The Nation Newspaper

Category: Wednesday

  • The EFCC we need

    Nigeria is presently passing through a critical stage in the history of its existence as a nation. It is a country that is besieged by all manner of vices and above all, rapacious and debilitating corruption in all facets of national life. Now, the country’s new President, Muhammadu Buhari, has made it unequivocally clear that his mandate will primarily be focused on ridding the country of this great monster that has undoubtedly eaten deep into its fabric.

    This has obviously rekindled hope and inspired great expectations in Nigerians that the war against corruption would now be waged with renewed ferocity. Indeed, dating back to the country’s independence in 1960,  corruption has remained a festering sore that has systematically developed into a gangrene. You can smell the rot. You can feel it. In fact, it walks on all fours all over the place so much so that whenever there is a discussion or commentary on Nigeria, the issue of corruption becomes a dominant topic in both local and foreign media. In short, at this crucial period of our socio-economic life, it is most appropriate to chart a way forward in order to save what is left of our misrably inglorious nation.

    Considering the fact that since its establishment in 2003, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, has strived, against all odds, to distinguish itself among other law enforcement agencies in the history of fighting corruption in Nigeria, the organisation is key in the war against corruption. In 2014, the anti-graft agency secured 126 convictions, a remarkable leap from 117 which it secured in 2013. Between 2011 and 2014, it secured 397 convictions, witnessing a steady rise from 2011 when it recorded 67 convictions and the 87 secured in 2012.

    This notwithstanding, there are those who believe that only petty thieves and criminals have tasted the wrath of the anti-graft agency while the big criminals who are mostly top government officials and politicians are having a field day without the EFCC raising a finger against them. The reason for this is simple. Under succesive administrations in the country, there was this half-hearted approach to fighting corruption. While many of them actually paid mere lip-service to the war against corruption, serious attempts were also made to scuttle the operations of the commission. In many cases, the EFCC’s management had to correctly read the body language of those in authority before moving against any corrupt government official. In some other instances too, their stooges in private businesses who obviously act as fronts or launder money for these highly placed government officials, are often shielded from the long arms of the law. It is believed that with the coming of Buhari, things may take a new shape.

    What is pertinent to note is the role the administration of Buhari will play to make the EFCC’s bite more potent than it has so far been. Change has come, no doubt, and this must particularly reflect in the political will to ensure that the EFCC continues to play its primary and pivotal role in the war against corruption. One thing that must be noted, however, is that fighting corruption is not cheap. The corrupt individuals understandably have so much money to throw about, as they have been found to secure the services of notable lawyers and are adept at exploiting legal loopholes to their advantage and that of their counsels.

    I have read about cuts in the budgets of the anti-graft agency. To me, such acts only suggest a deliberate lack of political will and a calculated attempt to ensure that the anti-graft agency is not fully able to discharge its functions. Indeed, the need to amend the EFCC Act to put it on first-line charge funding is long overdue. That the EFCC needs financial independence is a fact that cannot be disputed. Financial independence is paramount for the EFCC that we need to effectively combat corruption without any hindrance to its financing.

    The last budget presentation to the 7th National Assembly by Ibrahim Lamorde, the anti-graft agency’s boss, turned out to be more of a revelation of the financial hiccups that have (and which, if unchecked) continued to hamper the war on corruption. The 2015 budget was a marked decline from N12, 245,369,169 which was appropriated in 2014. Again, change has come and there must be an urgent change in the financial running of the agency. Puting the agency on first-line charge funding, will unarguably be the best model to ensure an independent agency. Tragically, a number of corrupt individuals being prosecuted by the anti-graft agency are alleged to have stolen money in excess of the agency’s appropriated budget and they are willing to spend a huge part of it to draw legal rings around the commission. What a sorry case!

    Therefore, the EFCC we need in this change dispensation must be financially independent and, by extension, politically independent, if the war on corruption must be strengthened, fought with renewed vigour and won. It is heart-warming though, that there are strong indications that a legislation derived from the EFCC Establishment Act 2004, which makes it tacitly dependent on the orders of the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, may soon be dropped. Indeed, Section 43 of the Act mandates that “The Attorney General of the Federation may make rules of regulations with respect to the exercise of any of the duties, functions or powers of the commission under this Act.”

    By implication, that section makes the AGF and Minister of Justice, the decider in cases the anti-graft agency prosecutes, equally mandating it to report the outcome of its investigations on “serious or complex” cases to the AGF, even before commencing prosecution. In simple terms, it cannot be overemphasised that if the new dispensation must give teeth to the war against corruption, it must ensure an independent anti-graft agency. More importantly, it is an undisputed fact that the EFCC the country needs at the moment is one that is financially and politically independent in the discharge of its duties. Buhari cannot afford to continue with the lethargic status quo. A situation where the EFCC, beholden to the executive and legislative demi-gods,  has to go yearly, cap in hand, to get approval to do anything or for funds to ensure the adequate running of its day-to-day activities, does not augur well for the war against graft.

    It is expected also, that President Buhari will equally look into the Nigerian Constitution itself with the aim of getting rid of various tactical obstacles that may impede the independence of the agency.  For instance, the constitution should be amended to outlaw dilatory tactics by defence counsels who deliberately stall prosecution of persons accused of grand corruption with all manners of frivolous interlocutory applications.  It should be such that once a case is brought by the EFCC to court, it must be heard and concluded within a defined period of time.

    Everyone is concerned about the damaging effects of corruption, which touch us all, not just collectively but individually.  We must all realise that neither the EFCC nor the ICPC or the Code of Conduct Bureau, or even the Nigeria Police, etc, can fight the rampaging corruption holding our nation by the jugular alone without the active support of the populace.  Therefore, we should take ownership of the war; we should be ready to volunteer information to EFCC or ICPC where and when necessary and be ready to constantly keep them on their toes with constructive (not destructive) criticism. The EFCC we need is one that has the total support of Nigerians.

    ‘We must all realise that neither EFCC nor ICPC or the Code of Conduct Bureau, or even the Nigeria Police, etc, can fight the rampaging corruption holding our nation by the jugular alone, without the active support of the populace’

     

     

     

  • The poisoned assembly

    The poisoned assembly

    After the emergence of Bukola Saraki as Senate President and Yakubu Dogara as Speaker of the House of Representatives against the wishes of the All Progressives Congress (APC), I suggested that the party cut its losses and move on because the embarrassment it was subjected to was avoidable. It got its politics wrong and had to live with the consequences.

    I was also assuming that the ‘victors’ would do the wise thing by allowing the party they had betrayed, as well as those who had lost out,  to console themselves with the crumbs – the principal officer positions. The events of the last one week in the Senate and House are clear pointers that we are in interesting times where things are not always what they seem.

    The mildest word I can find to describe the game being played by Saraki and Dogara is ‘curious.’ Until now I was under the impression that politics was about compromises; a game in which either side sooner or later abandon entrenched positions to meet each other half way.

    I am even more mystified as at to the end of all the intrigues. What agenda is at play here? To defy your party once is bad enough, but to treat its leadership – everyone from president to national chairman and governors – with such contempt is well nigh unforgiveable.

