Category: Gabriel Amalu

By Gabriel Amalu

The petit governor of Kaduna state, with a big ego, Mallam Nasir El-Rufai, has shown himself incapable of saving Kaduna State from self-destruct. El-Rufai, who thrust into national limelight while serving assiduously as the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, obviously lacks the dexterity to govern a multi-ethnic and multi-religious state, like Kaduna. An otherwise intelligent man, especially with mapping infrastructural development, he has proved himself bereft of the emotional intelligence necessary for managing a fractious state with ethnic fault lines.

While the inter-ethnic crisis in Southern Kaduna predates El-Rufai, he has worsened the situation with his petulant arrogance and debilitating idiosyncrasies. Unfortunately, he has an ally in President Muhammadu Buhari, who is slow to react to matters of urgent national importance. With pressure from the international community, perhaps those kneeling on the necks of the indigenes of Southern Kaduna can be forced up and brought to account at the International Criminal Court (ICC) at Hague.

El-Rufai’s latest gaffe that leaders of Southern Kaduna are asking for money to stop the violence is absurd, and deserves an investigation by the excitable Department of State Security (DSS). If non-state actors like Obadiah Mailafiya and former Speaker House of Representatives Ghali Umar Na’Abba, can be questioned for making statement on national security issues, the allegation by El-Rufai deserves similar investigation unless he names those asking for money and provide proof.

Earlier on, the governor had asked any traditional ruler in Southern Kaduna who claims that the armed herdsmen were appropriating their lands after sacking their communities to come forward with proof. Such demand begs the question, because appropriation of land can’t be the only reason for the mindless killings that is taking place in the region.  Otherwise what is the motive for the mass killings, insane destruction of properties and dislocations that is the hallmark of the attacks?

With the Nigerian state incapable or unwilling to bring the perpetrators to account, there is justification to warrant the intervention of the ICC prosecutors. The ICC is an international court with “jurisdiction to prosecute individual for international crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crimes of aggression.” According to Wikipedia “It is intended to complement existing national judicial systems and it may therefore exercise its jurisdiction only when national courts are unwilling or unable to prosecute criminals.”

Earlier in his administration, El-Rufai had admitted the helplessness of the Nigerian state in bringing the perpetrators to account, which necessitated his sending emissaries to the bandits and inducing them with financial rewards to stop the attacks. In an interview in 2016, the governor claimed most of the attackers where from outside Nigeria, and there were aggrieved for losses incurred while passing through Southern Kaduna, after the General Elections in 2015. He said that he had traced those concerned and begged them to forgive, while those that demanded compensation were paid.

In his words: “A lot of what was happening in Southern Kaduna was actually from outside Nigeria.” He went on: “we got a group of people that were going round trying to trace some of these people in Cameroon, Niger Republic and so on to tell them that there is a new governor who is Fulani like them and has no problem paying compensations for lives lost and he is begging them to stop killing.”

He assured the general public that “in most of the communities, once that appeal was made to them, they said they have forgiven. There are one or two that asked for monetary compensation. They said they have forgiven the death of human beings, but want compensation for cattle. We said no problem and we paid some.” So by the governor’s account, while he was begging non-nationals to accept compensation to stop killing Nigerians, he is now accusing indigenes of his state of demanding money to stop foreigners from killing them.

The incongruity and illogic of the governor’s claims shows that as the state chief security officer, the Nigerian state has either lost the capacity to bring the perpetrators to account or are unwilling to take steps accordingly. So, perhaps the ICC should be in the best position to come to the aid of the indigenes who are at the mercy of the criminals that have turned Southern Kaduna to a killing field.

The Office of the Prosecutor (OTP), under the ICC, is an independent organ of the court, which can initiate investigation, if appropriately triggered as provided by the Rome statute. Of course, it recognises that: “National authorities bear the primary responsibility, in the first instance, to investigate and prosecute those most responsible for the commission of mass crimes. The court will initiate investigations, in accordance with the legal criteria set by the Rome statute, only when the national authorities have failed to uphold this primary responsibility and in the absence of genuine national proceedings.”

The question Governor El-Rufai and the federal government should answer is why the state authority has failed to uphold its primary responsibility of providing security for the indigenes of Southern Kaduna? Perhaps, Ghali Na’Abba provided a general answer about the status of our country, as a failing state. To make the matter worse, many argue that the Kaduna State government is partial. So, it is time to resort to the international community to save the people of Southern Kaduna.

Nigeria as a state party to the Rome Convention, having signed since September 27, 2001, is bound by the provisions of the convention. So, if the appropriate petition is made to ICC, the prosecuting authority can initiate investigating that could trigger the prosecution of those responsible for the mayhem in Southern Kaduna.

Of note, at the 18th session of the Assembly of State Parties to the Rome Statute, at the International Criminal Court, at Hague, in 2019, the Attorney General and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, SAN, pledged the federal government’s commitment to end various acts of impunity in the country. The daily carnage in Southern Kaduna is a sad reminder that Nigeria lacks the capacity to keep its pledge and commitment.

Last Thursday, this paper provided in grim figures a glimpse of the daily atrocities in Southern Kaduna: “On 16th August, 2020 in Bugai village in Kachia LGA was attacked by armed militia. The village head, Dan’azumi Musa (67), was killed. His siblings, Aniya Musa (60), his very aged mother, Kande Musa (97) and sister Angelina Irmiya (45) were killed.” It went further: “On the 17th of August, Bulus Joseph (48) a father of nine was murdered gruesomely.” Interestingly, the ambivalence of Governor El-Rufai has been appropriately noticed by the Nigerian Bar Association, and this column urges him to make a turn around.  

