The Nation Newspaper

Category: Festus Eriye

  • Re: The trouble with the Buhari Doctrine

    I have read with dismay how newspaper columnists, the intelligensia and senior lawyers have, deliberately, out of mischief and ignorance as well as ill motive, misconstrued Prsident Buhari’s on rule of law and national interest statement and misled some Nigerians into believing that the President was wrong.

    Mr. Eriye, you and your fellow columnists in all the Nigerian dailies as well as some lawyers are wrong in your comments and reactions to the President’s address at the recent NBA Conference to the effect that the rule of law should give way to national interest (security). The president’s address is to the effect that rule of law gives way where national interest is involved.  All over the world national interest supercedes or overrides individual interest even where the later is protected by law. In other words, where there is a conflict or clash between the two interests, national interest prevails. In a great number of situations it is the Executive arm that defines or determines what the national interest is at any given time. In this country some people are always eager to malign the Executive as if the Executive do not have the interest of the country at heart, as if the Executive belongs to another planet and as if the critics have more Nigerian blood in them than the Executive. Critics should find out why the USA has Guatamano Bay. Sometimes laws are made to give effect to defined interests anywhere but they are easily recognisable. Some national laws admit refugees and accord them equal rights as citizens of host countries but the host country, in her national interest, has a right to refuse entry to a refugee-terrorist. It might not have been in the national interest initially to release the former NSA Dasuki and El-Zark Zaky on bail. It is not in the national interest for one to have his residence so proximate to Aso Rock or White House. Can an individual insist that as the constitution gives him the right to reside and have property in any part of the country he must reside or build in such seat of power? Take for example, revocation of property for (overriding)public interest, requisition of properties in the UK during the World War. All those that took the UK government to court lost. In recent times, Russia was accused of being the brain behind the deaths, in England, of some of her former spies who defected. The act of killing them was in the national interest of Russia and the perpetrators will never be brought to book as the defectors would have leaked secrets capable of compromising the national security of Russia.

    One may have heard of the term ‘classified documents.’ Such documents enjoy the privilege of not being tendered  in court even if they will assist one in presenting his case or defending himself in court. It is not in the national interest that such documents (e.g. the operational strategy in attacking the Boko Haram insurgents) be made public though the judge may insist on seeing it. Another vivid example is the taking of hostages by terrorists, say Boko Haram. The act of hostage taking is a clear violation of some extant laws of the country. Will a sane person insist on prosecuting  some of the terrorists that may have been caught pursuant to the rule of law or, in the national interest, if the opportunity arises, to exchange the terrorist with the hostages or even pay ransom for their release?  The Freedom of Information Act is replete with provisions in recognition of the primacy of  national interest. Israel, till date, exchanges prisoners for the dead bodies of her nationals.

    The reason is that the country made it against her national interest or policy for a Jew to be buried outside Israel. In this regard she overlooks or jettisons the rule of law in preference for her national interest Therefore, the President’s statement was very correct. – From Chijioke Dike, Esq.

  • Still on ‘The trouble with the Buhari Doctrine’

    You  were simply in your element as usual in ‘The trouble with the Buhari Doctrine’ piece, and almost made me change my position on the matter. However, I would agree with President Buhari that the law can only be optimally practised in a Nigeria that is safe, secure and properous; and that where national security and public interest are treathened or there is a likelihood for their being treathened, the individual rights of those responsible must take second place in favor of the greater good of society.That’s how I think it should be.The only problem is that it may always not be easy to differentiate when a vendatta-seeking president may want to punish a certain individual or a group of them just to massage his ego, all in the name of protecting national interest. I think that what is needed mostly here is a clear  resort to a true separation of power in our democratic governance, where the judiciary can always be the one interpreting what should constitute national interest and all, in matters involving Nigerians without the presidency influencing the interpretation to his own favour. The rule of law, though a very indispensible item in democratic governance, being strictly tied to it when the looters of our common  patrimony that impoverish everybody in the country take advantage of it to evade capture, is just not the ideal thing to do. Yes, if the looter ‘birds’ of our economy have learn how to loot without perching and with no regards to the rule of law, it is only fitting that any savior, visionary president should equally learned how to trap them without necessarily being tied down to the rule of law as well. Otherwise you can never beat Nigerian politicians to it – and which could simply mean a perpetual stagnation of the country, going by the rate at which corrupt practices deepen with Nigerian politicians by the day, From Emmanuel Egwu,

  • The trouble with the Buhari Doctrine

    There is something uncanny about the ability of President Muhammadu Buhari and his aides to make statements that reinforce negative impressions and stereotypes about him.

    Not too long ago there was the flap about the president trekking 800 metres while returning from prayer over the Sallah holidays in his hometown, Daura.

    Knowing that between now and the 2019 general elections, the opposition were going to feast on lingering questions about Buhari’s health and fitness, his aides thought it fit to spin the ‘long walk’ as evidence of his readiness to take on another four years of the gruelling schedule of a president.

    But instead of positive feedback, the 800-meter trek became the subject of ridicule by his rivals, and the object of a thousand hilarious memes on social media. It was so bad Buhari himself had to speak out about the real reason he took the walk.

    In another case that didn’t leave the administration smelling of roses, a journalist with Premium Times was arrested by the police and surreptitiously arraigned on a cocktail of creative criminal charges for allegedly publishing the transcript of the Inspector-General of Police’s investigation on the recent invasion of the National Assembly by agents of the Department of State Security (DSS).

    While the Presidency was not directly connected to the reporter’s travail, the actions of the police were executed under Buhari’s watch. The demonstrators who stormed police headquarters to rage against the journalist’s detention made sure to paint it as the latest manifestation of dictatorial tendencies by the administration.

    Even more potentially damaging, was the ill-conceived blockade of the National Assembly by the DSS allegedly acting under the orders of the ousted Director-General, Lawal Daura. But for the proactive moves of the then Acting President Yemi Osinbajo, no one knows how that incident would played out.