    People go on about APC being paid back in its coins because it benefitted from the template of disobedience created by former Speaker Aminu Tambuwal, but even that original sinner didn’t go this far. Once he got what he wanted, he moved to mollify the incensed Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP) and allowed the party to install its choice – Mulikat Akande – as Majority Leader.

    I am still trying to make sense of how Saraki and Dogara think they can function in a poisoned National Assembly that is now polarized into sundry factions. With embittered individuals whose egos have been deflated and dreams shattered roaming its hallways, this legislature would be nothing but a hotbed of intrigues. Forget about the public posturing of the presiding officers, they would never sleep with two eyes closed.

    In the ongoing crisis two concepts have been going toe to toe: legislative independence versus party supremacy. Each side has tried to justify its position standing on these grounds. However, there can’t be an absolute interpretation of these ideas.

    I had argued in this column two weeks ago that in the United States despite the acknowledgment of party supremacy there is a lot of tolerance of independent action by lawmakers taking into consideration the peculiar political considerations of their constituencies.

    There is, however, a stricter interpretation of the concept under the parliamentary system because lack of discipline within the ranks of legislators of the ruling party could bring down the government of the day.

    What is clearly lacking in the current crisis is the application of common sense. The APC has swallowed its pride and moved from its original position of not recognising Saraki and Dogara. Unfortunately, the Senate President and Speaker are still posturing as legislative purists when we know that what is at play here is just a raw Nigerian political power game.

    Can Saraki swear that when he was governor of Kwara he didn’t decide who became Speaker of the state house of assembly? Could the rebellion he’s superintending in Abuja ever have happened under his watch in Ilorin?

    This is not the first time that a party would present to the Senate or House a list of its agreed nominees for the principal officer positions. It happened under David Mark’s leadership and I don’t recall the new Senate President weeping over the impeachment of legislative independence.

    Actually, all those trying to argue that the party should have no role in picking the leaders of the National Assembly are only being hypocritical.

    The party is integral to the political process and cannot be separated from it. You are elected and do your business on its platform. In whatever chamber you function your identification is on party basis. Indeed, any indiscriminate change of affiliation would lead to the loss of your seat as the Supreme Court ruled recently in the case of Ifedayo Abegunde representing Akure South/North Federal Constituency of Ondo State in the House. He was asked to vacate his seat for leaving the Labour Party (LP) to join the defunct Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN).

    Many of those who don’t want to hear about party instructions rode into the National Assembly on the coattails of APC and Muhammadu Buhari. They were swept into the legislature by the change tsunami; it wasn’t because they were so popular in their constituencies, or espoused any unique agenda that got them elected.

    Most voters were largely motivated to vote for presidential and governorship candidates. When it came to the legislature they simply ticked the appropriate party boxes because many of the legislative candidates were not known to the electorate. To turn around and treat a party that lifted you up with such contempt is truly despicable.

    Let’s not forget that Nigerians voted APC in with a clear mandate to change things. In addition to handing it the presidency, they empowered the party with robust majorities in the Senate and House. Saraki and Dogara have, through the back door, exchanged the clearly expressed will of the voters for cohabitation with a party that was rejected by the people just two months ago. And they did so without another election or referendum – simply riding on the fuel of ambition.

    In this era of ‘gotcha politics’ when wounds are still raw from the elections, some people may delight in gloating over APC’s troubles. Well, whatever makes them happy! But irrespective of partisan identification, the more sober and reflective amongst us would know that grievous damage has been done to our fledgling democratic culture.

    If Saraki and Dogara get away unscathed with what they have pulled off why should any other person obey party leadership – whether PDP or APC? What moral authority would the leaders of the new governing party have to punish future rebels when it failed to act against those whose wrote the primer for this extreme acts of political truancy?

    Irrespective of whether APC takes overt action, depend on it – there would be consequences either now or in the future. On the occasion of his valedictory appearance as Speaker, Tambuwal bemoaned the fact that the House under him couldn’t do too much. He blamed it on unceasing ‘distractions’ from former President Goodluck Jonathan. That was part of the price he paid for going against his party’s wishes.

    During President Olusegun Obasanjo’s first term he had a torrid time at the hands of rebellious PDP House members who rallied around the leadership of the taciturn Speaker Ghali Na’Abba and pushed the nation to the brink of an impeachment crisis. When it was time to dole out tickets for the 2003 elections, the party exacted its revenge and all the marked rebels were denied a return to the National Assembly. Na’Abba himself was humiliated at the primaries.

    In the end no one should be too shocked by the upheavals arising from the leadership contests. If only Senate Presidents and Speakers were elected directly by voters we would have been spared the drama. Unfortunately, those who have to choose are lawmakers joined at the hip to various interests whose major concern is not necessarily the good of the Nigerian people. When these forces collide sparks are bound to fly.

    The foundation of the Fourth Republic federal legislature was laid in intrigues and turbulence. It kicked off with the riot over furniture allowance in 1999. It entered another level in the battle to oust one-time Speaker Patricia Etteh. So heated was the struggle that one aging lawmaker’s heart couldn’t take the strain. His corpse was carried out of the chambers. The Dogara dogfight is only the latest episode in a chamber accustomed to cage-fighting.

    Classes may come and go but the character of our poisoned assembly remains the same. That is why I find some of the outrage over last week’s proceedings a bit overdone. Even PDP has described them as shameful. Coming from the party that wrote the script for shamelessness that is rich!

  • The Gusau Institute: the new ‘kid’ on the block

    The Gusau Institute: the new ‘kid’ on the block

    All roads last Thursday led to No. 2 Dendo Road, off Ahmadu Bello Way, the commercial artery of Kaduna City.  The address houses perhaps the newest think tank in Nigeria and potentially the most influential. This is the Gusau Institute, the brainchild of Lt-General Aliyu Gusau Mohammed, until last month our defence minister and easily Nigeria’s longest serving spymaster if only because he holds the unique record of serving as the country’s National Security Adviser thrice.

    On the said Thursday the Institute formally opened shop with a seminar on how Africa will possibly shape out in the world’s political economy by the year 2040, and which of its countries will play the leading roles in helping it begin to realize its potential. As debuts go it was hard to identify a better topic and a better keynote speaker.

    This piece, however, will not dwell much on the seminar itself, incisive and thought-provoking as the keynote paper and the responses it provoked from the main respondent and the large and distinguished audience were.

    According to the keynote speaker, Dr Jakkie Cilliers, Executive Director of the Institute for Security Studies (ISS), a leading South African think tank, Africa may be rising, but by 2040 it is still unlikely to play more than a marginal role in the global political economy. Within the continent, however, the five biggest players, he said, would be Algeria, Egypt, Ethiopia, South Africa and, of course, Nigeria, its most populous country and biggest economy. “If,” he said in the summary of his paper, “Nigeria were to take the necessary steps that would see far-reaching changes to the governance issues and social challenges that currently beset the country, it could become Africa’s lone superpower.”

