Category: Gabriel Amalu

By Gabriel Amalu

As the final term of President Muhammadu Buhari’s presidency reeves to breast the tape, it is right to begin to access his legacy. One of the benefit of such endeavour is to remind the president that willy-nilly his tenure will soon come to an end. Another is to give the president an opportunity to cement his positive endeavours; and the chance to amend the negatives where the opportunity still exists.

Of course, this piece will not be able to list all the achievements of the president, neither would it be able to itemize all the failings of the regime. So, it will take a bite of both, and hope the message is passed that very soon, the alarm bell will start ringing time-up.

On the positive side, history would be kind to the president for his work to revive the railway, which was abandoned in the days of the military buccaneers that took over power in 1985. As I write this piece, the Lagos-Ibadan rail-line is ready, and there are plans to continue the project going up to the northern part of the country.

There is also a quantum leap in road infrastructure, and that includes a 10 lane Lagos- Ibadan expressway; as well as the 2nd Niger Bridge, which has been in the works, without much action, since the return of civilian rule in 1999. Similar important roads arteries are being developed in other parts of the country.

The Buhari presidency is also doing well in the aviation sector. The runways in Abuja, Lagos, and Enugu have been rebuilt, while some airports have new terminals. Also the temporary closure of the Abuja airport some time ago, offered an opportunity to upgrade the Kaduna International airport. In the agricultural sector, both the Central Bank and the ministry of agriculture are pumping resources into the sector.

Where the tenure of President Buhari to be about such positive efforts to revive various sectors of the economy, his legacy would be secured. But alas, one factor seems to have almost torpedoed all the great achievements. And that is the tragic promotion of the president’s filial relationship over and above the oath of office to which the president swore at his inauguration.

And that is why, despite all these achievements, the president is derided as a tribal and nepotistic leader, whose principal interest is to protect persons of his ethnic nationality, persons who worship God in the same way he does, and those who come from a certain geographical region. Of course, those who surround him, lie to him that exuding those preferences does not infringe the constitution of the country.

The most perverse of those negatives is his bias for his ethnic Fulani. While it will be unfair to expect the president to deny his Fulani nationality, and cultural idiosyncrasies, it is absurd, unlawful, unconstitutional and reprehensible that the president would promote the interests of his ethnic nationality, even when such action is derailing the corporate existence of country, he swore to protect and defend.

At the risk of repeating myself, it is that outward manifestation of bias that is undermining the achievements of his presidency. Except one lives in self-denial, the nation is torn apart today, because people of other ethnic nationalities, including the Hausas, are in various degrees of protest against the state, because they believe the president exudes ethnic characteristics.

Unfortunately, the resultant inter-ethnic tension and crisis have bread mini-insurgency in some parts of the country, and other forms of open confrontation against the state in other parts. As a sign of loss of faith, people of other ethnic nationalities openly call for the dismemberment of the country, and mentioning the president’s actions as the reason for their demands.

Emboldened by the disposition of the president, armed herdsmen, who are of Fulani ethnic origin, have become a menace in many parts of the country, as they kill indigenous people, destroy their property and appropriate their lands, as legitimate aspiration. Tragically, while the state characteristically hunts down other trouble makers, the armed herders who are the root cause of the crisis are treated with kid gloves.

Another negative impact of the menace of the armed herdsmen is that the agricultural programme of the president to ensure food security for the country is in jeopardy. Recently, the president lamented that only about 2.5% of the arable land in the country is being cultivated. Of course, a major reason why Nigerians have abandoned their farms is the fear of the armed herdsmen who have made going to farm dangerous.

All across the country, there are incidences of rape, murder, wilful destruction of farms, and banditry by armed herdsmen without any repercussions. To compound the crisis those whose farmers have been eaten up by herds have resorted to kidnapping and armed banditry as an industry. In turn the herders whose cattle have been rustled have turned to banditry and kidnapping as a better business.