    But both local and international opinion hinted that there was the suspicious suggestion of a ‘coup’ in the failed invasion. It was a hint that the prompt sacking of Daura swiftly quenched. Despite what many lauded as a thorough repudiation of the use of undemocratic methods to resolve the executive’s dispute with the legislature, Buhari’s foes continued to hint darkly that a one-time military strongman would never really shed his spots.

    Now, we have the latest in a series of verbal grenades hurled, needlessly, into the public space. Last Sunday, Buhari in an address he delivered at the opening of the 2018 Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Annual General Conference in Abuja, stated that the rule of law must be subject to the supremacy of the nation’s security and national interest.

    He argued that where national security and public interest were being threatened, the individual rights of those allegedly responsible must take the second place.

    “Our apex court has had cause to adopt a position on this issue in this regard and it is now a matter of judicial recognition that; where national security and public interest are threatened or there is a likelihood of their being threatened, the individual rights of those allegedly responsible must take second place, in favour of the greater good of society,” he declared.

    Predictably, a chorus of critics have descended on the president for his controversial comment. Many of the commentators were quick to reference the president’s past. Take the reaction by Nobel laureate Wole Soyinka as an example.

    “Here we go again! At his first coming, it was ‘I intend to tamper with Freedom of the Press’ and Buhari did proceed to suit action to the words, sending two journalists Irabor and Thompson to prison as a reward for their professional integrity,” he said.

    “Now, a vague, vaporous, but commodious concept dubbed ‘national interest’ is being trotted out as alibi for flouting the decisions of the Nigerian judiciary.”

    Soyinka wondered if Buhari’s incarceration by former President Ibrahim Babangida’s regime was also in the “national interest”.

    I suspect that the comment comes out of the government’s discomfiture with trying to justify the continued detention of former National Security Adviser (NSA), Col. Ibrahim Dasuki (rtd) – in a democratic setting – long after the courts have granted him bail. It is a position which, despite their public posturing, would leave many of the senior lawyers in the administration ill at ease.

    Although Buhari has run to a certain Supreme Court ruling for cover, the trouble with the newly-espoused doctrine is that national interest is such a nebulous concept which is open to diverse interpretations, misinterpretations and manipulation by malevolent forces.

    What is in the national interest of a country is often down to what the individuals who run it think it is. There are hardly ever any objective parameters for defining it. So, take for example, a country like Venezuela where the socialist government is battling to contain anarchy as the economy crumbles and the misery of the populace deepens by the day.

    Is it against the national interest when the opposition conservative party and its allies – reacting to the suffering – holds mass rallies calling for the resignation of the government? President Nicholas Maduro who is clinging to power has been using the security forces to ruthlessly suppress the protests – all in the ‘national interest.’

    ‘National interest’ is what dictatorial regimes hide under to clamp dissidents in detention. But the moment a more liberal administration takes over, one of its first acts is often the release of detainees – in the ‘national interest’ – in order to score points locally and internationally and shore up support.

    The argument becomes even more complicated where the constitution has spelt out clear roles for the different arms of government. Their leadership at different points would interpret their uses of their powers at each point as being in the ‘national interest.’

    We’ve seen instances when the United States’ government was shut down for days as the executive and Congress squabbled over the budget. The executive branch which wants its proposals passed so that government can continue providing services would argue that it is acting altruistically.

    Would the legislature be justified is making the same point when it says that its acting as a check of the executive is in the ‘national interest’ – even in the face of a temporary disruption of services?

    It is important that the president and those in government today never give the impression that the rule of law is something that can be cavalierly sacrificed in furtherance of some supposedly larger ideal.

    We can say to President Buhari that even in an imperfect state like Nigeria, there are still has enough institutions and provisions under the law to checkmate those who would want to subvert national security.

    It is very important that the already very powerful executive branch not be perceived as executing a power grab where it begins to take on roles that have been set aside for the judiciary; or where it is seen as picking and choosing what orders of court to obey.

    No democracy, indeed no society, can thrive when we start to make excuses for not allowing the rule of law take its way unfettered course. A day may come when someone else may use the same Supreme Court argument to abridge our rights – all in the ‘national interest.’ I doubt if anyone truly wants that.

  • Ajimobi-Ayefele Saga: Not exactly David versus Goliath

    Peace has supposedly broken out in the weeklong saga over the partial demolition by the Oyo State Government, of a building in the Challenge area of Ibadan, belonging to the popular singer and entrepreneur, Yinka Ayefele.

    On Thursday, a parley ostensibly put together by an All Progressives Congress (APC) gubernatorial aspirant and sundry peacemakers doused the fire. In attendance were Oyo State State Governor, Abiola Ajimobi, the Alaafin of Oyo, Oba Lamidi Adeyemi, as well as the singer Ayefele and a couple of others.

    At the pow-wow, the governor reportedly declared that the demolition was all about enforcing law and order and that he had nothing against Ayefele as a person. The singer, for his part, pronounced himself a law-abiding citizen who had always replied all correspondence on the building infractions levelled against him.

    After Ayefele’s team prostratged themselves before Ajimobi and the Oba, he was absolved of his ‘sins’ and assured of an amicable resolution of a saga that had provided feverish excitement and entertainment for the baying mob on social media for days.

    For the governor, the truce must have been welcome relief from the unrelenting bashing which has painted him as a stubborn autocrat who plunged into a public relations disaster with eyes wide open.

    Even, the peace meeting, which seeks to bring closure to the storm, is not all positive for him. Irrespective of who initiated the talks, the truth is he has come across as a Goliath – backed by all the awesome powers of state – who has been brought to heel by a physically-challenged but wildly-popular entertainer. It may not be the fairest of characterisations, but that is just the way it is.

    In reality, though, this is not your everyday replay of the Biblical David versus Goliath conflict. There is a bit of that, and lots more about what has brought Nigeria into the pitiable condition it finds itself today.

    In an environment where sentiment often trumps reason in public discourse, Ajimobi’s feeble attempt to stand on the law and order high ground was bound to fail. Nigerians are more likely to side with the underdog – with the powerful symbolism of his physical handicap – against a powerful politician portrayed as arrogant and unfeeling.