    Without any doubt one of the big governance issues and social challenges facing the country, if not the biggest, is the Boko Haram terrorism which is widely regarded as a consequence of the bad governance that has bedevilled the country’s for almost all of its nearly 55 years of independence. It was hardly surprising therefore, that the chairman of the occasion and the country’s first Chief of Defence Staff and one of its finest officers and gentlemen, General Alani Akinrinade, contended in his opening remarks that perhaps the biggest task before the Gusau institute is to come up quickly with a military doctrine that can tackle the novel challenge of Boko Haram’s type of internal insurrection.

    Of course there are other governance issues and social challenges besides Boko Haram. There’s corruption. There’s unemployment. There’s acute power and infrastructural deficits. There’s illiteracy, laziness and inequity, etc. None of these is amenable to quick fixes. All which means the Gusau Institute has its job cut out for it, namely, to research into how these problems can be tackled and seek to influence public policy accordingly.

    With one of the richest private libraries in the land – possibly richer than that of Arewa House, Kaduna, a think tank affiliated to Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, and certainly richer than the Kaduna State Library – coupled with the fact that its founder has arguably the most extensive global network of intelligence gurus among the country’s spymasters, the institute should be able to live up to its promise of becoming one of the country’s topmost think tanks before long.

    Already, its library which, according to its librarian, Mrs. Marlene Maritz, has over 17,000 titles and more than 25,000 books – many of the titles have more than one copy – is where post graduate students of most universities in Kaduna’s catchment area, notably the degree awarding Nigerian Defence Academy, the state’s own university and ABU, go to for up to date answers to issues in their research projects.

    And since it started functioning quietly nearly two years ago, the library has, according to Mrs Maritz, donated thousands of books to universities, mostly to Kaduna State’s, and to secondary schools. Besides, the library has a rich trove of newspapers and magazines with plans to make them digital for easy reference. It also has an even richer e-library which can be accessed via wifi from the premises.

    By all counts – the quality of the keynote paper, the quality and quantity of the audience, the clock-like efficiency of the organization, you name it – the institute’s inaugural lecture was a huge success. But, as the founder told this columnist in not exactly those words, you are only as good as your last outing. And so the institute is already planning to surpass, or at least match, Thursday’s seminar.

    Next time the focus will reportedly be on domestic socio-political history, so to speak; the stories of the leading figures of the team without which Sir Ahmadu Bello, the first and only Premier of the North, would never have built a legacy which has remained unmatched and for which he has always been singularly praised. The moral of the seminar clearly would be that a tree does not make a forest, a thought that must surely be exercising the mind of our new president, Muhammadu Buhari, as he sets about bringing the “change” for which the nation, tired of so much barefaced venality and incompetence, elected him. One can only pray and hope that he is able to raise a team of such quality as Sir Ahmadu’s.

    It is a measure of how great the great man’s legacy is that, as Professor Ango Abdullahi, vice-chancellor of ABU over 30 year ago and the emergency respondent to the paper – the scheduled respondent and current vice-chancellor, Professor Ibrahim Garba, was unavoidably absent – pointed out, Sir Ahmadu’s last budget for 1966, the year he was assassinated in our first military coup, was equivalent to that of Kaduna North Local Government which is only one of the over 400 local governments that exist today in the North!

    The Gusau Institute is, of course, only one of a relatively large number of think tanks this country can boast of. According to a global rating of think tanks by the University of Pennsylvania, USA, Nigeria, with 46 think tanks, ranks second only to South Africa with 87, in the number of such institutes in each country. These are, of course, puny compared to, say, America’s which has over 1,800 out of a global total of over 6,300. But then America is centuries older than most African countries, is more populous than all of them and has a democracy with the richest economy in the world.

    With 46 think tanks – and still counting – the Gusau Institute obviously has a lot to compete with. These come in various shapes and sizes. There are state sponsored ones like the Nigerian Institute of International Affairs (NIIA), Lagos, our own equivalent of Chatham House, London, and the Nigerian Institute for Social and Economic Research (NISER), Ibadan. There are party sponsored ones like those of the erstwhile ruling PDP and private ones like the Centre for the Study of the Economies of Africa (CSEA), established in Abuja seven years ago by Dr Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, until last month, our one and only Coordinating and Finance Minister.

    Given its founder’s global connections, commitment and knowledge, the Gusau Institute should outclass most, if not all, of these in a not too distant future. Certainly it will be a key player in generating the ideas that should truly transform our country into the greatness destined for it by its size and resources, human and natural.

    Re: Saraki as President of the 8th Senate

    Sir,

    Saraki needed not to have acted the way he did. He may have won even if the entire 109 senates participated in the election. Nobody would have cried foul. When God chooses a man, he makes him to endure; unlike when a man through desperate ambition chooses himself.

    Funso Enoch,

    Ilesa, Osun State, +2348033779630.

     

    Sir,

    Your piece in The Nation today (June 17) has revealed you as one of a very few writers and political commentators whose understanding of political science and its application to social reality is, to me, an embodiment of excellence. Majority of Bukola Saraki’s critics couldn’t even, perhaps because of bias and sentiments, fathom the principle of power separation. That was why some senators loyal to (Senator Ahmed) Lawal chose to attend a meeting arranged by APC when the President had even issued a proclamation which stipulated that sitting should commence at 10am.

    +2348025498722.

     

    Sir,

    I had thought the election of Dogara as Speaker should have assuaged the fears of Christians in the North just like Akume if he had been elected Senate President. But you didn’t acknowledge this fact. For me you just set out to discredit Saraki and I am disappointed. +2348033315859.

    Note: In the light of the controversy that this subject has continued to stir, I’ll publish more and longer reactions next week, God willing.

    M.H.

     

  • Our Girls;  Educare Trust@21; President Buhari: We need a ‘Youth Centre’ in every ward, Pls

    Our Girls are still missing since April 15 2014. We pray for their safe return.

    A lesson from recent history about Educare Trust@21. From the late 70s my family was a member of The Group, a social association of 30 families bringing up a generation of children in Ibadan spearheaded by the vision and uniting strands of Dr Funso Onafowokan and Dr Dele Fawole. Back in 1994, we smarted under the terrorism and coming darkness of the then one week old Abacha Regime- ‘a change’. The exodus abroad which had started under Babangida as an economic refugee tide had become a flood with the addition of security refugees. The Abacha change motivated some additional members of the Group to get together in my sitting room every evening for six weeks. There we X-rayed the economic, agricultural, health and other problems associated with a maximum military regime. Having brainstormed on the low quality of everything including education in Nigeria under the military, we offered a raft of solutions. We wrote down nothing and remembered everything as we went ‘underground’ to implement various strategies for the survival of the citizens. In education it was decided to ‘do something’ to ‘change’ education. An NGO was needed as ‘Change Agent’ and Dr Toyosi, a distinguished private medical practitioner, agreed to be chairman only if I agreed to become the secretary. So 21 years ago, in 1994, a number of people held the inaugural meeting of the founding members and Educare Trust was born at the Department of Agricultural Biology, University of Ibadan on Thursday October 20, 1994. At that meeting, Professor Ayo Banjo generously pointed us in the right direction by saying that we should deal more with the foundation level of education than the tertiary education. Others at the first meeting included Dr Bayo Banjo, Engineer Palmer, Dr Mike Aken’Ova, Dr Dele Fawole and myself and Dr Raymond Zard who has remained the major pillar of support.