There is also political tension across the country, because of the one-sided appointments the president promotes. While the president has obeyed the constitution in ministerial appointments, he has disobeyed the constitution in appointing heads of parastatals and agencies of government. Such one-sided appointment ignore the provision of section 14(3) of the 199 constitution which the president swore to “preserve” by his oath of office.

More importantly, when the president ignores such fundamental provision of social justice, fairness and equitable disposition to governance, the people withdraw their allegiance to the state, and in some extreme case, take up arms to confront the state, as we see in some parts of the country. And as the people who feel oppressed voice out their frustrations and anger, the president is tempted to clamp down on their freedom of expression.

So, one bad policy encourages another bad policy and the cycle goes on. As John Locke (1632-1704) wrote centuries ago: “Freedom of men under government is to have a standing rule to live by, common to everyone of that society and made by the legislative power created in it, and not to be subject to the inconstant, unknown arbitrary will of another man.”

To forestall the inevitable criticism over the self-inflicted shortcomings of the administration, the Buhari regime is now looking for ways to clamp free speech and press freedom. Unfortunately that battle is one the president will never win. As the US Supreme Court held in Olmstead v USA, “If the government becomes a law breaker; it breeds contempt for the law; it invites everyone to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy.”

For this column, all the avoidable distractions and detractions of the regime, arise from the president’s ill-advised disposition to ethnic and nepotistic tendencies.

 

By Gabriel Amalu

Last week, Nigerians where assailed by the gruesome killing of 39 persons in Zamfara State by persons who have been given the pseudo-name of bandits and marauders. Similar killings have been taking place in the state intermittently in the past few years. Perhaps, because of the state of anarchy in many parts of the country resulting in similar mass killings, the nation has not taken notice of the peculiar nature of the Zamfara killings.

Of course, no life is worth more than another, but anytime a crime is committed, one of the ways to find out the culprits, is to investigate those who have the motive to commit such a crime. Working from such premise, investigators sometimes solve the crime. In essence, motive is usually key to solving a crime, as well as resolving the root cause of the particular criminality. While the killings in other parts of the country are excruciating the psyche of Nigerians, it is benumbing when as seems the case in the Zamfara killings, the motive is unknown.

In the theatres of conflict in other parts of the country, one can haphazard the motive of the protagonists however misconceived and petulant. Take the war in the northeast, by Boko Haram, ISWA and their affiliates. Their motive for the mass killings, mendacious propaganda, kidnappings and sundry criminality is to overawe government in that part of the country, so that they can establish their preferred type of caliphate.

Across the north-central, especially in the Benue-Plateau axis, the major motive for the killings is the desire by violent herders to forcefully appropriate fertile lands, pasture and water for cattle; and the occasional retaliation by the rural farmers. Again, as cruel and as callous as the tactics of the herders may be, the motive for the killings can be guessed. In other parts of the north, there is also the escalation of mass abductions and cattle rustling, with attendant killings that sometimes accompany it.

For that too, the motive seems clear. For many of the criminals engaged in the nefarious activity of kidnapping and cattle rustling, the motive is economic, whether in the demand of ransom or the appropriation of the rustled cattle. Going further down south, the major security challenge is the killings by herders and kidnappings for ransom. Again in both instances, the motive as misbegotten as there are, is clear. While the herders want to forcefully gain control of pasture, including farm crops for their cattle, the kidnappers’ motive is to extract ransom from victims and their families.

But in Zamfara, we are told that marauders just go into a rural community and massacre people, which is strange. While some reports contend that the crisis is between Hausas whose farm crops have been eaten up by herders’ cattle and Fulani herders whose cattle have been rustled by Hausa boys, it has metamorphosed into a cycle of mass killings.  Indeed, in one instance, it was contended that the mantra by one of the groups is to kill any person of the opposing ethnic group they see.

Of course, there may be other instances of mass killings in other parts of the country, without any clear motive. But the objective of this catalogue of woes is to encourage the government to study the motives for any repetitive mass killings in other to find solutions to at least some of them. So, while levying war against those who have made life miserable for other Nigerians is justified, it is also necessary to seek intellectual solutions to some of the challenges.