    So, while the government swiftly rushed to the court of public opinion with series of letters sent to Ayefele’s organisation about deviations from the approved building plan, the irate denizens of social media neither had the patience nor inclination to wade through tons of official correspondence, or even digest the content. They reacted emotionally to photos of Ayefele – chin in his palm – staring sorrowfully as the bulldozers chewed up parts of his building.

    The rage was raw, the reactions viral. Official rationalisations were never going to catch up. Did Ayefele deviate from the approved building plan? Were there genuine concerns about public safety for users of the road arising from the unauthorised alterations? Did he ignore past correspondence from the authorities on the matter?

    It didn’t matter. People were more concerned about the fate of the over 100 people said to be working for the singer who stood to lose their jobs if the roof came down on the structure.

    Ajimobi understood what he was up against because in the heat of the debate, he wondered whether Ayefele should be allowed to get away with the violations just because he had problems with his legs. That may not have been the most politic of comments to make, but it certainly goes straight to the heart of the matter.

    Two of the greatest challenges limiting this nation today are impunity and sentiment: impunity on the parts of the governors and the governed. Countries that work function properly because laws are enforced and there is order. If you beat the traffic light, a ticket would be delivered at your doorstep as surely as the sun rises from the east.

    The contrary is what we’ve become. Everyone wants to be free to do as he or she likes – and the laws be damned.

    On account of this reckless disregard for what is lawful, greedy developers who were allowed to bend the rules, end up as mass murderers when their flawed structures collapse on innocent victims.

    In some Nigerian cities, roads have become concrete jungles where motorists are engaged daily in mortal combat where only the fittest and their automobiles return home in one piece. Crazed ‘Okada’ riders chase harried pedestrians off the sidewalk. Desperate drivers going against traffic, hurtle towards those with right of way like weapons of mass destruction. The wise get out of their way in hurry. Desensitised traffic officials and the police look away – unconcerned.

    A government that attempts to restore sanity would soon be told how wicked it is because it wants to restrain maniacal ‘Okada’ riders and crazed drivers from endangering other road users. We are so blinded by sentiment that we’ve lost all sense of what sane behaviour is about.

    We need to accept that where there are violations of the law, whether with regards to building regulations, traffic or cold-blooded murder, responsible government must take action.

    But this should not be mistaken for an endorsement of how the Oyo government went about tackling this messy episode.

    For one, things could have been addressed before the structure was developed to its current state. What happened to the stage by stage reviews by the building authorities? What actions did they take to halt further building when the first deviations were noticed?

    Even when matters came to a head with the three-day demolition notice, the needless controversy could have been avoided because Ayefele went to court and supposedly obtained an injunction. It is easy for the government to claim it was unaware of any such judicial intervention. The controversial building has been standing for years, waiting another couple of days to verify the true status of the legal action would have hurt no one. The question many have asked – justifiably – is what was the mad rush about? Was there some deadline that had to be met?

    Even more suspicious was the fact that the demolition crew set about their task at the unusual hour of 4.30am – a time when God-fearing civil servants would still be snoring in their beds. Such efficiency is unheard of in state bureaucracies notorious for their snail speed.

    And so the government staggered from one unforced error to another – until it was put out of its misery by last Thursday’s parley.

    Even if it was so zealous about enforcing the law, there’s always a wise way to act and an appropriate time to take action.

    With barely four months to the next general election, this miscalculated demolition was akin to shooting oneself in the foot with a Dane gun. Already, many on social media had begun threatening retribution against the ruling party. Maybe some will forgive and forget, but depend on it that the opposition would not let voters forget in a hurry.

    Perhaps, the governor wanted to come across as a firm and no-nonsense administrator who would not brook breaches of the law no matter how eminent the offender is. The question would then be that he should have stood his ground and damned the consequences, having established that there were violations.

    As things stand, it is the government that is being made to look like it backed down in the face of unrelenting public criticism. Instead of appearing tough, Ajimobi has across like someone who was only too glad to have been offered a dignified way of escape from a tight spot by the peacemakers.

    To argue otherwise would raise this scenario: if some offending individual without Ayefele’s celebrity and physical challenges had been at the receiving end of this demolition, would the governor and traditional rulers be convening peace talks? After this bruising encounter would the government still have stomach to embark on demolitions where egregious violations of the building code are identified?

    Hopefully, some enduring lessons have been learnt about the uses and application of state power in pursuit of our common good. For those on the other side, perhaps time has come to ponder whether laws should be scrapped in Nigeria and every man should be left to his own devices.

  • Akpabio: The strangest of strange bedfellows

    A wise saying recommends you never judge a man until you’ve walked a step in his shoes. So, I would be the last person to condemn politicians switching parties as they battle for survival.

    It is even harder to be judgmental because virtually everyone – All Progressives Congress (APC), Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and sundry others – have benefitted from the seasonal migration.

    In the last couple of the weeks, following the movement of 15 senators and three governors from the ruling party, it did appear as if the opposition was headed for a crushing victory in the defection Olympics. Rumours of even more exits from a supposedly sinking APC ship must have sounded like sweet music in the PDP camp.

    But in this column, I had observed that the defections were certainly not going to be one-way traffic given that the factors driving them were largely local ones, differing from state to state, from institution to institution.

    Whereas the calculations in the Senate were comforting enough to encourage Senate President Bukola Saraki to jump ship, Speaker of the House of Representatives, Yakubu Dogara, has not been so fleet of feet, knowing how precarious his own position is. So, despite his expected exit from APC being one of the worst kept secrets in the political space, the Bauchi legislator has wisely chosen to fly under the radar for now.

    Without question, the PDP has been the biggest beneficiary numerically in the gale of the defections – a development that gave the party some momentum in recent times. But whatever wind it must have gathered in its sails has been largely deflated by just one movement in the opposite direction. I refer to the decamping of erstwhile Senate Minority Leader, Godswill Akpabio.

    If you want to gauge the shock and devastation felt by the PDP leadership over his departure, you only need to check the vitriol that has trailed his action. He has been called a traitor, Judas and a coward – and those are the more complimentary words used against him.

    But it is not just the PDP which has suffered this embarrassing PR blow that is stunned. As a political commentator, I am shocked.