    Educare Trust’s first project was fixing the leaking roof of a primary school, Salvation Army Primary School, Yemetu, Ibadan at N360. Since then, the Trust has spent over N60m of its members’ funds and countless hours playing both grassroots on-hands and leadership roles in uplifting members of society showing that much can be achieved with little provided the will is strong.  

    After a couple of years of visiting schools for programmes and projects, the absence of a youth-friendly, edutainment (ET) centre in Nigeria was obvious as was the need to help fill the ‘ignorance gap’ about non-school subject material.  At the time the National Museum at Alalubosa, Ibadan dealt only with the ancient and the ET centre was to complement it by being both Ancient and Modern -a change agent.

    In 1997, the members set up The Educare Trust Youth Exhibition Centre (EYTC). It was in a space in Brick House, Bodija and the year’s rent was paid by Engineer Niran Fafowora.  Diana Johnson recruited our first employee, a bright young man Daniel Henshaw. On the principle that ‘a picture is worth 1,000 words’, the centre was equipped using material sourced from The Smithsonian and Welcome museums and exhibitions in the USA and UK; Thus a poster and wall chart exhibition was setup with education wall charts, display picture cards, Native American craft pieces, display boards, two aquaria and the first computer available to the youth in Ibadan and donated by Tunji Adepeju, brother of the late Kunle Adepeju killed by a stray bullet in front of Queens Hall UI back in 1971 when I was in UI.  The ETYC targeted children, young adults, teachers and parents. It was to challenge their minds to learn and exchange ideas and ‘eliminate ignorance’. The exhibition centre is multi-focal, multi-disciplinary and multi-ethnic to expose children and adults to their surroundings as well as the universe.

    Since it was opened, the Educare Trust Exhibition Centre has been an ignored and neglected TEMPLATE begging for individual, groups, communities, government, YOU and corporate bodies to use the huge available resources and, especially in CSR, to replicate in every ward, in Nigeria in different sizes. This will keep youth occupied and educated in non-text book subjects and life-skills. So far, most of the millions of Nigerians visiting or aware of Educare Trust and YOU have not taken up the ‘Challenge To Change The Educational Opportunities’ and spread the word and so millions are suffering ignorance and become prone to youth restiveness.

    On January 2nd, 1999 the centre was relocated to space in Goshen Building run by Mrs Toyin Marinho, Coca-Cola, Ibadan. After 10 years it moved to Our Lady of Apostles Secondary School Odo-Ona in 2010 for two years. Then Educare Trust was offered a Youth Centre built by PZ Cussons Foundation at N10.5m and we had to find the land which we eventually got from the Akala Government and the C of O followed under the Ajimobi Government.

    As Buhari, governors and other stakeholders ponder on solutions to youth restiveness and crime and plan for the changes in education, we offer a suggestion that ‘The Time of the Youth Centre’ as a powerful tool to change and empower the youth nationwide is NOW. All Nigeria’s 16,400 wards must have a Youth Centre, small or big, built by collective effort. You want a Youth Centre in your neighbourhood, don’t you? Replicate the success of Educare Trust@21.

    ‘As Buhari, governors and other stakeholders ponder on solutions to youth restiveness and crime and plan for the changes in education, we offer a suggestion that ‘The Time of the Youth Centre’ as a powerful tool to change and empower the youth nationwide is NOW. All Nigeria’s 16,400 wards must have a Youth Centre, small or big, built by collective effort’

    •  To be continued

  • The two Buharis and microwave change

    The two Buharis and microwave change

    Under the convenient cover of anonymity many of those who voted for continuity of Goodluck Jonathan’s disastrous rule have teamed up with others who truly plumped for a new beginning to bemoan the failure of Presidency Muhammadu Buhari to deliver change at the speed of a microwave.

    The former are motivated more by mischief to paint the picture of a bumbling president in the same manner their fallen hero was caricatured in the last four years. The latter are not exactly driven by patriotism but more by that Nigerian habit of rushing around in circles before deciphering why we’re scurrying around so furiously.

    The calamity that has befallen the nation is that three weeks after taking office Buhari has not appointed a Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF) who by his mere emergence would magically transform our fortunes.

    Even more sacrilegious is the fact that the country still doesn’t have cabinet ministers. Those who have waited this long to moan have been uncommonly patient. After all, I did read a post by a supposedly enlightened blogger who wrote this on his Facebook page: ‘Three days and Nigeria still doesn’t have a government. Hmn…!’ This was on June 1, 2015!

    The last I checked the structure of government doesn’t crumble just because someone hasn’t been appointed Chief of Staff, SGF or minister. The fact that the president is getting things done is confirmation of that.

    In any event, historically, in the Fourth Republic it has taken even the most prepared of presidents at least four weeks to put together a cabinet. Taking that time to assemble a team that would run a race of four years is not being tardy in my book.

    That is even fast when we consider certain examples from around the world. After winning the March 17, 2015 general elections it took Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu almost two months to cobble together a cabinet.

    I suspect that much of the hysteria is being driven by those interested in being appointed to some of these offices. They are frustrated by the fact that Buhari has refused to show his hand and is taking his sweet time to resolve things. I can understand how that can unsettle politicians who are desperate to be relevant again.

    For the average Nigerian the naming of a Chief of Staff to the President doesn’t change the price of beans at Mile 12 market in the short term. Buhari has to govern with a team of ministers and he would name them sooner than later. He understands how hungry people are for change. That is why he kept trying to lower sky-high expectations that things would change overnight.

    We would all be totally stressed out if we don’t take the trouble to understand the man in whose hands we have put our collective fate. Indeed, if we remain our usual impatient selves, then it’s going to be a very long four years under the Buhari presidency.

    One-time British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher once said of herself: ‘the Lady’s is not for turning!’ We have on our hands another self-assured and stubborn customer. He would not be moved until he’s ready to move.

    After winning the All Progressives Congress (APC) ticket in Lagos last December, he came under intense pressure to quickly name a running mate. The furore was as much the product of intense jockeying by those who fancied themselves for the role and the anxiety of the then ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) which was waiting for an opening to attack its rival.

    Rather than seeing the time it is taking to constitute a cabinet as some great failing, people should understand that today’s Buhari is a totally different package from the stern, lean-faced infantry general who 30 years ago delivered change under a military regime “with immediate effect.”

    Despite the good his regime did restoring orderliness, paying off debts and stabilizing the economy, it would be ultimately undone by its cavalier abuse of human rights. When General Ibrahim Babangida and his co-conspirators took over they didn’t accuse the man they toppled of fiddling with public funds; they posed as liberators who had come to restore freedoms taken away by a stern dictator.