Gabriel Amalu

 

The Nigeria Broadcasting Commission (NBC) has drawn an angry mob for slamming a five million naira fine on a Lagos based radio station, Nigeria Info 99.3Fm, for alleged professional misconduct. A disconsolate public accuses the NBC of acting as the accuser, the prosecutor and a judge in the matter. They argue that the 1999 constitution (as amended) is unequivocal as to the institution vested with judicial powers. Agreeably, section 6(1) of the constitution provides: “The judicial powers of the federation shall be vested in the courts to which this section relates, being courts established for the federation.”

For our purpose, what constitute judicial powers was adumbrated in Section 6(6)(b) of the constitution. It provides: “The judicial powers vested in accordance with the foregoing provisions of this section – shall extend to all matters between persons, or between government or authority and to any person in Nigeria, and to all actions and proceedings relating thereto, for the determination of any question as to civil rights and obligations of that person.” Of course, the Black’s Law Dictionary defines a person to include: “An entity (such as a corporation) that is recognised by law as having the rights and duties of a human being.”

The NBC is the federal government agency imbued with the powers to regulate the broadcast industry, as a medium for expression. Interestingly, the right of freedom of expression and the press is a fundamental right, enshrined in section 39 of the constitution. Section 39(2) provides: “Without prejudice to the generality of subsection (1) of this section, every person shall be entitled to own, establish and operate any medium for the dissemination of information, ideas and opinions.”

Of significance is the regulatory powers, in the proviso, to section 39 (2), to wit: “Provided that no person, other than the government of the federation or a state or other person or body authorised by the president on the fulfilment of conditions laid down by an act of the National Assembly, shall own, establish or operate a television or wireless broadcasting station for any purpose or whatsoever.” From the foregoing, the regulatory power of the NBC can only be derived from an Act made by the National Assembly.

So, can and did the National Assembly’s powers to make regulatory laws under section 39(2) of the constitution, extend to imbuing the NBC with powers to regulate the fines, determine the guilt and impose such fines on those licenced by it, to operate a broadcasting corporation, for alleged infractions of the controversial broadcasting code? First, is whether the National Assembly has the power to grant to a body created by it, what amounts to administrative, sub-legislative and quasi-judicial powers? Yes.

The powers of the National Assembly is succinctly provided for, in the 1999 constitution. With regards to the issue at hand, section 4(8) provides: “Save as otherwise provided by this constitution, the exercise of legislative powers by the National Assembly or by a House of Assembly shall be subject to the jurisdiction of courts of law and of judicial tribunals established by law, and accordingly, the National Assembly or a House of Assembly shall not enact any law, that ousts or purports to oust the jurisdiction of a court of law or of a judicial tribunal established by law.” So, if any person is aggrieved about the extent of power granted by the National Assembly, the recourse is the courts.

But can the National Assembly delegate the power to make a subsidiary legislation on broadcasting rights to the NBC? Yes, it can. In his book on Administrative Law, Ese Malami, quoted the finding of the British Committee on Ministers Powers, on the need for such delegation thus: “The truth is that if parliament were not willing to delegate law making power, parliament would be unable to pass the kind and quality of legislation which modern public opinion requires.”

The power of the NBC, is provided by Act No. 38 of 1992, as amended by Act No. 55 of 1999. The Act gives the NBC expansive powers, which include: “Regulating and controlling the broadcast industry; determining and applying sanctions, including revocation of licenses of defaulting station which do not operate in accordance with the broadcast code and in the public interest; and intervening and arbitrating in conflicts in the broadcast industry.”

Clearly from the foregoing, the NBC, through its organs has powers to regulate the broadcast industry. The two main organs of the NBC, are the Board of the Commission and the Board of the Management. While the Board of the Commission is vested with the authority to make policies, the Board of Management has the power to implement such polices and run the commission. Could the management determine a new broadcast code, without the approval by the board, as claimed by the board? I doubt.

Significantly, the chairman of the NBC Board, Ikra Bilbis, has vehemently disagreed with the Acting Director General, Armstrong Aduku Idachaba, on the propriety of the new broadcast code, and the heavy sanction imposed on Nigeria Info 99.3Fm. The chairman said that due process was not followed, and warned against making the broadcast code a disincentive to private investment in the broadcast industry.  He also claimed that the Minister of Information and Culture, Lai Mohammed, is obtrusively intervening in the running of NBC. Of note, the role of the minister, in the law establishing the commission is very minimal, and he cannot lawfully take over the functions of the board, as alleged.

The critics of the fine imposed on Nigeria Info 99.3 consider the fine as draconic, and this column agrees with that. But also important, is whether the statement by Obadiah Mailafa amounts to a criminal defamation, and whether the channel can be punished without the author being convicted by a court of competent jurisdiction? Further challenge is to determine what constitutes a hate speech. For instance, can a factual statement be a hate speech? No doubt, the fine imposed by the NBC would be subjected to judicial review, to determine whether NBC’s administrative adjudication followed due process.

In summary, the Nigerian court will be expected to observe the dictum of Lord Greene, in the English case of Caltona Ltd vs Commissioner of Works & ors, (1943) 2 All ER 560 at p.564, to wit: “All the courts do is to see that the power which is claimed to be exercised is one which falls within the four corners of the powers given by the legislature and to see that those powers are exercised in good faith. Apart from that, the courts have no power at all to inquire into the reasonableness, policy, the sense or any other aspect of the transaction.”