By that this column suggests that the federal government, while waging war on one hand, should seek help from international and local organisations which have the capacity to engage in intellectual analysis of conflicts, its management and potential solutions. This column believes that some of the conflicts could be resolved through dialogue and political concessions, instead of waging war that may rather escalate such conflicts.

Perhaps, it is in that regard that instead of war-war, as solution to all the conflicts afflicting the country, the Buhari presidency may consider the option of jaw-jaw, at least for some of them. Taking the suggestion a notch higher, the federal government should commission specialised United Nations organs to study the causes of the multiple conflicts tearing our nation apart. They can also employ the services of reputable international non-governmental organisations, which have the technical know-how on conflict management, to study and proffer suggestions to government, on possible solutions to the conflicts.

So, when President Muhammadu Buhari chastises those seeking national dialogue as the way forward for our dear country, this column believes he misses the point, when all he sees is a secessionist agenda. The same misconception about the grave challenges he faces, is the bane of the governor of Zamfara State, Bello Matawalle, who instead of seeking solutions to the problems facing his state, is rather engaged in sabre-rattling against imaginary enemies of the north.

To help the north, and by extension Nigeria get out of the political quagmire, the northern intelligentsia must put on their thinking cap. It is not enough to be contended with merely seeking power as an end in itself. They should worry why despite holding the reigns of federal power in our country, for more than three-quarters of the life of the country since independence, the northern region has retarded instead of growing. And that is despite the socio-economic and political advantages, which the region gains from dominating central power.

So, when misguided elites like the governor of Kogi State, Yahaya Bello, concentrate energy on the north keeping power in 2023, regardless of the acrimony that it will entail, the northern intelligentsia must adroitly redirect the mind of the northern public to a better agenda than political brinkmanship. No doubt, experience has shown that the challenges faced by the northern region cannot be resolved by the unfair appropriation of political power by all means possible. For only a few political elites gain from it.

Of course, many would argue that the Buhari presidency has not shown the predilection to intellectual stock, judging by their actions in the past six years it has been in power. But with brawn failing to achieve the desired goal of national peace, despite millions of dollars so far expended; perhaps it is time to task the brain, to proffer alternative solutions to the myriad of security problems facing the country. To do otherwise, is to keep doing the same thing over and over, and yet expecting a different result.

The peculiar security challenge facing Zamfara State is a pointer that some of the security crisis needs to be examined through a different prism, and perhaps resolved, using a different method.

By Gabriel Amalu

 

The bill sponsored by Hon. Olusegun Odebunmi to amend the Press Council Act 1992, gave him out as a closet dictator, masquerading as a democrat. If the bill scales through, I will dare not write this piece. For Hon Odebunmi can get the executive secretary of the proposed press council, to summon me. And if the friends of the executive that will populate the proposed council consider my referring to Odebunmi as a dictator as blameworthy, they will ask me to apologise.

And if I hesitate, I could be slammed with N250,000 fine, while this newspaper would be asked to pay one million naira as fine, under section 17(1)(c) and (3)(a) and (b). Of course, while by the bill Hon. Odebunmi has exhibited a dictatorial tendency, in spite of being a democratically elected legislator, the council sitting as a quasi-judicial tribunal, could hold my reference to him as a closet dictator, as blameworthy. Even more dangerous for me, and this medium, is that my assertion could be termed fake news.

If they come under that part of the dreadful bill, I will dare not write a column again, as I may spend years working to pay the fine for writing that a democratically elected legislator is acting dictatorial. What could be more “fake” than that? By the provision of section 33(3) of the bill, I could be slammed with a N5 million fine in favour of the state, as well another N2million, for Hon. Odebunmi, in addition to a jail term. So, I may not even be able to work, to pay the fine.

The medium which published the “fake news” would further pay a whopping N10 naira for the high crime, in addition to a handsome N20 million to the Honourable. To further assuage for the high crime, the news medium could be closed for one year. Surely, if Hon. Odebunmi has his way, publishing a “fake news” would be more dangerous than rigging election to be become a legislator.