    Back then in 1985 not many would have predicted that the man who left office reviled as a draconian junta leader would 30 years later be swept back into office as an almost messianic figure.

    But by joining those he once scorned to compete for power, Buhari invited intense scrutiny of his time in office. It was an exercise that his foes welcomed with glee and executed to devastating effect. Along with the caricature that he was a Muslim fundamentalist, the general was portrayed as a harsh despot who would never change his ways. The caricature was especially effective down south.

    He may not have apologised for the most egregious abuses, but there is plenty of evidence to suggest that he understands how his record and image worked against him in three previous attempts at being elected president.

    In the 2014-2015 election cycle we have been confronted with a re-packaged Buhari. The man who once suspended constitutional government and ruled by decrees now swears by the constitution. He was accused of religious fanaticism, he countered by running twice with not just any Christian – but with Pentecostal pastors. Once derided as the ultimate anti-democrat he now overcompensates by making sure his every move is by the book.

    The new Buhari is one who thinks meddling in the leadership scheming of the National Assembly is a no-no because they are a different arm of government. He is a political innocent who just received a lesson in skullduggery when his APC was outmaneuvered in a conspiracy involving some of those who having been grinning in his face like friendly sharks, while plotting to undermine him and further their own interests.

    Without question the president believes that the troubles some of his predecessors had with the legislature had to do with their attempt to impose leadership. Of course, he had the recent example of Aminu Tambuwal to point to. But his hands-off approach also has much to do with not giving opponents grounds to cry that the old dictatorial traits were returning.

    The trouble with the new Buhari – the converted democrat – is he expects politicians to be honourable. Unfortunately, Nigerian democracy is a jungle where anything goes. He expected Bukola Saraki to toe the party line; the rebellious senator thumped his nose at the APC high command and cut a deal with the enemy – leaving the majority party humiliated in a chamber where it held a comfortable majority.

    The new Buhari is keen to prove his democratic credentials so he has made peace with the reality he’s been handed at the National Assembly. An Olusegun Obasanjo would not rest until he’s hounded the usurpers out of their thrones. That is not likely to happen with Buhari Mark II.

    He has shown unwillingness to manipulate the coercive instruments and agencies of state in pursuit of partisan political ends in ways that Obasanjo or his pupil, Goodluck Jonathan, would have done. That is why Ayo Fayose is still governor of Ekiti State today.

    Before the March 28 polls no one was sure which of the Buharis would show up as president – the old or the new. Former First Lady Patience Jonathan ventilated those fears when she repeatedly warned voters at campaign stops not to vote for the general as he would jail them and their spouses.

    The day after he was inaugurated many actually expected him to begin clamping PDP cabinet members into detention as the general circa 1983 would have done. Somehow a stop order whose origin we still don’t know went out preventing certain former office holders from travelling. It took the intervention of the new Buhari to clear the coast for the frightened to flee overseas and watch what would unfold from a safe distance.

    But being a stickler for rules is one thing, being politically naïve in an environment like Nigeria is a totally different matter. Former Vice President and APC chieftain, Atiku Abubakar, in a recent interview described Buhari as ‘a leader and not a politician.’

    It sounds contradictory to say a man who won the ticket of a political party and eventually became president is not a politician, still the statement is quite revealing. What Atiku was really saying is Buhari is an innocent at large in the dark and murky ways of Nigerian politics.

    Obasanjo and Jonathan may have made their mistakes in the manner they tried to impose leadership of the legislature but they were not wrong in taking more than passing interest in who became Senate President or Speaker. These are people who will determine the success or failure of your legislative agenda, and to be unperturbed whether they would be hostile or friendly is a big mistake.

    Although there’s very little a president can do to influence who leads the United States Congress because of their established democratic traditions, still we see that a hostile legislature can render the most powerful leader on earth impotent. The Barack Obama presidency has been paralysed at critical points in recent years by the hostility of the Republican congressional majority.

    Here in Nigeria, Obasanjo’s third term dream was shot down because the Senate and House turned against him.

    Again, we see in the tragic case of the late Chief M.K.O. Abiola that the consequences are often grave in this environment when the leader declines to show interest in who controls key points in the nation’s power architecture.

    Abiola had won the ticket of the then Social Democratic Party (SDP) narrowly seeing stiff competition from the candidate of the Shehu Musa Yar’Adua political machine. He was so satisfied with what he had accomplished he generously declared he didn’t care who became party chairman.

    His position led to the emergence of Chief Tony Anenih. This would later prove to be pivotal after the annulment of the June 12, 1993 election results. After Babangida stepped aside and Chief Ernest Shonekan’s Interim National Government (ING) was eased out by General Sani Abacha, the SDP under the new chairman lost the desire to press for actualisation of Abiola’s mandate.

    Even worse, they quietly began negotiating for positions in the new military junta that would ultimately bury the June 12 mandate. Who knows what would have happened if Abiola had backed a candidate for chairman who was committed to his vision?

    Aside his determination not to get his hands dirty playing politics what has changed between the old Buhari and the new? Only the methods if you ask me. He is still committed to fighting corruption, restoring security and stabilising the economy. This was the same agenda when he took office 30 years ago. The only difference is that terrorism was an unknown phenomenon back then.

    Can this new, aging Buhari who has to work with a National Assembly leadership whose emergence he had no hand in still deliver the change he promised? There’s no reason why not.

    Exercising the powers of the presidency doesn’t call for the strength of the weightlifter. A friend argues that the Saraki-Dogara rebellion is just a sideshow and that even if there are no new reforms or bills, there are existing laws on our books for any serious president to jail 1,000 corrupt Nigerians every month.

    The problem with the Nigerian system is not a shortage of laws it is the absence of political will to enforce what we already have. Is it not a marvel the way the EFCC has been prosecuting people and arresting hitherto untouchable politicians all because the body language of the new president indicates he would not tolerate sleaze?

    The 73 year-old Buhari may be looking wistfully back at when he was 37 years old. But he doesn’t need the strength or stamina of his youth, neither does he need Saraki and his crowd to pat him on the back in order to deliver change.

    All he needs is that same iron will which first arrested the attention of Nigerians 30 years ago, as he begins to change the ways things are done in this country.

  • Saraki as President of the 8th Senate

    Saraki as President of the 8th Senate

    President Muhammadu Buhari called it “constitutional”, but Barnabas Gemade, the ranking senator from Benue and leader of “Unity Forum”, which was behind Ahmed Lawan’s bid for the leadership of the 8th Senate, said it wasn’t. Whoever was right between the president and the senator, it is now obvious that the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) failed to learn the lesson of the debacle of the erstwhile ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), which produced Aminu Tambuwal, now governor of Sokoto State, as Speaker of the 7th House of Representatives in defiance of the decision of the PDP leadership four years ago.

    The cloak and dagger drama, which has now produced Dr. Bukola Saraki as Senate President, against APC’s preference for Lawan, followed almost exactly the same plot as that of Tambuwal’s, with the two political parties merely swapping places as culprit and victim and the difference that, unlike his predecessor, the new president did not hesitate in accepting the decision of the legislators, even though he did express some reservations about Saraki’s tactics.