Gabriel Amalu

 

Those who accuse President Muhammadu Buhari of exhibiting a messianic complex should not blame him. Rather, they should blame the circumstances of his political rebirth. Prior to his fourth presidential contest and eventual victory in 2015, he had been written off by many as too insular and tribal to rule a complex nation like Nigeria. Even religious bigotry was hauled at him. But despite the allegations, the majority saw him as the answer to the nation’s greatest challenge – corrupt practices.

So, Nigerians, who voted President Buhari, into power expects him to heal Nigeria of the disease of corrupt practices, and he has been at the war front. How far he has succeeded is out with the jury. But there is the other ailment, which afflicts Nigeria, and perhaps has done as much damage to the corporate existence of Nigeria, as corruption. That is the pestilence of tribalism. When Nigeria was at the cross-roads in 1966, ethnic sentiments trumped the hatred, for corrupt practices, as those celebrated for overthrowing the 10 percenters, soon became alienated and vilified, following the resurgence of ethnic sentiment.

To heal Nigeria therefore, the healer must be able and willing to face those twin challenges head-on. On the score of tribal and ethnic favouritism, President Buhari has been bashed from many quarters, especially with respect to the appointment of persons to man the key national security agencies and assets. Some have accused him of damaging the fabric that holds Nigeria together. For this column, while the president has not been fair in the spread of key appointments, he has fared better in addressing the key infrastructure needs of the various parts of the country.

But a sticking sore, is the railway programme of his administration, for which the nation is entering into a debt peonage. The president must appreciate that if the entire citizens are to pay for the huge debts the country is accumulating for the railway projects, it is scandalous, and an aberration that while the country is borrowing furiously to modernise the Lagos-Kano rail line, that from Port Harcourt to Maiduguri has been left unattended to. The Minister of Transportation, Rotimi Amaechi, recently acknowledged the depressing pressure he faces, for the neglect of his home front in the railway projects.

Interestingly, the immediate past regime of Goodluck Jonathan, also concentrated the nation’s resources to modernise the Abuja to Kaduna rail line, for which many vilified him as a stooge of the northern power brokers. So, it is fair to ask, why the concentration of energy to modernise the railways, only in one part of the country? If President Buhari, wants to apply some balm to the nation’s ethnic sore, he must ensure the revamping of the rail line that runs from Port Harcourt to Maiduguri, with a detour to the federal capital, Abuja.

After all, the resources that will be used to build the rail lines and to repay the huge debts the nation is accumulating for the projects, will come substantially from the south-south part of the country. Again, to maintain ethnic balance, it is unfair that while people of the northwest are already enjoying a train ride to the federal capital, peoples from other regions have to wait for more rail lines to be built in the northwest, connecting Kano, Kastina and even Niger Republic, before the people from Southeast, South-south and Northeast would be connected to the federal capital, Abuja.

You cannot heal a sore, by sprinkling pepper on it. If the rail line from Lagos through Ibadan is developed up to Abuja, it is only fair, that energy be shifted to build the one from Port Harcourt, passing through south-east to Abuja, and the one from Maiduguri, down to Abuja, which is situated in the north-central. The pursuit of even development for all the regions is a sine qua non for peace and national progress. Conversely, the effect of the neglect of some parts of the country, moves from physical underdevelopment, to national insecurity, sabotage and the failure of a nation.

Indeed, if President Goodluck Jonathan, from whose ethnic backyard, the resources for the development of the rail lines come from chose to start with the rail line that connects the northwest to the federal capital, President Buhari, from the northwest, should not show excessive ethnic bias in favour of the region he comes from, in the development of that critical national infrastructure. Indeed, those who suggested to him, the extension of the rail line, from his home state of Kastina to Niger Republic, merely wanted to entrench the accusation of ethnic slur.

Admittedly, this column has praised President Buhari for the revamping of the Akanu Ibiam International Airport’s runway and the Second Niger Bridge, which the past regimes made a song and dance of, without turning the sod. But similar infrastructure development, are also going on across the other regions. So, there is no justification for the neglect of the railways in the region, just as there is no justification for the neglect of the region in the nation’s gas project. At a recent meeting of the Southeast governors, the states in the southeast appealed to the president to include the region in the nation’s gas pipeline projects, opting to pay for it.

An evenly spread development, is the greatest antidote to the agitation for the division of the country. So, the federal government cannot be borrowing to develop the Ajaokuta-Abuja-Kaduna gas pipeline, while the South-south and Southeast where the supply pipeline passes, are not factored in the projects. Again, that is scandalous, and condemnable. Addressing reporters, after the meeting of the Southeast Governors’ Forum, the chairman, Governor David Umahi, appealed to the federal government thus: “since the pipelines are going to come from the south-south and south-east, we feel the states in the region should also benefit.”

As noted by Alan R Ball, in his book: Modern Politics and Government: “economic differences appear to provide a universal source of political disagreement.” The author also noted that “if politics is the resolution of conflict, the distribution of power within a political community determines how the conflict is to be resolved, and whether the resolution is to be effectively observed by all parties.”