If the bill succeeds, life would become extremely difficult for most print mediums, as the bill intends to regulate them in a most stringent way. By the provision of proposed section 3(1), the council shall regulate the print and related media, ensure truthful, genuine and quality service by the print media (emphasis mine). What the council will consider truthful will surely prove a tough knot for the media.

For instance, it will be dangerous to speculate why President Buhari cancelled his shelved visit to London for his medicals. Those who have speculated that the president wanted to avoid the embarrassment from Nigerians demonstrating in London, would be asked to prove the truthfulness of the allegation. Even more challenging would be to speculate the medical status of the president. With the presidency refusing to come clean on what ails our president, no news medium will dare comment.

The Minister for Information and Culture, Lai Mohammed, may also love the passage of the bill, because no news medium would ever refer to him again as “Lie Mohammed.” Of course, even a rookie lawyer can easily establish beyond reasonable doubt that his name is not Lie but Lai, and those who call him “Lie Mohammed” would stand guilty of untruthfulness. With the enormous powers granted the minister under the bill, the journalist and the print medium, would pay dearly for that.

One way to deal with such recalcitrant print media will be to revoke the licence or refuse to renew it. And by the proposed section 3(1)(e) and (f) the Hon. Minister and the council would be acting within their powers to deal with the media house. By the provision of section 3(3) of the bill, upon conviction, the fine to be paid by ‘the liar’ would be as much as N5 million, and the amount would increase as the days go by.

There are several other provisions in the bill that give out Hon. Odebunmi as a closet dictator. For instance, the act seeks to create the position of an executive secretary and a council with quasi-judicial powers. And in some cases, the council can actually be a judge in its own cause, and if they are not satisfied that a complaint has merit, dismiss same. Many would frown at such a bizarre attempt to imbue an administrative body with the powers reserved for the courts by section 6(6)(b) of the 1999 constitution (as amended).

Thankfully, the constitution clearly makes a mincemeat of the dubious intentions of the dictatorial legislator. Section 39(1) of the 1999 constitution (as amended) provides that: “every person shall be entitled to freedom of expression, including freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart ideas and information without interference.” The derogation allowed by the constitution is with respect to the regulation of television or wireless broadcasting. Furthermore, it allows any law that is reasonably justifiable in a democratic society, in limited circumstances.

So, from where did Honourable Odebunmi and his co-travellers, gain the constitutional impudence to seek to place the fourth estate of the realm on a death knell? Or don’t they care about what the constitution provides? If the bill becomes law, does it occur to the sponsors, both the person in the open and the others beating the drum, for him to dance, that the constitutional responsibility placed on the press by the constitution would be fettered?

From the provisions of the bill, it can safely be concluded that Odebunmi may never have read section 22 of the 1999 constitution, which enjoins that the mass media should be free, so it can “uphold the responsibility and accountability of the government to the people.” If the intense strangulation of the print media as proposed by the legislator scales through, would it not defeat the constitution, by which he answers a legislator?

It is reassuring that both President Muhammadu Buhari and the Minister of Information Lai Mohammed, have both disassociated themselves from the draconian bill sponsored by Hon. Olusegun Odebunmi. This column urges the House of Representatives to massively defeat the bill and the other surrogate bill seeking to strangulate the electronic media. All bills seeking to strangulate the media, must be called by their name: draconian bills.

Both chambers of the National Assembly have no need for draconian bills, as the executive can even use it to hunt them down. Any legislator who supports such bill should look up the root word of draconian. It came from Draco, a legislator in ancient Athens, who loved to propose severe punishments like death penalties. We urge Hon. Olusegun Odebunmi to immediately withdraw the bill, unless he is the Draco of the 21st century.