    The first time I wrote about this political drama five weeks ago, my choice for Senate president was George Akume, a former Benue State governor and minority leader at the time. At that time the APC National Working Committee had reportedly zoned the job to the North-Central and it looked like the race was Saraki’s to lose to Akume, both of them from the same zone; Saraki had, by words and deeds, all this while made no secret of his ambition to head the Senate as a prelude to his bigger ambition of being president of the whole country.

    My choice of Akume, as I said then, was essentially because I thought it would go a long way in healing the deep wounds of the decades-long nasty and bloody Christian/Muslim conflicts in the North, which had been a big source of the region’s economic retardation and, by extension, the whole country’s.

    Even then I knew my choice was based more on hope than on Akume’s real prospects; long before the March/April elections, it was an open secret that Saraki had built a formidable network of support for the realisation of his ambitions not only within the ranks of the party leadership. He was also widely known to have built an even wider network of support among prospective senators across party lines.

    The scales seemed to have turned against Saraki only when, in spite of the then President-elect Buhari’s oft-repeated declaration that he had no preferred candidate for the job, his body language seemed to suggest, at least to some party leaders, if not all, that his preference was for Lawan. For this reason, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu, for one, shifted his formidable support for Akume to Lawan, having apparently calculated that this was the only way to achieve his goal of installing his protégé, Hon. Gbajabiamila, then House minority leader, as its speaker.

    As things have now turned out, it seems everyone opposed to Saraki had underestimated the capacity for political subterfuge of this apparently worthy scion of the late undisputed godfather of Kwara State politics and leader of the Senate during the Second Republic, Dr. Olusola Saraki. For, constitutional or not, the younger Saraki’s successful coup of June 9 against the decision of the party leadership to support Lawan takes the gold in political gamesmanship.

    It is a measure of his success that his strategy has left his adversaries fuming in great anger and frustration. “The purported election of Senator Saraki and Dogara as Senate President and Speaker respectively”, fumed Mr. Joe Igbokwe recently, “is a clear transgression of both the tenets of democracy and party politics.” Igbokwe is a spokesman for the Lagos State chapter of the APC and his anger merely echoed that of his boss, Tinubu, who had said he would not even recognise Saraki as Senate president, a sentiment re-echoed by Gemade when he told reporters after Saraki’s election that “this process, which remains unconstitutional, cannot confer legitimacy on the elected Senate president.”

    As the Senior Special Assistant on Media and Publicity to the president, Malam Garba Shehu, said on Channels Television during one of its flagship programmes, Sunrise Daily, on June 10, there was no doubt that Saraki employed underhand means to achieve his ambition. In what was clearly a grand conspiracy in cahoots with the PDP Senate caucus, he and his group in the Senate ignored the president’s invitation for a meeting to reconcile the APC federal legislators an hour ahead of its inauguration at 10am on June 9 and got himself nominated unopposed and elected by 57 senators, mostly PDP, while the other group numbering 51 waited for the meeting with the president at a different venue. Apparently he feared, admittedly with some justification, that the meeting would be used to make him submit to the outcome of the party’s straw poll the day before in which Lawal emerged as the party’s choice.

    In the face of this political sleight of hand by Saraki, it is understandable that many an APC chieftain have been calling for him to be disciplined. The extremely angry ones have even called for his sack. Almost all of them have also blamed Buhari’s advertised indifference to the outcome of the election of the leadership of the National Assembly on the altar of non-interference with the other arms of government for Saraki’s successful coup.

    Those who now blame Buhari for the APC debacle have, as I’ve said at the beginning of this piece, apparently not learnt from the same debacle that befell PDP four years ago. It also seems they lack an understanding of the workings of party politics in a presidential system when they lament the absence of party discipline in the country.

    True in both the parliamentary model of democracy we once practised and the presidential democracy we now practise, all elected office holders hold their offices solely by the grace of political parties. But the notion of party discipline, i.e. the ability of members of parliamentary groups to get members to support party policies and decisions, is much weaker in the presidential system than in the parliamentary one, the simple reason being the lack of clear separation between the executive and legislative arms of government in the parliamentary system as is the case in the presidential.

    This means legislators can defy party decisions in the presidential system without bringing down a government, which in turn means party whips don’t have the imperative to constantly crack their whips to get members into line that party whips do in the parliamentary system. In the American type of presidential system we have largely modelled ours after, party disciple is particularly weak because elected office holders feel more loyal to their constituencies, geographical or ideological, than they do to political parties.

    At any rate, those who argue that if Buhari had intervened decisively in the choice of the National Assembly leadership, APC, as the new ruling party, would’ve saved itself the embarrassment of having a PDP senator as deputy Senate president, ignore the fact that Saraki might still have won, in which case APC could have suffered an even worse predicament than it is in.

    So rather than cry over spilt milk, APC will serve Nigerians and itself better if it fosters the separation of powers among the three arms of government even as it ensures that the arms cooperate with each other in making policies and programmes that in the overall interest of the society rather than in the interests of only a few.

    On his part, Saraki should know that there is widespread public perception that as governor of Kwara State and subsequently as one of its three senators, he seemed to have served himself more than he had served society, as is apparent from how little his state has made any progress under him. Much of the public’s concern about his emergence as Senate president stems from this perception. He should know that the public will be on the watch out to see if he will cooperate with the new president in enacting laws and making pro-people policies or as was the case under PDP they’ll watch to see whether he will preside over a Senate that is anti-people.

  • Our Girls; Media vs military; FRSC checkpoints; Legislate against ‘Insult the Citizen Month’

    Our Girls are missing since April 15th 2014. Intelligence is vital for their recovery. This is usually from a debriefing interrogation of freed captives and captured Boko Haram fighters. Are they and kidnap victims debriefed to identify their captors, locate hideouts, analyse modus operandi, trace cellphone numbers and locations and track the money trail?  Some intelligence requires to be paid for leading to opportunities for fraud among security personnel. We pray that the new offensive works. However, it is unethical of the press to prematurely reveal military strategies which must be kept under wraps until after the incident. Boko Haram follows the news giving them an opportunity for ambush, evasion and diversion. Nigeria is at war. Such details cost our soldiers their lives and can cost us the war.

    The Amnesty International Report about military atrocities is another media frenzy matter which the President will study. Human rights are the right of all Nigerians. It is difficult to justify or enforce the human rights of a suicide bomber apprehended only because the bomb failed and who promises to do it ‘properly next time’. However we Nigerians also know that our Human Rights are threatened by everyone in ‘authority’ or uniform, including the police who have again stopped checkpoints, saving the population N12-24billion/year.  The police still swoop on traffic outside their police stations and along major roads in spite of the order.