President Buhari has shown ardour, whenever he is convinced on a course of action. He must wear that armour to heal the nation’s sore points, as part of his legacy. This column feels vindicated about its last outing, after the president agreed that there are some fake Buharists in government, who have abused his trust as the essay argued. He must tweak his infrastructure programmes to reflect the diversity of Nigeria, if he wants to apply balm to the nation’s sores.

By Gabriel Amalu

With the media feasting on the accusations and counter-accusations against those that ordinarily should be the arrowheads of the war against corruption in President Muhammadu Buhari’s government, one only hopes that the much hoped for, war against corruption, has not been won and lost. Of the course, the winners would be those who never wanted the war to succeed, and the fake Buharists, in government, who have turned public service to a bazaar, just like we experienced, particularly under the government of former President Goodluck Jonathan.

The losers are President Buhari, whose life legacy, would stand or fail on the anti-corruption war, and the grieving Nigerians, who have suffered and would continue to suffer the debilitating impact of corruption, in our wasting country. With the media leaks, linking the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), Abubakar Malami SAN, to allegations of official corruption, the on-going administrative probe of the suspended acting chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, Ibrahim Magu, should be expanded to include the probe of Malami.

I make the recommendation based on the need to clear the smog surrounding the two major actors in the war against corruption, once and for all times. Such clearance would enable the Buhari presidency start the difficult process of reclaiming the moral higher ground, without which, the war against corruption may end up as a ruse, especially in the eyes of those who never wished it well, from the beginning.

While this column has its sympathy for the success of the war against corruption, it considers the present haze on the integrity of Magu and Malami as major dents on the war against corruption. So the earlier the integrity status of the suspended EFCC czar, Magu, and serving AGF, Malami, is determined and publicly disclosed by President Buhari himself, the higher the chance of resuscitating the war on corruption.

With President Buhari’s second term in its second year, another long drawn media bashing on the integrity of the AGF might just be the final nail on the integrity of the anti-corruption war. So, there is the need to join an enquiry on the mind boggling allegations against AGF Malami, to that of EFCC’s Magu, so that the two cases can be dealt with simultaneously, as quickly as possible.

It would be a monumental tragedy for the anti-corruption war that is already besmirched by the public trial of the EFCC chairman, Ibrahim Magu to again suffer distraction by another public trial of Malami, before reclaiming the initiative in the public domain. President Buhari’s presidency cannot afford such luxury. So, it may be better to endure the pains together, and hope for a simultaneous healing.

The truth be told, with the allegations of corruption levelled against Malami by persons recruited by the president to fight corruption, the allegations would simply not go away, without an examination by an eminent panel, such as that now quizzing Magu, in the presidential villa. If Magu, ordinarily has a chance to clear his name before Justice Ayo Salami’s administrative body, then the AGF who has now been accused of several corrupt practices, should use the same procedure to clear his own name.

After all, what is good for the goose is good for the gander. More importantly, the office of the AGF is the fulcrum of criminal investigation and prosecution, with enormous tentacles across power centres, in a democracy. The 1999 constitution is unequivocal about the importance of the AGF, amongst the persons authorised to aide an executive president.

Section 150(1) of the constitution provides: “There shall be an Attorney General of the Federation who shall be the Chief Law Officer of the federation.” Section 174 grants expansive powers to the office of the AGF. Sub-section 1(a) provides: “The Attorney General of the Federation shall have power: to institute and undertake criminal proceedings against any person before any court of law in Nigeria, other than a court martial, in respect of any offence created by or under any act of the National Assembly.”

Section 174(1)(b) gives the AGF power “to take over and continue any such criminal proceedings that may have been instituted by any other authority or person” while 174(1)(c) enables him: “to discontinue at any stage before judgment is delivered any such criminal proceedings instituted or undertaken by him or any other authority or person.”  Agreeably, section 174(3) provides: “In exercising his powers under this section, the Attorney General of the Federation shall have regard to the public interest, the interest of justice and the need to prevent abuse of legal process.”

So, the AGF is clearly one of the most important ministers in a presidential system of government, and for a government which made anti-corruption its cardinal objective, should be the most important official. President Buhari has never hidden his disdain for corrupt practices, whether as a military president or as a civilian and that maybe why he chose Abubakar Malami, SAN, reputedly his lawyer, before he became the president. So, Buhari should deal decisively with the allegations against his ally and trusted aide, considering that his other eminent aides are the accusers.

A president, who during the last election, checked the party his wife voted for, before she slotted the paper in the ballot box, should not shy away from confronting the challenge he is facing, from a close and trusted ally, who regrettably is now the subject of scurrilous allegations of corruption in the public domain. Of course, those opposed to the war against corruption can go to any extent to besmirch the war against corruption, and perhaps the allegations against the regimes’ top aides, are not coming from them?

While Nigerians are hiding their heads in shame at the lunacy that were visited on the Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC), the Minister of Labour and Productivity, Dr Chris Ngige, has told the nation that those formerly in charge of the Nigeria Social Insurance Trust Fund (NSITF), also corruptly enriched themselves in a manner showing their lack of respect for the reason, their principal, President Buhari, was elected as president twice. Similar tales of corruption also trailed the former administration, at the Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC).

So, those who are close to President Buhari should feel concerned that the man’s life legacy is being maligned, by those who never had stood for anything, despite their closeness to the man. How the situation can be salvaged must be their utmost interest, as the tenure of the man whom the rich and mighty loved to hate, draws towards the end. Whatever can be done lawfully should be done urgently to restore the integrity of the war against corruption.