 

 

By Gabriel Amalu

As I set out to write this tribute in honour of Sam Omatseye, who turned 60 on June 15, my thoughts went to the United States of America’s poet, Maya Angelou’s: Caged Bird, which is perhaps one of the most poignant poems on freedom versus bondage. At a time, when Nigeria is roiling is mass disaffection with the status quo, I consider it a fitting tribute to use the poem as the background to celebrate Sam Omatseye at 60.

I met Sam when I was invited to join the editorial board of The Nation, sometime in 2006. Prior to that, I had occasionally read Sam’s scathing criticism of President Olusegun Obasanjo’s government in The Sun newspaper. Ever insightful, critical, and sometimes contemptuous and disparaging, Sam in irresistible language dissected the government led by President Obasanjo, and many times put it to the sword.

So, unlike many who have written tributes in honour of Sam Omatseye at 60, I didn’t take notice of his great exploits in his days at Concord newspaper or other earlier journalism career. But I can say without equivocation that it is at the editorial board of The Nation newspaper, which he chairs, that Sam blossomed. Not just in his journalism career, but as a journalist, writer, poet, novelist, and television personality of national and perhaps international repute.

Sitting with Sam nearly every week since 2006, physically, and virtually since COVID-19 birthed on the scene, there is no better tribute than to buttress Sam’s wish for a new Nigeria, in the mould of the first and fourth stanzas of Maya Angelou’s stimulating poem: Caged Bird. By words and action, the tantalizing prospects of the two stanzas, I dare say, is what Sam has devoted his career in literary and other intellectual works, and most recently his television broadcast to profess.

Though set in the redoubt of the black man’s struggle in the United States of America, for freedom from slavery and bondage, the poem poignantly accentuates the potentials of the freeborn and attenuates the disillusionment of the slave in bondage. Many in Nigeria today, see themselves as shackled by bad governance, in a manner not different from that of slave denoted by Maya Angelou in the poem: Caged Bird.

Sam, every week, in the print and electronic media, excoriates the pitfalls of government at all levels, which has manacled the potentials of Nigerians, in ways not different from that of the caged bird. His weekly offering on Mondays in this paper, titled: In Touch, is arguably the best written weekly prose in any newspaper in Nigeria. Scented with poetic dilations, Sam Omatseye, uses literary, historical and didactic anecdotes to corral the power elites to free Nigerians from the fetters of bad governance.

Of course, he proffers better ways, to make Nigerians the free birds, where the country to be a truly democratically governed country. As Maya Angelou wrote: The free bird leaps/on the back of the wind/and flouts downstream/till the current ends/and dips his wings/in the orange sun rays/and dares to claim the sky. Should those in power rule with democratic fervent, Nigerians can with ease claim the African sky and contend with Europe and America for the world sky.

But nay, what we have is a stale president who misguidedly believes that he can force the states to create what he calls a grazing route, instead of modern ranches. A president who naively believes that because he has temporal executive powers he can decree that his kinsmen who own the roving cattle are the freeborn, while the rest are slaves. A president who would use his office to grant the wishes of the minority, which offends the laws of the land, against the majority, constitutional democracy be damned.

Of course, because of his actions, there are significant numbers of Nigerians, who believe the president sees the rest of Nigerians as slaves, like the caged birds. Again Maya captures the mood of those manacled by the poor governance. She wrote: But a bird that stalks/down his narrow cage/can seldom see through/his bars of rage/his wings are clipped and/his feet are tied/so he opens his throat to sing.

Not long ago, the youths of Nigeria sang @ #EndSARS and the consequences were catastrophic for the caged bird and the free bird. With the experience of that unfortunate outcome, the federal authorities are no longer amenable to even allow the bird to openly sing the song of disillusionment and despair. Those who tried to sing at the June 12 remembrance met canisters of teargas and staccato of bullets.

The third stanza of the poem reminiscences how the caged sings/ with fearful trill/ of the things unknown/ but longed for still/and his tune is heard/ on the distant hill/ for the caged bird/sings of freedom. This part captures the faith of the Nigerian youths whose potentials have been mismanaged. Who shine in other less endowed countries, and who would wish that their country could unleash her potentials so that they can be free.