    Into the gap created by the IGP to stop checkpoints, the FRSC deserves high praise[??] as it has repeatedly proven its uninvited ability to replace the police having abandoned its primary role of ‘keeping traffic moving safely’  at traffic jam areas like on the expressway due to construction and inadequate supervision. Instead the FRSC prefers to jump into the middle of the road, at the Lagos-Ibadan Expressway Ijebu/ Benin turn and a point at Ogere where the FRSC can truncate your human rights to reach your destination merely by stopping you for no offence other than ‘being on the road’. Thereafter they seek an arrest-able or fine-able offence- trumped up or otherwise. There are bad eggs in the FRSC and their actions kill local and international tourism. Why should I be afraid of the FRSC every time I travel? Indeed I cut down travel not because my papers are not intact but because the FRSC has lost its way and will attempt to embarrass anyone. Travellers beware. FRSC ‘checkpoints’ are alive and well and hungry. It seems it is now a detainable offence ‘to be on the road’. The FRSC needs a new direction and requires to be reined in by President Buhari. I am tired of being stopped at Ogere. I always see three or four cars stopped by FRSC at Ogere and Ijebu turn-off.  I cannot understand why I have been stopped more than seven times by FRSC. What is this your experience?

    The Chinese are building a 57-storey building in 19 days. Our 120km Lagos-Ibadan Expressway is under construction in a four years contract. President Buhari must resist the temptation to ignore this vital road, made problematic by the withdrawal of the road from World Bank contractors with an undisclosed probable ‘breach of contract’ payment by Obasanjo who passed it to Babalakin where it stagnated till Jonathan awarded it to two contractors –Julius Burger and RCC. This four-year contract, too slow, too long and too expensive, has crippled life and ‘enjoyment of the journey’ for millions frequently ‘on the road’. Uncaring contractors create malicious bottlenecks and diversions- a nightmare on Saturdays and Sundays.

    After the ‘please vote for me, I beg, I beg’, it will soon be ‘Insult The Citizen Month’ led by Internally Generated Revenue ‘Consultants’ –the time when the drive for IGR will turn politicians into rude arrogant and often stupid animals as they alienate their voters with stupid ‘No U turn’ and parking laws and excessive fines and taxes. Have you had a really outrageous bill or an insulting ‘Demand Notice’ from an agent, private or government insisting that you pay a maliciously and fictionally high figure, with too short payment times seven days to 28 days –as if you are a thief or robber; backdating for several years –before the politian even came to power; and threats of ridiculous sanctions- cumulative interest rates or sealing of premises or eviction? All these are typical in normal Nigerian customer client/ official relationships. This government must change this and REDUCE TAXES IN LAGOS. Such letters and bills deliberately destabilise you and cause you anger and anxiety from the arrogant unsupervised officials. The Nigerian citizen is not a prisoner and deserves to be treated with better respect and compassion by estate agents, tax officials, and organs of government.

    The legislature must introduce ‘Citizen/Client Protection Laws’ making it a punishable offence for government and private agencies to send stupid, insulting and enraging ‘Demand Notices’ for unimaginable ridiculously high fees, rents, etcetera. Instead they should opt for more civilised and respectful ‘Request Letters’ or ‘Expectation Letters’. ‘Anti-Outrageous Bill’  Legislation is required to enforce accountability, supervision and self-discipline in tax bodies and utility companies and thus stopping outrageous, inflated, unrealistic bills, sent to force the receiver to be corrupt, steal or  die from annoyance or blood pressure. Legislation must prevent litigants from naming ludicrous sums as damages and perhaps demand that if the litigant loses a libel case, the litigant must pay the person-sued a sum equal to 1-10% of the sum sued for defamation of character.

    ‘The Chinese are building a 57-storey building in 19 days. Our 120km Lagos-Ibadan Expressway is under construction in a four years contract. President Buhari must resist the temptation to ignore this vital road, made problematic by the withdrawal of the road from World Bank contractors with an undisclosed probable ‘breach of contract’ payment by Obasanjo who passed it to Babalakin where it stagnated till Jonathan awarded it to two contractors –Julius Burger and RCC’

  • General Abdulsalami Abubakar @ 73

    The approach of the 2015 elections in Nigeria brought with it, fear and trepidation. There was this fear that the country was likely to go up in flames as had been predicted by those who said Nigeria was capable of disintegrating in 2015.  So, the more the elections drew nearer, the more heightened was the fear that gripped the populace. But one man was quite optimistic that the country will remain intact after the elections.  That man is General Abdulsalami Alhaji Abubakar, otherwise known as General AAA or Triple ‘A’ for short.

    I remember in one of my routine visits to him in his Minna, Niger State home some time last year. As had become customary with him, the issue of the state of the nation and the impending elections came under discussion. That day was a day after the leaders of the All Progressive Congress, APC, who were going round and holding consultations with notable senior citizens and political figures  across the country, visited him. They had visited the old but energetic former leader to put before him, their resolve to effect a change in the leadership of the country which, according to them, they believed deserved something better, a more purposeful leadership with vision and vigour.

    The APC entourage that visited him was so large that the General quickly looked for a way out by simply asking the delegation to nominate five people among them to deliberate with him in an inner room. There and then, General Muhammadu Buhari, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, Alhaji Aminu Masari and two others were unanimously chosen to meet with him. After the five-man team had briefed him about their mission and their concern for the progress of the nation, General AAA wished them the best of luck in their chosen endeavour and urged them to go about the whole thing in a peaceful manner.

    The above scenario emblemizes the quiet and unassuming nature of General AAA. On the day of my visit and as always, one thing that dominated our discussions was the state of the nation. Like I mentioned earlier, at a time in this country when numerous prophecies from several doomsday prophets predicted gloom and disintegration in the political horizon, General AAA buried himself in a rather quiet domestic diplomacy in the search for enduring peace. With unrelenting vigour, he made pragmatic efforts that helped to banish despair and replaced it with renewed hope in the citizenry.

    At many fora, he strongly expressed his conviction that despite the negative predictions that the country was capable of disintegrating by 2015, the prophets of doom would be disappointed, as the umbilical cord of the federating units cannot be separated.  He once said: “God has joined us together. Whether you break Nigeria into pieces, we will remain joined by our umbilical cord. No matter what happens, our umbilical cord is still there. We will live together either as neighbours or as communities.”

    What this signifies is the fact that the General is always concerned about the peace, progress and development of  Nigeria. Long before the 2015 elections, when many people were visibly worried about what becomes of the country before, during and after the elections, he was seriously involved in efforts to calm frayed nerves across the country. His passionate commitment towards ensuring peace helped the country to successfully navigate landmines that political interests had erected at various points. His headship of a national peace committee that brokered the non-violence agreement between then-President Goodluck Jonathan and Muhammadu Buhari, the main presidential challenger at the time, was not by accident. It wasthrough this agreement that the two most prominent gladiators in the 2015 presidential election, agreed to rein in their supporters in the event of anyone of them losing the election. That was just one aspect of General AAA that everybody got to witness.

    Ever since he handed over power to a democratically elected government in 1999, the General has been toiling to ensure peace in the country, peace in Africa and peace globally. His numerous travels, (I believe he spends more time inside the aircraft than he spends with his lovely family), are to enthrone peace wherever there is turmoil in the world particularly in the trouble-prone areas of Africa. He was in Zimbabwe several times as leader of the observer group in the country; he was involved in the negotiations in Liberia during the country’s decade-long fratricidal war and succeeded in getting former President Charles Taylor to agree to step aside. He was also involved in Sierra Leone and many other hot spots in Africa.