By Gabriel Amalu

Is the federal government’s war against corruption in Nigeria no longer the causa proxima for the emergence of President Muhammadu Buhari’s regime or what? Or is that Nigerians don’t trust the government in its fight against corruption? Since the news of Magu’s detention, interrogation, and now substitution, at the instigation of the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, SAN, broke, I have been watching to see whether some Nigerians or in the least the self-styled anti-corruption groups would rise up to his defence.

Could it be that these groups, really don’t buy into the fight against corruption, or is it that they never trusted Ibrahim Magu, in his avowed determination to wrestle corruption to the ground? How come there are no protests over the sudden clampdown on Magu, as we saw, when President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, initiated the duplicitous process to force out the first EFCC anti-corruption czar, Nuhu Ribadu, in December 2007?

Of note, a cursory look at the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (Establishment) Act shows that the chairman of the commission has no security of tenure. Section 3(1) of the Act provides: “The chairman and members of the commission other than ex-officio members shall hold office for a period of four years and may be re-appointed for a further term and no more.” The above provision makes for determinable tenure, without security.

By the provision of section 3(2) of the Act: “A member of the commission may at any time be removed by the president for inability to discharge the functions of his office (whether arising from infirmity of mind or body or any other cause) or for misconduct or if the president is satisfied that it is not in the interest of the commission or the interest of the public that the member should continue in office.”

By that provision, it is presumed that the chairman of the commission can be treated like any other member, with respect to cessation of membership of the commission. So, under the EFCC Act, a president can remove the chairman of the commission for a whimsical reason, or for no reason at all, considering the subjective nature of the powers granted the president under the Act.

In Magu’s case, however, the president has opted to exercise his powers after due diligence, following the allegations of misconduct levelled against Magu, by the AGF, Abubakar Malami (SAN). He set up a presidential committee headed by a retired President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Ayo Salami; a man who suffered untold humiliation in the hands of his colleagues, over allegations proven to be spurious.

According to reports, Salami has promised to be fair in the assignment. Without prejudice to the administrative enquiry, some of the allegations against the EFCC chairman are rather tenuous, unless there are underlying factors not in the public domain. One of the allegations is insubordination to the office of the AGF, who wrote the petition, against Magu.

While the powers of the AGF, is enormous under the 1999 constitution, the EFCC Act, in my humble view does not contemplate that the chairman of the commission should take orders from the office of the AGF. Any claim of insubordination, should only be of significance, if the chairman is working at cross purposes with the directive of the president, who is the overall boss of both the EFCC chairman and the AGF.

Considering the clear intendment of the Act, the EFCC is scheduled to be reasonably independent, in the war against economic and financial crimes. So, should an AGF, for instance, engage in a financial crime, the commission should be able to investigate and prosecute such an AGF. Again, without prejudice to the specific act of insubordination complained of, against Magu; the EFCC should be independent enough to investigate any member of the executive, just as it can investigate any member of the legislature or the judiciary.

A comparison of the EFCC Act and the Independent Corrupt Practices & Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) Act shows that the chairman of the ICPC has a secure tenure, unlike the chairman of the EFCC. Yet, these two commissions are geared to help the country fight the scourge of corruption, and both organisations, were established by President Olusegun Obasanjo’s administration, about the same period. Interestingly, the EFCC has by its action proven to be more proactive in the fight against corruption, more than the ICPC.

Section 3(7) of the ICPC Act, provides that the chairman shall hold office for five years in the first instance, and members apparently for four years in the first instance. On security of tenure, section 3(8) provides: “Notwithstanding the provision of section 3(7) of this Act, the chairman or any member of the commission may at any time be removed from office by the president acting on an address supported by two-thirds majority of the senate praying the he be removed for inability to discharge the functions of his office (whether arising from infirmity of mind or body or any other cause) or for misconduct.”

Magu, like his predecessors, will be booted out, ignominiously, unless a miracle happens. On its part, no ICPC chairman, has been sacked before the expiration of his tenure, as far as I know. Comparing the productivity of the two commissions, many would give thumbs up to the EFCC, as being more proactive in the fight against corruption, within and outside government circles. Again, between the two agencies, the EFCC is more feared. Could that fear be, because they often employ strong-arm tactics, or is it because of their determination to fight corruption?

Perhaps, the lawmakers should consider, whether there is a connection between the hyperactive performances of the chairmen of the EFCC and the more matured disposition of the chairmen of the ICPC, and the security of tenure. Could the hyperactivity be an effort to retain the plum job, or is it the calibre of persons who the respective Acts provides, should be appointed to head the two different commissions. Many who have been maltreated by the EFCC would wish Magu, an immediate repose from the plum position. But there are those making a song and dance of Magu’s predicament, without minding their celebrated immorality.

As the Minister of Information and Culture, Lai Mohammed, would have said, the complaint about the wrongheadedness or even highhandedness in the war against corruption is corruption fighting back. I shudder that there is not a whimper, in defence of Magu, one of the poster boys, of the Buhari’s administration in the past five years. Could there be more than meets the eye, in the unfolding Ibrahim Magu’s saga?

Gabriel Amalu

 

Those who argue that the 1999 constitution (as amended), is filled with absurdities will point to the impending constitutional crisis in Ondo State as one more proof of the claim.

Ondo State has become a kingdom divided amongst its princes, with the governor being in the All Progressive Congress (APC) and the deputy, defecting to the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

To make matters worse, the governor has unfortunately been diagnosed as positive to the corona virus disease, otherwise known as COVID-19.

