are boarding trains at the Idu Station. God has been faithful, protecting the travellers.

But has the government played its part? It is not enough to have state-of-the-art trains on that route, it is also the government’s duty to ensure that the users are safe. No government puts a train on the rail line and leaves the citizenry to their fate while using it. What happened on the Abuja-Kaduna route on Monday could have been averted if the government had learnt from past incidents. Trains had been ambushed there before and travellers either killed or kidnapped. But that of Monday is amazing. The bandits and terrorists went a step further. They bombed a train.

What will these terrorists not do to put fear into travellers? They have tried all sorts of tricks in their book, but they turned a new page with the introduction of bombing. Reports said improvised explosive devices (IEDs) were used in bombing the train, which had over 300 official passengers on board. Earlier claims said they were over 900. No matter what, getting IEDs on to the rail tracks could not have been easy. It must have been done under the cover of darkness and not in daytime. What this tells us is that the rail lines are not well covered.

Security is paramount in any business. The government cannot spend billions of naira to acquire trains, build tracks and go to sleep, without securing the infrastructure. If the tracks and trains  were well covered and secured, Monday’s tragedy might have been avoided. Nobody puts up a fanciful structure without fortifying it. Terrorists, bandits and their like have had a free reign on that route for too long. They have struck not once, not twice, but several times. Each time, they killed, kidnapped and maimed people.

Monday’s tragedy occurred some 24 hours after terrorists invaded the Kaduna Airport, killing one person. Some passengers on the illfated Abuja-Kaduna train have relived their harrowing experience. They said they were lucky to be alive. As usual, top government officials have also been speaking. Transportation Minister Rotimi Amaechi said his plans to acquire sensitive security gadgets that could detect any planted item on the rail tracks were hindered by civil service bureaucracy.

President Muhammadu Buhari has directed that the track be repaired forthwith and rail services resumed. As usual, he ordered that the perpetrators be brought to book. The security and military chiefs promised to get the culprits, as if they apprehended those who committed the same atrocities in the past. This is the usual noise that they make when such tragedies occur. What the govermment can do now is to assure the people of their safety whenever they travel and by whatever means they choose to do so.

As Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu noted while cancelling the colloquium for his 70th birthday on Tuesday, this is a time for sober reflection. My heart goes out to the families of the departed. May God comfort you and may your loved ones find rest in the Lord’s bosom. But the billion naira question remains: how should people now travel without their hearts in their mouths?

SHE TOOK the decision without batting an eyelid as she voided Section 84 (12) of the Electoral Act. Her Ladyship, Justice Evelyn Anyadike of the Federal High Court, Umuahia, Abia State, did not stop at that. She further ordered that the provision, which President Muhammadu Buhari considers ‘offensive’ be expunged from the Act when gazetted. It was an order made per incuriam, as lawyers would say. This means that it was made in error. How?

One, because Anyadike acted contrary to the provisions of the Constitution, by directing that the provision be expunged from the Act, when she does not have such power. Two, all the interested and necessary parties were not before the court. It is a well known fact that you cannot shave a man’s head behind his back, as the late MKO Abiola used to say, the way the judge did.

She granted the request of the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice Abubakar Malami (SAN) to invalidate the section, without hearing from the National Assembly, which amendment of the Act led to the court case. How and when the case was filed remain unknown. The making and signing of the Act have a controversial history. It took the President ages to sign it into law after it was amended by the National Assembly. The first controversy was over the mode of primaries to be adopted by parties in picking candidates for elections.

The lawmakers recommended direct primaries, where all party members will participate in the selection process. The President kicked, claiming that it was against the spirit and letter of the Constitution which granted individuals unfettered right to make that decision. He said there should be options for people to choose from. The National Assembly acceded to his request, by including indirect primaries and consensus as other options of picking candidates in the Act.

Still, the President was not satisfied. He sat on the Act for days again, before eventually signing it with the caveat that the ‘offensive’ Section 84 (12) be tweaked. The National Assembly promised to consider his request to take another look at the provision, which says that political appointees cannot participate in parties’ primaries without first resigning. It was a way of checking the executive (the President and governors) from flooding the primaries with their appointees to do their bidding. The Senate cut the carpet from under the President’s feet by retaining the provision as it is when it sat on March 9, while also ignoring a court order stopping it from further working on the law. The House of Representatives has yet to reconsider the provision.