The fifth stanza further portrays the tragedy of our dear country, whose citizens are buried with their dreams, because their wings are clipped and their feet tied. Maya wrote: But a caged bird stands on the grave of dreams/his shadows shouts on a nightmare scream/his wings are clipped and his feet are tied/so he opens his throat to sing. There is no doubt that Sam Omatseye has dedicated his life to push for Nigerians to actualise their dreams.

Indeed from accounts, Sam has remained a frontline activist since he graduated from the university. He tumbled with the civil rights movement during the feisty days of the military. From his overseas redoubt, he remained in touch with nation’s socio-economic throes, firing his salvo against oppression and bad governance. Since his return, he has not taken his foot off the throttle for a better Nigeria.

He has authored several works, including his famous: My name is Okoro, set in the period of the Nigeria civil war. To write that work of faction, Sam researched on the war, read and heard variegated stories, and is actually a better commentator than President Buhari who boasts about his one-sided civil war account. Sam also has collections of poetry, Mandela’s Bones and Other Poems and Lion Wind and Other Poems, and of course Dear Baby Ramatu. He is also a playwright.

His first novel The Crocodile Girl: “digs deep into a society in the throes of hatred and injustice.” While his second: My name is Okoro, is history emblematised in fiction. An ardent follower of the Nobel awards, this writer predicts that Sam could be the next Nigerian Nobel Prize winner in Literature. Happy birthday, my chairman.

By Gabriel Amalu

The disagreement between Twitter and President Muhammadu Buhari has surprisingly been elevated to a dispute between the company and the Federal Republic of Nigeria. And with the federal government adamant, despite the misgivings of majority of G7 members to the banning of Twitter in Nigeria, the nation may unnecessary be exposed to avoidable international economic backlash. This column therefore urges for a quick détente, before a private dispute degenerates into an international dog-fight.

Obviously, Nigeria is dealing with enough catastrophe, and should not add an a new international economic war-front to the multifarious crisis that made the United States Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) label Nigeria a failing state. What Twitter did to President Buhari, it also did to President Donald Trump, while he was the President of USA, and the dispute was never elevated as an affront to the country.

To tag what Twitter did to President Buhari as a destabilisation plot against Nigeria is to mix-up issues; for while the president is a symbol of our nation, he is not the nation. To think otherwise is to elevate him to an absolute monarch in the nature of the failed Louis XIV who at the height of his reign, had quipped: ‘L’etat c’est moi’ (I am the state). In fairness to President Buhari, he has never equated himself to the state, and at the twilight of his regime, those surrounding him should not misguide him.

Before the federal government’s hammer fell of Twitter, the Honourable Minister for Information and Culture, Lai Mohammed, accused Twitter of engaging in double standard. He observed that Twitter did not delete posts by Nnamdi Kanu, of the banned Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), who had posted incendiary posts worse than what President Muhammadu Buhari did. To affirm merit to the accusation, Twitter struck down the offensive posts by Nnamdi Kanu.

While some are concerned that the minister has unintentionally elevated Nnamdi Kanu, by comparing him to President Buhari, this column is more concerned about the issue of double standards, which the minster rightfully denounced. So, in condemning the double standards by Twitter, it also argues that double standard should be unacceptable and resisted in any decent relationship, by all and sundry.

Talking about double standard, it urges the minister to introspect over allegations of double standard by President Buhari’s government, which many believe is the root cause of the crisis afflicting the social cohesion of our country. If the complaints are genuine, it will be fair and equitable that the government should make amends. It is also important to note that some of the major complaints against the government also touch on the provisions of the constitution, upon which the democratic enterprise hangs.

Section 14(3) of the 1999 constitution (as amended) provides without equivocation that: “The composition of the government of the federation or any of its agencies and the conduct of its affairs shall be carried out in such a manner as to reflect the federal character of Nigeria and the need to promote national unity, and also to command national loyalty, thereby ensuring that there shall be no predominance of persons from a few state or from a few ethnic or other sectional groups in that government or in any of its agencies.”