In that divided kingdom, Rotimi Akeredolu (SAN), the governor of the state has declared his deputy, Agboola Ajayi, an enemy of the state, and in fact, the greatest threat to the state administration.

Yet, by the provision of section 187(1) of the 1999 constitution (as amended), Ajayi is the constitutional alter ego of the governor, the counterpart copy if you like, or indeed the governor’s shadow.

Should the governor for any reason, become incapacitated, and unable to perform the functions of his office, the deputy governor, ipso facto, becomes the governor without much ado.

Yet, in the words of the Ondo State Commissioner for Information and Orientation, Donald Ojogo, the deputy governor is “the greatest threat to good governance in Ondo State and you can’t attempt to hand over to people like that.”

For effect, he added: “Agboola Ajayi is the greatest threat to this government.” But speaking with tongue in cheek, he confirmed: “the deputy has left governance, though he is still in government.”

Clearly, the statement attributed to the spokesperson of the Ondo State government is an absurdity qua incongruous, if I may use such expression.

But, in fairness to Ojogo, the current situation in Ondo State is a classical instance of a tsetse fly perching on the scrotum.

As he rightly stated, while the deputy governor has left governance, he has not left government. But of note, while governance gives allowance for the predilection, the whims and caprices of the official of the state; the legitimacy of a government, the substratum of the office, is predicated on the provisions of the enabling law, in this instance, the 1999 constitution (as amended).

In the beginning, section 187(1) of the constitution, says: “In any election to which the foregoing provisions of this part of this chapter relate, candidate for the office of governor of a state shall not be deemed to have been validly nominated for such office unless he nominates another candidate as his associate for his running for the office of governor, who is to occupy the office of deputy governor, and that candidate shall be deemed to have been duly elected to the office of deputy governor if the candidate who nominated him is duly elected as governor in accordance with the said provision.”

So, the constitution envisages in the above provision that the deputy governor shall ab inito, be an associate of the governor.

Having been elected into office, on the premise that he is nominated by the governor, as his associate, does a deputy governor become an appendage of the governor, existing at the pleasure of the governor, or a constitutional creation, part, but independent of the governor, even though a spare product, which is used to substitute the original, should it become incapacitated to function?

Again, let us turn to the constitution. By the provision of section 186, the constitution provides that: “There shall be for each state of the federation a deputy governor.”

While in section 190, it says: “Whenever the governor transmits to the speaker of the House of Assembly written declaration that he is proceeding on vacation or that he is otherwise unable to discharge the functions of his office, until he transmits to the speaker of the House of Assembly a written declaration to the contrary such functions shall be discharged by the deputy governor as acting governor.”

Section 191(1) of the constitution adumbrates on the constitutional importance of the deputy governor, thus: “The deputy governor of a state shall hold the office of governor of the state if the office of governor becomes vacant by reason of death, resignation, impeachment, permanent incapacity or removal of the governor from office for any other reason in accordance with section 188 or 189 of this constitution.”

As many are wont to say, the deputy governor is a spare tyre, but if you have ever been stranded on a lonely stretch of road, without a spare tyre, you will appreciate that spare tyres are of immense value.

The importance of the above constitutional imperative were frequently ignored by governors and even presidents, so much so that it nearly upended our fledgling constitutional democracy during the incapacitation of late President Umaru Yar’Adua.

Power tasted so sweet that the wife of the late president, in cohort with a cabal in the presidency, sought to appropriate the powers of the president, when President Yar’Adua could no longer perform the functions of his office, the 1999 constitution be damned.

Regrettably, while President Yar’Adua could, he refused to obey the clear provision of section 145, of the constitution, which provides mutatis mutandis, similar provision as section 190, with respect to the office of the president.

What saved the day was the invocation of reasonableness, succinctly encapsulated as the doctrine of necessity. Since that debacle, the lawmakers have since made necessary amendments to countermand the recalcitrance of a governor or president, by the provisions of section 190(2), in the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (First Alteration) Act.

While wishing Governor Rotimi Akeredolu a quick and complete healing from the afflictions of COVID-19, the constitutional imperative is that while going into isolation and treatment, for a disease that has so far beguiled the medical world, he ought to transmit the letter envisaged by section 190 of the 1999 constitution (as amended).

But he has ruled out that expectation. Interestingly, while section 186 of the constitution, declares without equivocation that: “There shall be for each state of the federation a deputy governor” section 187(1) envisages that it is the governor who shall nominate “his associate” to that high office.

The gaping gap, in the constitution, of what should happen, should the deputy governor, at any stage in the relationship, seize to remain an associate of the governor, puts the constitution on trial.

Of course, there are several other aberrations in the 1999 constitution, which make some commentators consider the document a fraud entrusted on Nigerians, by the retreating military junta in 1999.

How would the Ondo State constitutional aberration be resolved, should it turn into a debacle, since the governor and his associates, see the deputy governor, as enemy of the state?

Gabriel Amalu

The coronavirus pandemic, otherwise called Covid-19, has remained a source of trepidation, for the citizens of the world. Defying science, the virus is making a mincemeat of the advancement, by Homo sapiens. Until Covid-19, birthed in Wuhan China late last year, humans have lived the illusion that with the aid of science and technology, they have become their own god, and intrinsically a competitor in creation with God.