    For months, when reporters filed stories about a supposed rift between Akpabio and incumbent Akwa Ibom State Governor, Udom Emmanuel, I would treat them with a spoonful of salt. I would turn them back to go and crosscheck their information. Many times I felt vindicated when the feuding sides – with straight faces and plastic smiles – would deny any problems. Frankly, most politicians possess greater Thespian skills than the so-called Nollywood stars.

    Even when tales of Akpabio’s imminent defection to APC picked up pace, I preferred to be cautious. After all, all the seers were so sure Kaduna State senator, Shehu Sani, on account of his bickering with Governor Nasir El-Rufai, was set to abandon the ruling party. Imagine our collective shock when he smugly sat back in the company of the devil he was accustomed to.

    It wasn’t until the former Akwa Ibom governor began appearing in chummy photos with APC National Leader, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu and President Muhammadu Buhari, that I accepted that something was indeed afoot. Today’s reality is that Godswill Akpabio is now a member of the ruling party!

    He may have taken one momentous step as an individual, but for the party of which he used to be a key leader, it is several steps backwards in the battle to wrest power from the APC.

    Akpabio was as PDP as they come. He was one of the pillars that made the South-South zone an impregnable fortress for the former ruling party in the last eleven years. Even when the then Rivers State Governor, Rotimi Amaechi, pulled out because of his troubles with former President Goodluck Jonathan and his wife, Patience, his efforts helped shore up whatever loss the party suffered in the brief period Rivers State was not within its ranks.

    If he helped the party, PDP also reciprocated. In 2015, the party’s caucus in the Senate bent the rules to allow the newcomer to fill the Minority Leader slot – a position that would ordinarily have been occupied only by a ranking senator.

    Irrespective of what might have transpired within the PDP in Akwa Ibom, very few would have boldly predicted that Akpabio would now be making common cause with a band of politicians he derisively referred to four years ago as “expired drugs” – a play on the acronym ‘APC’ – the name of a once popular analgesic in these parts.

    He and others were equally vociferous in dismissing those who midwifed APC as a bunch of strange bedfellows who could never work together.

    So what on earth could have made him hop into bed with those many would consider strange bedfellows to him? Let’s not forget that he’s now locked in awkward embrace with some of those he edged out of the PDP in the heat of the succession battle of 2015.

    For instance, Umana Okon Umana, one-time Secretary to the State Government and now Managing Director, Oil and Gas Free Zones Authority (OGFZA), quit the PDP when it became apparent that Akpabio was bent on installing Emmanuel who he had headhunted from Zenith Bank, as his successor. The parting between erstwhile political allies was bitter.

    In APC, Akpabio now has to caucus with the likes of John Akpan Udoehehe, his bitter rival for the gubernatorial seat who has long fancied himself the real leader of the party in Akwa Ibom. How would he respond to the assertive ex-governor who is not noted for taking the back seat?

    Some have suggested that Akpabio’s defection is a ploy to get the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) off his back. But I doubt this theory because nothing on the ground would encourage any savvy politician to bet his house on this sort of arrangement.

    Ask Orji Kalu if his praise-singing of Buhari and APC has slowed down the prosecution of his graft case. Perhaps former Plateau State Governor, Joshua Dariye, believed at some point that his membership of the ruling party would somehow ameliorate his legal woes. Today, in the anonymous prison where he’s serving time, he’s certainly wiser.

    Or could it be ambition? It is not inconceivable that the top job in the National Assembly could be on offer – especially if the APC succeeds in toppling Saraki. But this, again, is unlikely as it would mean upturning the zoning arrangements locked into place by the ruling party.

    The answer clearly lies elsewhere. It is true that politicians have a very low suffering or humiliation threshold, but something truly traumatic must have happened between Akpabio and his godson Emmanuel to have caused him to flee into the embrace of those he once fought with unrelenting ruthlessness.

    It must have been something quite grievous if he’s willing to bear being painted as the face of treachery by his one-time confederates in Akwa Ibom and Abuja.

    Whatever it was, the fallout between Akpabio and Emmanuel is an object lesson to incumbent governors who believe that by installing those they think would be their poodles, they are guaranteed a peaceful retirement where they would be governing from the back seat. This is another example that Nigerian gubernatorial ‘poodles’ have a nightmarish way of morphing into Frankenstein monsters.

    Akpabio has taken a bold but risky step driven by calculations which only he can properly explain. He is just one individual and we must be careful not to ascribe too much power and influence to him. Still, in the context of today’s politics of defections, the APC which lost more in numbers would welcome this one significant movement in its direction.

    A few weeks ago, the seemingly one-way defections were being interpreted by some as a bellwether for likely 2019 outcomes. But the unscripted reverse decamping by Akpabio is a significant psychological blow for the PDP and a coup for the APC. As we await the next act in the unfolding drama, wise men won’t go placing bets.

  • 2019: What’s defection got to do with it?

    IT was planned for maximum effect. In one fell swoop  15 senators and 37 members of the House of Representatives  left the ranks of the ruling All Progressives Party (APC). Next day, Benue State Governor, Samuel Ortom, jumped ship  exiting with 10 members of the state House of Assembly.

    With the threat that further defections from the ruling party will follow in coming days and weeks, defection is at the center of national discourse.

    For the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) whose ranks have been bloated by the new arrivals, it was both a numerical and psychological boost. Long on the receiving end, as its members who are not used to being in the opposition wilderness bolted from its stricken ship, this was welcome news  something to be spun as sign that the political wind was, perhaps, beginning to turn in its favour.

    Its leading lights have been boasting about the defections unfolding in batches, as they continued their open flirtation with senior APC office holders. Some of the disaffected like Senate President Bukola Saraki and House Speaker Yakubu Dogara  for strategic reasons  may never formally cross until 2019 polling is virtually upon us.

    The smart money expects Sokoto State Governor, Aminu Tambuwal and his Kwara counterpart, Abdulfatah Ahmed, to shortly confirm one of politics worst kept secrets: they are headed back to PDP. It remains to be seen whether the opposition’s gains from gubernatorial ranks would dry up thereafter.