Will the minister say that the present government has obeyed this kernel provision of the 1999 constitution, as to reap the benefits envisaged by its obedience? With complaints against the lopsided appointments by the federal government, does it not follow that the federal government is engaged in double standards? Again, section 16(2)(a) of the constitution provides: “The state shall direct its policy towards ensuring: the promotion of a planned and balanced economic development.”

One example. Considering the decision of the president to approve the establishment of a standard gauge railway line, an important factor of economic development, from his home state to a neighbouring country, while his minister for transportation is offering about one-half of the country the archaic and out-dated single gauge; would it not be appropriate to levy accusation of double standards against the government? Of course, such double standards will not enhance “federal character, promote national unity and also command national loyalty.”

The greatest challenge faced by our dear country is that, a large chunk of her citizens have withdrawn their loyalty to the country, substantially because they perceive the country as being run on double standards. Of course, some of the challenges predate the government of President Buhari, but it appears to have been aggravated under his watch. For one, in a recent interview, the president vehemently denied the allegation of lopsided appointments, even as his opponents reel out statistics to counteract his assertion.

More importantly, since there are those who disagree with the perception of Mr President, the ideal reaction should be to engage the claimants in debates in sundry manners. If the president is convinced that his appointments are not lopsided, and that his military chiefs are appointed because of their proven field experiences, his men should present facts to counter those claiming otherwise. As the saying goes, facts are sacred.

Regardless of how angry the president has become, this column strongly advises him to change his strong-arm tactics in dealing with those who hold a different view as to how to resolve the lingering national questions. Of course, this column decries and condemns the orchestrated violence by non-state actors to pursue their misgivings against the government. But the president must realise that his dithering in correcting the anomaly, rather escalates the crisis.

With less than two years in power, substantial part of which he will be a lame-duck president, President Buhari must avoid being remembered as a dictatorial civilian president. If he does not rein in the war-mongers around him, the country may degenerate into chaos by the time the regime winds down. The international community may also make him and our country a pariah, for the excessive force currently on display, especially in the southeast, which amounts to abuse of the fundamental rights of Nigerian citizens.

The perception out there is that while the president is soft both in words and actions against the armed herdsmen that have been wreaking havoc in several rural communities across the country, he has been vehement and trident in condemning separatist groups, like IPOB. While the president is entitled to his private idiosyncrasies, he must exercise due diligence in matters of national importance and public perception.

As we have stated here severally, comparatively, the president has not done badly in terms of performance in infrastructural development. He must therefore not allow his mismanagement of the national fault lines, and his foreign relations tactics, to mare every achievement.

By Gabriel Amalu

 

The 9th senate has suddenly burst into life, and is undertaking a ‘holistic alteration’ of the 1999 constitution (as amended). Up till now, no far-reaching amendment of the constitution has been successful, because the political class usually disagree over drastic alterations, which is the minimum requirement to get Nigeria on the path of sustainable growth.

The four alterations made so far, while significant in some respects, have avoided the big issues, and without a resolution of the big issues, the clamour for restructuring, or even balkanisation of the country will not go away. Under President Goodluck Jonathan, the first to third alterations were made; while under President Muhammadu Buhari, the fourth alteration was made.

The first alteration was geared principally to grant financial autonomy to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), the National Assembly and judiciary; and to secure the transmission of power should the president or governor refuse or is unable to handover to the deputy during a temporary absence from office. The second alteration was geared to ensure the timely dispensation of election petitions, and the procedure and makeup of various election petitions.

Like the first two alterations, the third alteration was also not contentious. The amendment was to create the National Industrial Court, as a superior court of record. The fourth alteration under President Muhammadu Buhari, came in five parts, and the first of the five parts dealt with the time-line for the determination of pre-election matters. The second dealt with the reduction of the age for electability to the various political offices.