While using technology to tame the environment and make life easy, humans went as far as attempting to use science, to create man in its own image. Starting with the so-called test tube babies, scientists were feverishly working hard to prove that what ‘God’ can do, they too can do same. Those arguing that it was ethically repugnant to natural order, to manufacture humans, outside the biologically mandated and allowable procedures, were ignored.

Bust. The coronavirus pandemic birthed in Wuhan province in China, late last year, perhaps to draw the world’s attention to the underlying reality, that despite all the strides and huge fields covered, the fundamentals have never been conquered. To compound the ignorance of man, there is a raging debate whether what has turned the world upside down, is a virus or bacteria. The Igbo adage that says: “you must remember where the rain started beating you, in other to remember where it stopped” is applicable here.

The world must first understand what beguiles it, to discover how to tame the monster. Mimicking popularity, in its duplicity, Covid-19, has turned itself into a world-trophy on a world tour. Starting in Asia, with China, as its epicentre, it wangled its way to Europe, barring its fingers in the city of the old saints, Italy, as the chosen epicentre. After awing European cities, it crossed over to shake hands with the United States of America.

Indeed, the hitherto all-knowing and all powerful, United States of America, is in the throes of strangulation by Covid-19, with her bumbling President Donald Trump, presently arguing dubiously that it is better not to know the extent of the ravaging impact of the virus, by reducing the number of those tested daily. This was after, he had argued that the Covid-19 was a fluke, engineered by the opposition Democratic Party and their foreign collaborators, to derail his second term election, which is due by September this year.

From initially denying the existence of the virus, Trump turned his twitter skills, like an enchanter, to boasting that the USA was by far, the country with the highest capacity to test more people than the whole of the world put together. When the use of ventilator appeared to be the containment for Covid-19, Trump, tuned his boast to the production of ventilators. He again boasted that the USA was producing more ventilators that the whole world put together.

From the North America, the pandemic veered to South America, with Brazil as the epicentre. With about 1.3 million confirmed cases, over 57,100 deaths, as I write this piece, there are demonstrations for and against the handling of the epidemic by President Jair Messias Bolsonaro. Some of his critics have argued that his handling of the virus has decimated the Brazilian economy. While he was initially dismissive of the virus and the measures advised by the World Health Organisation, the Brazilian economy is expected to contract by about 4.7 per cent this year.

So, Covid-19, has become a monstrous monster in the mould of the science fiction thriller: Godzilla versus Kong. Creatures so huge and destructive that it walks on skyscrapers, spewing fire that burns physical objects into ashes in its trail. Unfortunately, Covid-19 is a real and deadly deal. Interestingly, while Trump, is at the head of the bumbling team of leaders, in their handling of Covid-19 pandemic, there are leaders who have exhibited grip and dexterity in their dealing with the pandemic.

One of such leaders, the world looks upon, is the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel. Yes, the same leader that our dear President Muhammadu Buhari, joked to, about women’s place, being in the other room. While political commentators describe her as lame duck, considering that she may be near the end of her political career, she has been praised for her handling of the pandemic. From Europe to America, the praises have been high. According to The Atlantic: “For weeks now, Germany’s leader has deployed her characteristic sentimentality, to guide the country through what has thus far been a relatively successful battle against Covid-19.”

With the fear that Africa may become the next epicentre of the pandemic, states must brace up, to contain the feared implosion. From no testing centres, at the onset of the pandemic, in the entire old Northern Nigeria, and former Eastern Nigeria, many states now have two to three testing centres; Kaduna and Kano states for instance. Also, the PPE’s are being manufactured in thousands, while the reagents are more readily available, making more tests possible.

Of course, the numbers have begun to shoot up, with Lagos, the commercial nerve centre of the country and the nation’s epicentre of the Covid-19, having a lion share, as expected. The testing capacity of Lagos, is probably as much as the rest of the country put together, and it has built many isolation centres to fight the scourge. Enugu State, which has been relatively safe comparatively, even though some have argued that the testing capacity is lacking, has taken the bull by the horn, to wrestle the Covid-19 beast.

Governor Ifeanyi Ugwuanyi, (Gburugburu) has assured stakeholders that he is up to the task. With the University of Nigeria Teaching Hospital’s (UNTH) testing centre up and running, he has set up a highly technical Expert Medical Advisory Committee, led by Professor Emmanuel Ejim, a professor of medicine and a consultant cardiologist, to map out strategies and organize the state to contain the Covid-19 pandemic. Of the world leaders mentioned in this piece, Ugwuanyi, approximates closest to Germany’s Angela Merkel, who does not play politics with every opportunity, unlike presidents Trump of USA and Bolsonaro of Brazil.

The governor, who is press shy and meek, no doubt, has an uncommon connection to the ordinary people in the state, and critics have interpreted that as a weakness. But despite initial criticisms on this page, he has successfully tamed the farmers/herders’ clashes in the state, without climbing the roof top to gloat about it. Going forward, Covid-19, is another governance challenge, he must ride to submission. The Prof Ejim led committee, with the like of Dr. Emeka Onoh, a public health physician, with United Kingdom qualifications, must help Governor Ugwuanyi, to contain the feared Covid-19 implosion in the state.

Gabriel Amalu

 

The Premier League is back with a bang: black lives matter. Sorry, I am not referring to last week’s drubbing of Arsenal, by Manchester City, and the lowly performance by Arsenal defender, David Lewis.

Many Arsenal fans, will angrily refer to David, as a football-low-life, in the manner of the inscrutable President of United States of America, Donald Trump, who relishes that usage, in reference to those looting and burning properties, as Americans continue to protest the murder of George Floyd, and systemic racism and prejudices, ruining the world.