    For the new APC chairman, Adams Oshiomhole, there couldn’t have been a more excruciating baptism of fire. It is his lot to steady the ship  not knowing who can be trusted to remain or who is secretly in bed with the enemy.

    Oshiomhole and President Muhammadu Buhari have tried to project calmness  suggesting that they were all for people exercising their constitutional right of freedom of association. Still, they are not likely to be jubilating over the loss of a boatload of high-profile members within the twenty-four hours.

    But the flow of defectors may not necessarily persist in one direction. For now, APC is nursing its bruises but very soon it, too, could be brandishing its own trophies  well-fed politicians crossing the divide for whatever reason.

    No one is deceived that these movements are remotely linked to any principle under the sun.

    That is why APC and PDP should limit their contest to one of numerical superiority and not attempt to score any moral points. Both sides are equally guilty of benefitting from a tradition of politics that emphasises the cult of personality over the contest of ideas.

    How funny it is to hear Oshiomhole denounce those who have gone back to PDP as men and women lacking in honour. But he conveniently forgets that the very foundation of the ruling party was partly secured by defectors who once upon a time operated under the ‘n-PDP’ banner.

    Not too long ago, after the court killed his power grab within the PDP by recognising the legitimacy of former Kaduna State Governor, Ahmed Makarfi’s caretaker chairmanship, his rival  Ali Modu Sheriff  moved his entire faction’s leadership into APC.

    The then party chairman, John Odigie-Oyegun, joined by three state governors and Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF), Boss Mustapha, joyfully welcomed the new defectors who included the likes of Senator Hope Uzodinma, Gbemisola Saraki, Teslim Folarin and 34 state chairman of the faction at the APC’s national headquarters in Abuja.

    At the occasion, Odigie-Oyegun declared: “This is the first time this magnitude of event is happening since the amalgamation of the party and since the APC came into being.

    “It is the first time we are receiving a total party with all the structures all over the nation fusing into the APC.”

    So Oshiomhole’s comments are a bit rich given that his party has never been too embarrassed to embrace some of the poster boys of worst that PDP represented.

    As the drama unfolded, some of those changing sides sought to sell their action as driven solely by disgust over Buhari’s or the APC’s performance in office. In reality, however, they have largely been motivated by survival.

    A lot have jumped because their interests now conflict with those of governors who would pull out all stops to deny them return tickets to the National Assembly.

    Some are contending with two-term governors who are especially interested in retiring to the senatorial seats they currently hold. Others are chafing under the vice grip of local godfathers who wouldn’t let them breathe.

    In the case of a governor like Benue’s Ortom, defection is the only way he could escape the stranglehold his erstwhile benefactor, George Akume, has on the party in the state. Indeed, there was a question mark on whether he would get a second term ticket. Little wonder, he cried out that he’d been given a red card at state level  despite the reconciliatory moves of the national leadership.

    For the likes of Senator Rabiu Kwankwaso and former Vice President Atiku Abubakar before him, there was the small matter of their unresolved presidential ambition. The former also had to deal with a successor in Kano State Governor, Abdullahi Ganduje, who is committed to crushing him politically. Their intractable conflict left no room for cohabitation within APC.

    These defections are more complex than they may appear on the surface. It would be foolhardy to begin to compute numbers and draw conclusions about the ultimate outcome of the 2019 race just because the movements haven’t significantly altered the power dynamics in the National Assembly or across the country.

    In the Senate APC retains a nominal majority, but the coalition that installed Saraki is still in control. In the House of Representatives, the ruling party retains a fairly stable hold. Unlike in 2014 when the PDP lost five governors to the opposition, only one has switched sides so far. Even if Sokoto and Kwara eventually change affiliation, it doesn’t significantly damage APC’s spread.

    Perhaps the fascination with defections and defectors will pass, but as we have seen in the past, this phenomenon might just drag on as desperate politicians seek platforms on which to run.

    It is a shameful development that only underlines the poverty of our politics. Rather than focusing the 2019 discussion on the critical issues that confront our country, we are all giddy with excitement over leopards switching sides without shedding their spots.

    Nigerians should not be made to decide who gets a mandate to govern by how many defectors they were able to attract. This is country at a critical juncture facing an existential crisis. There are grave problems with the economy that are exacerbating our security challenges. Depending on which side you are on, corruption in public office has either be contained or metastasized.

    So, as it was in 2015, the 2019 election ought to be a referendum on the performance of Buhari and his APC administration over the last three and a half years.

    Nigerians are within their rights to ask whether they are better off today, than they were three years ago. If they are not, are there mitigating factors that would make them consider giving the incumbent a second chance?

    The opposition would also be justified to pose that same question as it stakes it claim for another mandate to run the nation. But in doing so, the PDP, which dismisses the incumbent as incompetent must offer a credible alternative. If it were in APC’s shoes what would it have done differently?

    The challenge it faces is having to sell a believable alternative plan, while dealing with the issue of trust. How can it get the vast majority of Nigerians to trust it again when the rank record of the last PDP government still reeks in the nostrils of many?

    It was only three years ago when many were baying for ‘change.’ What changed in the conduct and character of the erstwhile ruling party to make it believe that those who rejected it would so swiftly embrace it again?

    We have barely six months to when the first ballots would be cast in 2019 and yet we don’t have that clear alternative. You can judge Buhari and APC by their record in office. But what do PDP and its presidential aspirants offer as alternative?

    Veteran presidential contender, Atiku Abubakar, has vowed to quickly end widespread insecurity and killings. What he conveniently neglects to address is how. Or are we just to take his word for it because he is Atiku?

    If all the PDP and others have to offer as their case for taking over power is how many defectors they have been able to lure from APC, then their hope of returning to power soon might just end up as pipe dreams.

    They need to present to Nigeria a compelling argument for being returned to office, just as the APC needs to defend what we’ve seen them do in the last three years. Only on that basis would we make our 2019 choices.

  • ‘Total Chairman’ meets ‘Maximum Chairman’

    I HAVE never found out why the PDP national chairman, Uche Secondus, is fondly called ‘Total Chairman.’ It is certainly not because he’s totalitarian in his ways. Observing him from afar he looks like the genial sort who is more comfortable wheeling and dealing behind the scenes, than sounding off before a bank of microphones and cameras.