The third of the fourth alteration granted financial autonomy to the House of Assembly of the state and the judiciary and but for the initial cowardly disposition of the members of state houses of assembly is non contentious. The fourth of the fourth alteration act, dealt with granting INEC sufficient time to conduct bye-elections, and provided ground for de-registration of political parties. Just as well, the fifth of the fourth amendment dealt with issue of the disqualification of a person who completed a vacated term of governor or president, being eligible for only one more term.

What is abundantly clear from the above-mentioned alterations is that none of them dealt with the contentious issues that have made our federation a quasi-unitary system of government. The alterations gingerly avoided the devolution of economic power, like whitling down the items in the exclusive legislative list. It also avoided the contentious issue of creating sub-national police, at the state and other levels. The amendments stayed clear of the issue of resource control, and the status of local governments amongst other issues.

Tragically, after what was thought to be a holistic effort by the 7th National Assembly, President Goodluck Jonathan, shot it down, contending that some of the provisions are offensive to the amendment procedure and the powers conferred on the executive. Under President Muhammadu Buhari as shown above, only piecemeal amendments have been made, but it appears the senate and the House of Representatives are geared to test the waters.

The senate in a jiffy have concluded the town-hall meetings across the six-geopolitical zones, and it is hoped the House of Representatives will embark on its own consultations shortly. The promise from the leaders of the National Assembly is that the amendments would be ready for presidential assent before they proceed on their summer break. Considering many unkempt promises, on the electoral reform bill, and the Petroleum Industry Bill, Nigerians are sceptical about the genuineness of the promise.

Again, considering that President Buhari is an ultra-centralist, and for some a sectional leader in favour of the status quo, many Nigerians are doubtful whether any fundamental alteration would receive his presidential assent. Furthermore, considering the make-up of the National Assembly which favours the northwest and northeast in numbers, especially in the House of Representatives, and the procedural requirement for any amendment, any proposed amendment that they don’t support will fail woefully.

Perhaps these obstacles are why the Afenifere, the pan-Yoruba socio-political organisation decided not to participate in the exercise. Of course, the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) which despite their proscription, commands significant followership in the southeast and south-south, and the Sunday Ighoho-led Yoruba separatist groups, which is growing in sympathisers, consider the National Assembly a contraption of a failed state, and as such lacks the legitimacy to meet the minimum demands of a restructured Nigeria.

So, could it be that that like their predecessors, in the 7th National Assembly, the 9th National Assembly members are merely on a jamboree, to deflate the agitation for restructuring? This column is worried that those elected or selected to govern our country are too far engrossed in their eating (apologies to late Sunday Afolabi) that they do not understand the urgency of the situation and the need to engineer necessary constitutional amendments to restore peace and progress in our country.

As the Ooni of Ife, asked recently, how many of our political office holders, including the president of the senate, and the speaker of the House of Representatives can go home to their constituencies and stay for a week, without overburdening the security men? The same situation, I might add, is applicable to the commander-in-chief and his top commanders. None of them can freely go home, and like Chinua Achebe said, gather with their kinsmen in the village square, to enjoy fairy tales and the succulent incandescence of the moonlight.

None of them will dare travel home by road, even with the protection of the national army, not to talk of stopping by the road-side to enjoy the decor of the undulating hills and the stimulating savannah of the country-side. Yet, most of our leaders are incapable of rising above their ethnic sentiments, religious bigotry and private interests masquerading as national interests, to become statesmen and history makers, and gift our country a life-line.

In case the members of the National Assembly cares, they have the opportunity to take the sail off the separatists, by making far-reaching constitutional amendments that can give our country an opportunity for a new beginning. Such amendments must touch on the fundamental underpinnings which hoist a unitary state on a multi-ethnic and substantially disparate nationalities. To think and act as if all s well, is playing the ostrich.

To believe that by force of arms, the present unitary structure foisted on the nation by the military can be rammed down the throats of every part of the country, is to live in a fools’ paradise. President Buhari who is playing the statesman, to save the unravelling democracies across the West Africa, must realise that he is being mocked for playing the fire-fighter for other countries, while his backyard is smouldering.