The bold inscription on the back of the jerseys of the players, and the kneeling on one knee before the kick-off, is a bold initiative to put racism in the front burner, despite the effort of Trump and white supremacists around the world, to tone down the world’s outrage.

Without realising it, the violent white supremacist, whether in the police or government are ultra-low-lives. Theirs is of a worse kind, because not only that they are doing evil, they glory in their perfidious acts.

In Nigeria, the murderous herdsmen are lowlifes. Their patrons, including those in the corridors of power are equally, lowlifes.

They are lowlifes because they glory in getting people killed, for little or no reason at all, while they think nobody is watching.

Regrettably, President Muhammadu Buhari’s government has been indicted for condoning these lowlifes, in a report issued by All-Party Parliamentary Group on International Religious Freedom or Belief (APPG).

While the presidency has vigorously denied the findings, it should go forward, to manifestly repudiate these lowlifes and their patrons.

Last week, APPG released its report in Westminster, entitled, Nigeria: Unfolding Genocide? The report noted thus: “APPG members have been alarmed by the dramatic and escalating violence in Nigeria characterised as the farmer-herder conflict.

This violence has manifested along ideological lines, as the herders are predominantly ethnic Fulani Muslims and the farmers are predominantly Christians.” It went further: “Attacks by armed groups of Islamist herdsmen have resulted in the killing, maiming, dispossession and eviction of thousands of Christians.”

It continued: “These factors are compounded by the Nigerian government’s failure to respond adequately to the violence, to protect communities or to bring perpetrators of violence to justice.”

Of note, a reporter at the APPG, presentation, noted that both Christian and Muslim populations need protection, from the murderous attacks of the Boko Haram, who are the major drivers of the genocidal pulses across the country.

But, while the government of President Buhari, is assiduously fighting the Boko Haram, it is seen to be lenient to the murderous instinct of the Islamist herdsmen, who hide under the guise of being ordinary pastoralists.

Because they are treated with kid gloves, they are bold enough to have spokespersons who make incendiary statements against the existence of the country.

While there are incendiary Islamist herdsmen, invading the country, from neighbouring countries, in the name of seeking greener pastures, there are those who claim to be Nigerians, but are no less a threat to the country.

Recently, an amorphous group, claiming to represent Fulani people in Nigeria, laid claim to the Nigerian territory from Sokoto to the Niger Delta.

Of course, these lowlifes grant interviews, and parade themselves around the country, without the federal government bringing them to account.

According to the APPG report, the result of the activities of these murderous entities have been devastating, to our country. It noted: “The exact death toll is unknown.

However, Humanitarian Aid Relief Trust quote reliable reports that over 1,000 Christians were killed between January-November 2019, in addition to the estimated 6,000+ deaths since 2015.”

It continued: “International Crisis Group estimate that over 300,000 people have been displaced and that the violence has claimed the lives of six times more people than the conflict with Boko Haram.

Violence by herders, and periodic retaliatory violence, is costing the Nigerian economy £10.5 billion per year.”

That is a huge price to pay for the activities of a group of misguided people. And while the government is giving Boko Haram a bloody nose, its body language, gives the impression that it is soft on the Islamist herdsmen.

In an effort to distinguish between the local herders, and foreign invaders, the governor of Kano State, recently called on the federal government to stop foreign pastoralists from entering into Nigeria, because of the mayhem they cause.

If this dichotomy exists, who are those that have taken over the lands of the indigenes, displaced in Plateau and Benue?

So, while there are definitely the foreign components of these lowlifes, they are rogue organs operating in the country, and the government should at least bring them to account.

At the inter-faith dialogue and reconciliation parley in Plateau State earlier in the year, the revered Sultan of Sokoto, Alhaji Mohammadu Sa’ad Abubakar III acknowledged the challenge faced by the Miyetti Allah Cattle Breeders Association, commonly associated with the Fulani ascendency in Nigeria.

Talking about the trouble makers, the Sultan said: “They don’t belong to Miyetti Allah Cattle Breeders Association; they are criminals.

I don’t know why security agencies allow them to be who they are. It is the responsibility of the security agencies, not mine.”

He went on: “There are Fulani criminals just as there are criminal elements among the Berom, Yoruba, Igbo and other tribes in the country. Let us stop name-calling.”

Agreeably, there are criminals everywhere, but the challenge is that the awesome powers of the federal government has not been trained against the lowlifes, giving the Fulani a bad name, in Nigeria.

No doubt, it is the responsibility of the federal government, which controls the security apparatchik of the country, to bring peace to Nigerians, if need be, by force of arms.

While it is the responsibility of the presidential spokesmen to marshal arguments to deny the finding of the APPG, the undeniable facts are that Nigerians are disproportionately being killed because of their faith, and perhaps for their proprietary interests.

While defending itself, the major task is to summon the will, to send a strong message that: lives matter.

Maybe, it is a clash of interests as Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, espoused on the elusive peace in the Middle East, in his book: My Vision.

He said: “We now hear some people who have regressed to the mentality of the nineteenth century, referring to a struggle between civilizations and religions, while I believe they ought to talk about a struggle over interests.”

If the struggle in Nigeria is over interests, it is important that the federal government, manifestly show itself as standing on fairness, regardless of faith or ethnic nationality. That is the challenge facing Buhari’s government.