    The same cannot be said for the APC’s new chairman, Adams Oshiomhole. The former president of the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) has a reputation for giving as good as he gets.

    Right from the moment his ascent was formalised I knew there wouldn’t be any dull moment under his leadership. Unlike his predecessor, John Odigie-Oyegun, who had a diplomatic  even soporific  style of leadership, Oshio-Baba as his political associates and friends call him, is as combative, articulate and outspoken as they come.

    I am sure if any of his promoters had any misgivings about him, it would have been whether he would be controllable. He obviously has very clear ideas about his role and powers as party chairman, and he intends to make the APC more assertive in its relationship with its members who are holding office.

    Not surprisingly, he has grabbed the assignment with characteristic zeal  the less-charitable would say overzealousness  leaving a few unexpected victims already bruised in this short period.

    For failing to inaugurate boards of agencies under their ministries, Minister of Labour and Productivity, Chris Ngige and Minister of State for Aviation, Hadi Sirika, were threatened with expulsion from the ruling party.

    While Sirika has meekly reacted with the silence of a lamb, the pugilistic Ngige has hit back by suggesting that his newly-minted party chair needed to be educated on the inner workings of government at a higher level.

    It is a bit surprising that one of Oshiomhole’s first political battles would be with a man who many have long believed to be his friend and comrade-at-arms. But perhaps in politics personal relationships sometimes have to take a back seat.

    Still, I feel Oshiomhole was overly aggressive in issuing an ultimatum to ministers who don’t report to him, by giving them two weeks to inaugurate boards or face sanctions as grave as expulsion.

    The problem with hurling ultimatums about is that to maintain your credibility, you are forced to carry out your threats, otherwise you are exposed as a having a bark not backed up with a bite.

    Even worse, the chairman’s comments which suggested that President Buhari somehow condoned disrespectful treatment from his ministers, was totally out of line  irrespective of whatever powers the APC constitution confers on his office.

    He said: “If the President condones disrespect for his office, I will not condone disrespect for the party. They have taken undue advantage of the President’s fatherly disposition.”

    If he’s going to succeed in his new role, the APC chairman needs to understand that he’s been called to be as much a conciliator healing a divided house, as he is expected to be a fire-fighter or verbal pugilist taking the fight to external foes. He definitely needs that balance if he’s not to end up as a ‘Maximum Chairman’ who must be obeyed.

  • NEF’s Elders Summit and state of the nation

    It is the age of the alliance. As the nation hurtles towards the 2019 general elections, more Nigerians are discovering that there is power in making common cause on political issues.

    First, it was the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) corralling more than 30 other parties into the contraption called Coalition of United Political Parties (CUPP), whose sole aim is toppling President Muhammadu Buhari and his All Progressives Congress (APC) administration.

    Then last Wednesday, an ‘Extraordinary Summit of Leaders and Elders of Nigeria’ was convoked in Abuja at the instance of Professor Ango Abdullahi’s Northern Elders Forum (NEF). Aside the grand title of the event, the list of attendees was equally impressive.

    It is not every day that you gather the NEF, Ohaneze N’digbo, Afenifere, Pan-Niger Delta Forum (PANDEF), Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN), Jama’atu Nasril Islam (JNI) and sundry others in one room, and emerge with an agreement. For each of these groups set their stall as ethnic and religious champions whose interests hardly cohere.

    Into the midst of these sectional leaders, the conveners parachuted Buhari’s bete noire former President Olusegun Obasanjo, who loves to posture as the arch-nationalist, as guest speaker – thereby setting the stage for what you would have expected to be a fractious gathering.

    But agree they did. In a communique titled: ‘State of the Nation: The Rising Spate of Killings Must Stop’, the leaders and elders condemned the bloodletting, called for the emergence of a new dynamic and visionary leadership, as well as resolved to work towards the restructuring of the country.

    The communique must have made for grim reading at the Presidential Villa as the summit returned a damning verdict on Buhari’s stewardship with regards to the economy, security and corruption – the three pillars of his 2015 election campaign. On each item they handed him a failing grade, rounding it up by dismissing his performance as incompetent.

    Their call for a ‘new visionary and dynamic leadership’ to lead Nigeria out of its present crisis was certainly no endorsement of the president’s second term bid.

    The Presidency hit back in a cutting response by Buhari’s Senior Special Assistant on Media and Publicity, Garba Shehu, which dismissed the gathering as an unholy alliance of selfish leaders motivated by hunger.

    HeHHe accused them of shedding crocodile tears because they felt alienated by an incumbent who had introduced a transparent and accountable system which disrupted their disproportionate survival on resources of the state.

    Shehu then reels off a number of ongoing security interventions in Taraba, Benue, Nasarawa, Kogi, Kaduna and Niger States to debunk the suggestion that his principal was merely sitting on his haunches while the country bled to death.

    With the battle line between Buhari and the old political elite – north and south – sharply drawn, it is tempting even if you are not a presidential spokesman to question the motives of the summiteers. Many have been active participants in government at all levels from as far back as the 70s. They, Obasanjo included, had every opportunity to move the country in a better direction but blew their chance.

    They could have restructured the country economically and politically but were among some of the most vociferous voices that have pushed for the sustenance of our virtually unitary system of government. They could have been visionary and foreseen signs that the minor economic and sectarian problems they left to fester would one day threaten to break up the country.

    So, Shehu may have a point that a lot of the finger-pointing is hypocritical coming from many who helped to create the mess that now requires cleaning. The downside for the president and his team is that, our history notwithstanding, they were elected to clean it all up. It is too late in the day to moan about the scale of the exercise or the motivations of the ever-present army of faultfinders.

    No matter how unfair the critics may be, Buhari and his team must ask themselves whether, in the context of what the nation is passing through, their solutions are enough? Defensiveness would not do. Saying that the killings didn’t start under your watch, or that the body count was higher under the Goodluck Jonathan administration, is a totally unacceptable position.