All these were in the public domain. The executive was miffed. It perceived the Senate’s action as a breach of the Gentleman’s Agreement between the President and the lawmakers. Malami gave a hint of what to follow, which the public ignored when he said the executive would explore other options, including legal redress, in order to have its way. No one ever imagined that it would go to court, as it were, through the backdoor. Before the ink  dried on the paper on which the decision was written, Malami announced with glee that it would be enforced to the letter.

His words: “The Act will be gazetted factoring the effect of the judgment into consideration and deleting the constitutionally offensive provision accordingly. The provision of Section 84 (12) of the Electoral Act 2022 is not part of our law and will be so treated accordingly”. As a senior lawyer, Malami should know better. This is not the end of the case and he should not be in too much hurry to gazette Anyadike’s order, warts and all, when the judicial process has not been exhausted. It is befuddling that his office is lending itself to this kind of shenanigan. As attorney-general (AG), he should be more interested in upholding the rule of law instead of using it to achieve selfish ends.

Can we really blame Malami when the judiciary is spineless? Who is an attorney-general before a judge? Yes, he holds a high office, quite alright, but that does not give him the right to act as a judge or dictate to a judge how he should do his work. Unfortunately, this is what we are witnessing in this case, where the AG, the chief law officer of the nation, went to court surreptitiously, so to say, to obtain an order just for the executive to have its way. The courts are there for all – the strong and the weak, the rich and the poor, the leader and the led. They are not meant to be used to oppress the weak, the poor and the led.

This is what Malami has done in this case in collaboration with Anyadike. A judge is the master of his own court. He does not take directives from any lawyer, be he the AG or not. He does not look at a lawyer’s face or status. He applies the law the way it should, without fear or favour, affection or illwill. Anyadike failed this litmus test in her handling of this highly sensitive and contentious matter. She cannot say that she has not been following developments over the Act since the National Assembly began its amendment. So, when the matter came up before her, she should have asked the plaintiff’s and sole defendant’s lawyers certain questions.

Her first question should have been: are all the interested and necessary parties before the court? She did not do that. These are some of the things people point at when they say many of our judges today are compromised. They refer to the times past when the judiciary lived up to expectations. They recall with nostalgia that a Justice Dolapo Akinsanya, a Justice Roseline Omotosho, a Justice Modupe Omo-Eboh or a Justice Rose Ukeje, in their own time would not sit on the Bench and make the kind of order that Anyadike made based on the sort of application before her.

They would have asked: “Learned counsel, why is the National Assembly not here? Why is the electoral commission not here? Don’t you think they should be in this matter? I don’t think we can go on without them being joined in this case?” They would have asked these pertinent questions because the subject-matter of the suit concerns them. But not so this Justice Anyadike, who believes in using the law to help the government rather than the society.

The National Assembly passed the Act, which will guide the electoral commission’s activities. That makes it both an interested and a necessary party which must be compulsorily (emphasis mine)  joined in the matter. The National Assembly’s absence in the matter is fatal to the plaintiff’s case because those already involved in the suit cannot receive complete relief without it. Second, because of its interest in the matter, its absence can either impair the protection of that interest or leave some other party (like INEC , in this instance) subject to multiple or inconsistent obligations.

Our judiciary has a tradition of excellence, which today is being eroded by judges who are not ‘fit and proper’ to be on the Bench. Ever before the coming of the Technical Aid Corps (TAC), under which brilliant Nigerian professionals are sent abroad to work, our judges did that kind of job in many parts of Africa unsung. They built and developed the judiciary of many sister African countries. Some of them, like the late Justice Daddy Onyeama, the late Justice Taslim Olawale Elias and Justice Bola Ajibola, who turned 88 on Tuesday, also served at the International Court of Justice, at The Hague.

Elias rose to become the World Court president. But he and Onyeama will be turning in their graves, seeing what has become of our judiciary today. Judges like Anyadike should not be allowed to destroy this legacy. The people should not stand idly by and watch this legacy being rubbished by the shenanigans of politicians and greedy judges, who prefer filthy lucre to honour and good name. What will it profit a judge to become wealthy through avarice but lose his integrity? Let our judges ponder over this poser.

MAKE no mistake about this – the headline is not to profane the name of God. It is to draw attention to the misuse of God’s highly-revered name by those who should know better. Many pastors like to play god, using their calling, that is if they are actually called, and the platform of their churches to hoodwink the gullible.

The name of God is a strong tower, says the Bible. What this tells us is that the name is not like any name that can be taken and used just for the fun of it. To these pastors, the name has become a business tool to be used at will.