    Although Shehu listed several ongoing military operations, it should alarm everyone that in spite of all he says is being done, so much bloodletting continues. It really goes beyond effort; it is all about the efficacy of what is being done. When Boko Haram was bombing major cities back in 2013 and 2014, the Jonathan administration also regaled us with all it was doing to battle to sect.

    To be fair, the Buhari government has done well with blunting the insurgency. The Islamist group is no longer the frightening force it was in 2014/2015.  The government equally deserves commendation for the number of Chibok girls it has rescued, as well as its quick response that led to the return of almost all the abducted Dapchi schoolgirls – leaving only Leah Sharibu as a sore point.

    Boko Haram maybe on the wane, but the overall security picture is bad news for the government. In terms of numbers and perception, the bloodshed of the last few years clearly surpasses any other period in recent peace time Nigeria.

    Herdsmen killings in the Middle-Belt, savage banditry in the Sokoto-Zamfara axis, and the swarm of kidnappers around Kogi, Abuja, Kaduna and many others parts of the country, have obliterated whatever feel-good dividend Buhari expected to reap from his successes in the Northeast.

    Indeed, the gravity of the situation was captured recently by former Kaduna State Governor Balarabe Musa who said the kidnappers had become so evil they have taken to abducting poor Almajiris from isolated farms and asking for ransom as low as N3,000.

    A person who would abduct another human being for as low as N3,000 is really not much of a kidnapper; he’s just a desperately hungry fellow whose only solution is base criminality.

    One direct consequences of the abduction epidemic is that farming takes a hit. The herdsmen killings also have the same effect – compounding poverty and the country’s larger economic problems.

    What is happening is very complex and cannot be easily attributed to just one or two reasons. Clearly, the parlous state of the economy is a major factor. A clichéd expression speaks of the devil finding work for idle hands.

    There are environmental problems at play as desertification forces herdsmen down south where their unrestrained encroachment on farmlands sparks conflict and killings.

    There are the x-factors. Many of Nigeria’s immediate neighbours to the east and north are seething with conflict: from separatist groups in Cameroun to the untamed regions of Libya, there is unceasing flow of small arms that end up in the hands of criminals.

    The president and his team would also have us believe that some of the killings are sponsored by politicians. My problem with this is that the government with all its powers has not moved against those it accuses. That is hard to understand.

    At different times agents of government have highlighted these points. But to my mind the biggest challenge remains economic. Until the economy is sorted out, a thousand military taskforces would not pacify this land. We would never have enough soldiers and policeman to keep watch over isolated villages, farmlands and highways north and south.

    The Elders Summit communique mentioned new statistics that claim Nigeria now has more poor people than India. It should surprise no one that this dubious distinction coincides with the nation’s serious security crisis.

  • Buhari, APC and the CUPP challenge

    With the formation this week of the Coalition of United Political Parties (CUPP) – a loose alliance between the main opposition Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and 30 other political parties – the battle for 2019 has been well and truly joined.

    Rumoured as political realignments picked up pace a few days earlier when certain elements of the ruling party moved to factionalise it with the formation of the so-called Reformed All Progressives Congress (R-APC).

    The group has quickly made common cause with the new PDP-led alliance while, continuing to trouble it erstwhile base by petitioning the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) over perceived sins at the last national convention. It has also instituted a case in court seeking to the recognized as the authentic APC.

    This should not confused as a bid by R-APC leader Buba Galadima and others to battle for the soul of the ruling party, but simply another way to unsettle it and provide evidence of factionalisation, as a cover for its members who are soon expected to execute dramatic defections in the National Assembly.

    By signing the CUPP Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) which aims to defeat President Muhammadu Buhari’s APC at the center, the states, and in the legislature, the parting of ways is settled.

    The resort of the PDP to sponsoring the new grouping simply confirms a settled fact in Nigeria politics – that there are a really only two major tendencies and the fringe elements.

    In 1998 that thinking, that those two tendencies were the military and civilian politicians, drove the bid to create a massive political party that would bring most of the key players together under one roof – irrespective of their supposed ideological positions. While the ambitions of certain individuals made it difficult to pull it off, the PDP was the closest they got in terms of spread.

    Those who demurred soon found themselves boxed into the then All Peoples Party (APP) and Alliance for Democracy (AD) which had their strengths in the regional redoubts and could not on their own challenge for the presidency.

    That realization was what led to a last-minute alliance between APP and AD that produced Chief Olu Falae as presidential candidate and the late Umaru Shinkafi as running mate.

    In the ensuing contest in February 1999, they were well trounced by the PDP’s Olusegun Obasanjo/Atiku Abubakar ticket which received 62.78% of the vote compared to 37.22% for the Falae/Shinkafi partnership.

    Among the key challenges faced by the APP/AD alliance was the lateness of its coming and hurried nature of its assembling. It lacked so much in cohesion and conviction – compared to the PDP which appeared to be in its element as the latest incarnation of the Second Republic’s National Party of Nigeria (NPN).

    It was the natural home for politicians of the conservative and centrist persuasions. They were comfortable in their skin and made no pretense about what they were.

    The same could not be said for the APP/AD alliance. For while the likes of Falae could project themselves as progressives – though some would dispute that tag for the brainbox of Ibrahim Babangida’s Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP); Shinkafi could not by any stretch of the imagination be described as a leftist. Truth be told, the natural home of this ex-NPN member would have been the PDP.

    At best, the APP-AD alliance was a poorly-assembled, ill-timed special purpose vehicle (SPV) to contest the 1999 presidential election. In theory the partners were to field candidates for state and legislative elections where they had advantage. The results of the federal legislative polls in February 1999 with the APP winning 20 out of 109 Senate seats and 68 out of 360 seats in the House of Representatives, was a signpost that even with the returns of AD in the Southwest, it had very little chance of capturing the presidency.

    But the fact that the APP-AD alliance failed to deliver doesn’t necessarily mean other such efforts are fated to meet the same end. We have the example of the emergence of APC to give us pause. Many felt its formation so close to the last general elections was a problem.

    Perhaps what made the APC a more formidable proposition is the fact that rather than an alliance of the half-hearted, it agreed a merger of all its legacy parts to create something akin to the then ruling behemoth. That very decision took care of the problems of commitment, cohesion and national spread.

    The circumstances of 2018 are a world removed from what prevailed in 2014. The PDP which once boasted it was Africa’s largest political party has been reduced to a shell by its catastrophic loss of power in 2015, and the opportunistic defections that followed thereafter.

    Today, it understands that it is not strong enough to oust an incumbent party with better spread and control of state organs. It has to rally the opposition to muster additional strength. Unfortunately for it, much of those it now trumpets as members of a potentially all-conquering CUPP alliance, have little or no electoral value.

    Compare and contrast where APC was at formation. Together, the then Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN), Congress for Progressive Change (CPC), All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP) and the Rochas Okorocha rump of the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA), had a little over a dozen governors and scores they would could call on in the National Assembly.

    CUPP, on the other hand, has the PDP and the R-APC as its leading lights. The Galadima group for now is mainly the aggrieved members of the ruling party in the National Assembly ostensibly backed by Senate President Bukola Saraki and House of Representatives Speaker, Yakubu Dogara. Sokoto State Governor, Aminu Tambuwal, is identified with the group and we are told that there are other ‘sleeper’ governors who will manifest at the right time. Until they do so, we must reckon with CUPP as it stands today.

    Shorn of the PDP and the Saraki-Dogara-Tambuwal axis, the new coalition is just an anonymous congregation of 30-odd names lacking electoral heft.

    You could argue that on account of what happened to Goodluck Jonathan and the PDP in 2015, incumbency is not all that it is made out to be. I would make the counter point that the Jonathan debacle was an aberration rather than the norm. In Nigeria, executive incumbency remains a major advantage for anyone who is not damaged beyond repair politically.

    Tellingly, such is the weakness of today’s PDP that none of its current partners is willing to dissolve into it. Some have even audaciously demanded that the erstwhile ruling party agree to change its name as a condition for cooperation. All of these, again, raise questions about commitment and cohesion.

    Still, I stop short of making predictions about 2019. Seers have had their fingers burnt making political projections; seasoned analysts and pollsters blundered badly with Donald Trump and Brexit. Given the Buhari administration’s challenges with herdsmen killings and the economy, the opposition would clearly fancy their chances. Their clear thought would be: if coming together worked for APC, why wouldn’t it work for us?

     

     

     

  • Plateau killings and executive helplessness

    Too much is often made of how powerful the office of the Nigerian president is. With the stroke of the pen he can make a raft of appointments and sign off on multi-billion dollar contracts. He is the commander-in-chief of all manner of forces – those visible in public as well as those whose domain is the clandestine.

    But nowhere is the limitation of the power of this grand office more apparent than when extreme security challenges arise. While we expect that the president would with an executive magical wand cause the troubles to cease, all he can deliver at those critical points are mere platitudes and promises of deliverance.

    He may issue commands but they only produce effect where there is proper execution in theatre of conflict and where the people and local communities buy into whatever solutions he is proffering.

    We saw this play out repeatedly in the run-up to the 2015 general elections. As Boko Haram ramped up its attacks in major northern cities and seized many local government areas in the Northeast, the security gave the impression that they were running around like headless chickens.

    Every new attack only produced hollow-sounding ‘tough’ from the beleaguered presidency. While then President Goodluck Jonathan gave the impression that he was doing his absolute best to deal with a nightmare that was threatening to unseat him, there was ample evidence that many of those who were supposed to be carrying out his orders on the frontlines were demotivated from fighting the energised and emboldened insurgents. The upshot was that the occupant of such a powerful position simply came across as spineless and clueless.

    His inability to deal with the Boko Haram security crisis was a God-sent campaign gift to the opposition who were then able to sell General Muhammadu Buhari as a credible alternative whose military background supposedly put him in better shape to deal with the insurgency.

    While Buhari has achieved a fair amount of success in containing the insurgents in the Northeast, under him the security challenge has mutated. The horrific herdsmen-farmer clashes across the Middle-Belt and in some southern states should definitely terrify leading lights of the administration.

    Again, as was the case with the previous administration dealings with Boko Haram, we see the same measure of executive helplessness. Every new attack is followed by the same standard words of condemnation and empathy. Senior government officials, and in this instance in Plateau the president calls to share in the grief of the people.

    Each time we hear of vows to bring the perpetrators to justice but we are hardly able to hold up a long list of those who have hung from the gallows because of the atrocities.

    The crisis of the current killings is even more depressing because of the confusion and contradictions obvious in the highest levels of government. On the one hand you have people like the Minister of Defence, Dan Ali, insisting that the problem would not abate unless anti-open grazing legislation in places like Benue State are repealed, at other times you hear the president blaming political actors who are determined to unseat him.

    Ali’s position suggests that herdsmen aggrieved over the loss of cattle are complicit in the conflict. Benue State Governor Samuel Ortom has never hidden the fact that he holds elements of the Miyetti Allah Cattle Breeders Association responsible.

    Beyond these two suspects, I have not heard of any other force being accused of promoting the killings. Although, we may add the so-called herders who were supposedly militants armed during the Libyan national war who have now found other nefarious work devastating unarmed communities in the heart of Nigeria.

    So, clearly, the suspects can be isolated. What Nigerians find so frustrating is that given the resources of the supposedly all-powerful presidency, none of these groups has been brought to heel.

    President Buhari misses it when he wastes time trying to absolve himself personally. What people are expecting is that he would deploy the extraordinary resources of his office to deal with the situation in a way his predecessor failed to do with Boko Haram.

    If herdsmen are the problem, what credible solution that has the buy-in of all parties is on the table? Cattle colonies and other ideas will not immediately curtail the savage killings that are going on.

    If politicians are driving the murders in order to discredit his administration why haven’t there been any arrests or prosecutions to back up his accusations and deter other such criminals in agbada?

    Now, we have the promise that the president wants to reorganise the security agencies to prevent a recurrence of last weekend’s killings in Plateau. Buhari obviously has to take some sort of action to contain what is spiralling dangerously into an unprecedented sectarian and ethnic conflict. All patriots should support that effort.

    However, any new security arrangement that doesn’t deal with root causes of this problem would only be dealing with the symptoms – bringing it back to square one.