But, the Lord’s name is not to be merchandised. It is for the saviour and the winning of souls for heavenly kingdom. Yet man, especially pastors who see themselves as God’s representatives on earth, because they own or lead a church, use the name to mislead their sheep, who refer to them as daddy. A daddy is a guide and a guard, who leads his children not unto temptation, but protects them against the vicissitudes of life.

These men of God turned gods of men, under the claim of shepherding their sheep, now seek to guide their political thoughts, their conjugal life and other aspects of living.  They worry less about societal decay, but are concerned more about who meets the biblical definition of “a cheerful giver”. God loves a cheerful giver, no doubt, but the giving must come from the lawful earnings of the giver and not filthy lucre, which in most instances some of these tithes, offerings and donations are from.

Pastors collect them and bless the givers without asking for the source of the money. Many of these one-time big givers have run into trouble today, with the churches looking the other way and moving on with the current cheerful givers. The churches are the same; they are only different in name. A memo from one of them has thrown up a political storm because it came from the least expected quarters. Yes, because the Redeemed Christian Church of God (RCCG) is seen as a sedate and solemn Ministry.

The memo was straight to the point. It stated what was expected of members in the unfolding political dispensation. With members worldwide, RCCG may not have the huge numbers that the Catholic Church boasts of, but its presence in 180 countries is significant. It is this huge membership that it wants to cash on towards the 2023 election. Why its sudden interest in the 2023 election? Some may say, the question is a no-brainer and they will be justified. Led by the highly-respected Pastor Enoch Adeboye, RCCG boasts of members in high places.

Many in power, including Vice-President Yemi Osinbajo count among its members. Osinbajo is also a pastor in Redeemed and was one of the close aides of Adeboye before he became vice-president. Adeboye was instrumental in Osinbajo accepting to be President Muhammadu Buhari’s running mate in 2015. They come a long way and their closeness was brought home after Osinbajo’s plane crashlanded in Lokoja, Kogi State, in February 2019.

Adeboye has relived that incident on the pulpit on several occasions, telling congregants how God ministered to him to pray three times for Osinbajo after a visit: “Father, please save your son”. On many occasions too, he has regaled congregants with a vision that he got from God that one of his children will become so powerful that people will rise in his honour wherever he went. “One day, you will enter a place and everybody will rise on their feet for you”, he said to loud amens.

Today, wherever Osinbajo goes, people rise in his honour. He only stands up for Buhari. To this extent, that prediction has come to pass. But the greater one is yet ahead, as Macbeth noted after he was pronounced Thane of Cawdor shortly after his encounter with the three witches in Shakespeare’s tragic play of the same name: Macbeth. The greater one that Macbeth referred to was being king of Scotland. Osinbajo too is a step away from the greater one – Presidency. This is why many believe that the RCCG memo is to help the political cause of Osinbajo, who has not publicly said anything about running for President in 2023.

Is the memo to pave the way for Osinbajo’s declaration? Is it a way of telling members to rally round their own when the time comes? Is he interested in running? Has Osinbajo sought Adeboye’s spiritual counsel about the matter? If he has, what advice did Daddy GO give him? People are wondering why RCCG issued the memo, with the subject-matter: Office of Directorate of Politics and Governance. The memo announced the creation of that office and the appointment of Pastor Timothy Olaniyan to head it.

The memo, signed by Pastor J.F. Odesola directed all pastors-in-charge of regions and provinces to appoint immediately provincial officers for their provinces and replicate same at all other levels of the church – zone, area and parish. Even, members of the church are wondering why RCCG is dabbling into politics. If it wishes to support the ambition of any of its members, can it not do so without throwing itself open to the criticisms of favouring one son over the other?

What does the memo say of RCCG? Is it not the same RCCG which prides itself in following the leadership of the Pentecostal Fellowship of Nigeria (PFN) in political matters? Did it take a cue from PFN before setting up its political directorate? It is difficult; too, too difficult to shake the public belief that the directorate was not created to help Osinbajo’s political cause. This is why other RCCG members who are also in politics are annoyed.

To them, the church has by its action, disowned them and  cast its lot with Osinbajo, who has not even come out to make his intentions known. “The church has, unwittingly, spoken for Osinbajo, while treating us as pariahs”, one of the aggrieved men said. Daddy GO needs Solomonic wisdom to handle this matter to avoid a divided house.

The ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) got to power from nowhere. It was a mishmash of groups that hurriedly came together late in 2014 to battle then ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) for the Presidency. President Muhammadu Buhari was the party’s candidate and he was trying his luck for the plum job for the fourth time.

He was lucky this time around. He and his party came to power, giving people high hopes; hopes of turning things around in a country that was bleeding and still is, contrary to the expectations that under them, there would be a change for good. The party mouthed change, the mantra under which it sold itself to the people, promising to turn the economy around, strengthen security and provide jobs.

It has not delivered on all counts. What did Buhari really bring to the table than his much-touted 12 million votes from the North, where he is revered for being an upright man (Mai Gaskiya). It is good to be upright, but it is better to have the capacity for the job. Buhari’s adventure in power shall be a topic for another day. Today, the focus is on his (mis)handling of the vehicle (APC) that he rode to power. APC is in tatters. It has become a rudderless ship, tossing up and down the sea.

Something needs to be done fast before it sinks and takes everybody down with it. It is still a long way, though, to the 2023 election where the party’s fate will be decided by the electorate that saw in it seven years ago the nation’s hope for the future. The jury is out and its verdict is that APC has failed the nation. It will be hard not to agree with that. For the umpteenth time, the party’s leadership has been tampered with in a manner unexpected of an association, which once prided itself as the promoter of the rule of law.

The APC now follows the rule of man; the dictates of the President who determines who gets what. It all started with the removal of Adams Oshiomhole as APC chair in what now seems to be ages ago. Since that June 2020 misadventure, the party has been running from pillar to post. Yobe State Governor Mai Mala Buni benefited from the ensuing succession crisis. Buhari ordered him to take over in acting capacity and also made him chairman of the caretaker extraordinary convention planning committee.

Over 18 months after he took over the party after abandoning his duty post in Damaturu, the Yobe State capital, Buni has not got his act together. Rather than knit APC together, he keeps widening the gulf among members of the party. His fellow governors who thought they could ride on his back to get their way have parted ways with him as he keeps shifting the date of the  convention where the party’s national executive committee will either emerge or be elected, as the case may be. The March 26 convention, if it holds, will also determine who gets the party’s presidential ticket.

Buni’s inordinate ambition to be the running mate to a candidate to be chosen in a convention which will be scripted by him and his footsoldiers has done him in. He has been removed by presidential fiat and replaced with Niger State Governor Abubakar Sani-Bello.

But one man whose presidential aspiration cannot be ignored appears to have become the fresh source of  worry of many in the leadership cadre of the party. Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, like others, worked assiduously for the emergence of APC as a party and its victory at the polls in 2015. He spent time, energy and resources to get the party into power. When he did all these, the party apparatchiks saw him as a trusted ally that one can go to war with.

But when he indicated interest in the 2023 Presidency,  many of his friends within the party started grumbling. Who does he think he is? Why does he want to be president? What do we owe him? He should go and sit down. They said all these and more. Rather than face the bigger challenge of party crisis, Tinubu and his presidential ambition became the issue. The party had been hit by crisis ever before Tinubu declared his ambition. For APC to move forward, it must accept its shortcomings. For one, it is not being run as a party.

For a party in power, that is not good enough. The party should not cede its power to its elected office holders. If it believes in the principle of supremacy of party, it should not allow its governors and even the President to call the shots within the party. Once, this happens, it sends the wrong signal. These people can and should have a voice in the party but their word must not be law, as it is presently the case at state and national levels.

As president in the defunct National Party of Nigeria (NPN)-led administration between 1979 and 1983, Shehu Shagari never dictated who became party chairman or not. The affairs of state are too enormous for any president to leave for party politics. The Presidency is not a tea party; it is a time-consuming job that requires the attention of the President 24 hours of the day. The earlier President Buhari realises this, the better. It is not too late for him to allow APC to rediscover itself in his remaining 15 months in office. APC is at war with itself on all fronts. How the party got to this pass remains a puzzle.

One thing is clear though. It was not ready for the power it wrested from PDP in 2015. Power,  it seemed, was delivered to it on a platter. This is what happens when one is not prepared for something. What ordinarily should be its gain is turning to its loss right before its eyes. On Tuesday, a Federal High Court in Abuja sacked Ebonyi State Governor David Umahi, who defected to it from PDP. This is a matter it should address with one voice and fast too, otherwise the same fate may befall it in Cross River and Zamfara.

It is now the lot of Bello to save the party from itself. Will he chart the right course for APC? He has little time to deliver on this charge.