    In 2007, when we – myself, Prof. Steve Azaiki, Prof. Bolaji Akinyemi and Alhaji Ibrahim Shehu Shagari – conceived the National Think-Tank, General AAA was unanimously selected as the most qualified Nigerian to be the chairman at the formal inauguration of the organisation at the Shehu Musa Yar’Adua Centre, Abuja, on May 23, 2007. He gladly accepted the offer, came early for the function and waited till the end of the programme. By this, he demonstrated friendship and recognised labour  and patriotism. It was Ambrose Bierce, the American writer who once said: “While your friend holds you affectionately by both your hands, you are safe, for you can watch both his.” Those who truly know General AAA, will agree with me that he does not and cannot betray friendship.

    To paraphrase John F. Kennedy: “If this nation is to be wise as well as strong, if we are to achieve our destiny, then we need more new ideas for more wise men working for our country than most of those sitting in Abuja dreaming about a time long gone and a future that reads failure”. Friendship, like a novel, to me and the much I know of General AAA, remains for me one of the few forms where I can express my innermost thoughts, express man’s complexity and the strength and decency of his longings; where I can describe, step by step, minute by minute, the unpleasant struggle to put ourselves into a viable and devout relationship to our beloved and mistaken world. In friendship, you can be yourself and not worry about mistakes and caution and language and compromise and pain and love; that is true friendship.

    Over the years, General AAA has distinguished himself as a detribalized, courageous, patriotic, trusted and committed Nigerian of unequal statesmanship. That is why he is readily at home wherever he finds himself around the globe, with  people welcoming him with open hands, open minds and open hearts. His noble deeds and friendly disposition to everyone clearly marks him out as one of the responsible and revered leaders and fathers of this great country. Like Martin Luther King, he believes that every man should be judged by the content of his character.

    I agree with Asiwaju Bola Tinubu when he wrote in The Nation newspaper many years ago, long before the 2015 elections, that: “When the history of this country is written, (Abdulsalami) Abubakar will be remembered as the one that saved our unifying institution, the Nigerian military, from itself and restored democracy in our country. For this singular act of courage, generations unborn would be grateful to him.” These living words are still valid, if not very relevant today, in view of the role being played by the General in the contemporary history of this great country.

    So, our dear beloved General, as you clock 73, we celebrate you and give you 73 ‘gbosas’. May we celebrate you for many more years to come and may our country, for which you toil day and night, rediscover itself and achieve the type of greatness we all envisage. Happy Birthday!

    ‘At a time in this country when numerous prophecies from several doomsday prophets predicted gloom and disintegration in the political horizon, General Abdulsalami Abubakar buried himself in a rather quiet, domestic diplomacy in the search for enduring peace’

  • APC and its baptism of fire

    APC and its baptism of fire

    The crisis of the National Assembly leadership elections which tore through the All Progressives Congress (APC) might just be the best thing to have happened to it in its short existence. People forget that the party is barely two years old and has never held power at the center.

    The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) on the other hand has been at it for 16 years. It has had almost two decades to make mistakes and learn. APC stumbled and that should not be mistaken for a fall.

    Last week’s storm was a rude awakening to the fact that if the party doesn’t sort out its politics it would be unable to deliver on the change mandate.

    It is to its advantage that the crisis occurred early in the party’s reign rather than at the tail end of its tenure when it would be going into another election cycle. So, rather than allowing the bitterness and anger of the moment to fester, the leadership needs to handle the fallout of the June 9 debacle with humility and introspection to see if things could have been handled differently.

    There are so many lessons and APC would be misunderstanding the import of recent events if it embarks on any sudden or extreme moves against those who have challenged its authority. The emergence of Dr. Bukola Saraki as Senate President and Yakubu Dogara as Speaker of the House of Representatives was a rebellion driven as much by ambition as by other factors. The immediate thing to do is indentify what these are.

    A wise leadership would first try to de-escalate things and contain the damage that’s already been done. That is exactly what Chief John Oyegun and his team have done by finally recognizing Saraki as duly elected head of the Senate. All the talk of the nuclear option of drastic disciplinary action was not practical as APC risked the danger of driving the offenders back into the embrace of a PDP that is desperately looking for a way to get back into the game.

    So where did APC get it wrong? For one thing they made a fundamental error in not dealing with the power sharing concerns raised by elements of one of the legacy parties that came together to form it – the ‘New PDP’. Dismissing their demands by saying that such groups died when the new party came into being was unrealistic. In every big political party there are diverse tendencies and people who have been linked in the past would flock together even in a new home.

    The seed of the rebellion was sown in that sense of marginalization and thrived because the issue was not dealt with frontally. It is no surprise therefore that the new Senate President and Speaker of the House were members of that ‘New PDP’ group.

    Thus far the APC leadership has been outraged by what it perceives as a breakdown of discipline within its ranks. Before their very eyes party supremacy which they had touted as distinguishing them from PDP has been stamped upon by the rebels.

    No organization that wants to be taken seriously would condone such brazen acts of indiscipline. However, it bears pointing out that the application of the concept of party supremacy cannot be absolute. It works best under the parliamentary system of government because rebellion against the party line by parliamentarians could lead to fall of the government of the day.

    Under the American presidential system things are slightly different. There is a lot more latitude for independent action on the part of lawmakers. Times without number we have seen Democratic senators and Congressmen cross the party line to join Republicans in voting against major legislation of their fellow Democrat – President Barack Obama.

    Whenever that happened, those who crossed party lines were not condemned for voting the way they did. They never come up for censure by their party. Pay back comes when they have to present their voting record to the electorate. Still, we acknowledge that we operate under different circumstances in a society that still has to deal with primordial issues like tribe and religion.

    But this is not to say that the methods adopted by Saraki to achieve his goal are acceptable. It wasn’t just the fact that he took the contest to the Senate floor in defiance of his party leadership that was galling he compounded the injury by inviting the defeated enemy to share in the victors’ banquet.

    Surely, Saraki must have known that the APC leadership would be incandescent with rage over what they have described as his treacherous conduct in selling them to the disgraced PDP just to satisfy his ambition, but he just didn’t give a damn about the consequences.

    His rivals and the APC clearly underestimated him – thinking he would not push things to the brink. He did just that without blinking. They should have known that the man who moved against his own father – the late strongman of Kwara politics Dr. Olusola Saraki – and ultimately retired the old man from active politics would be capable of defying anyone when his dream was so clearly within reach. Such ruthlessness is uncommon even in the rough and tumble of Nigerian politics.

    But to make sense of what happened on June 9 we must not focus on the ambition alone – notwithstanding the fact that it is a powerful incentive.

    I strongly believe that no matter how driven they were, Saraki and Dogara would never have sustained their challenge without the backing of powerful forces within and without the APC who have an eye on 2019 calculations.

    President Muhammadu Buhari is still trying to make something of the fresh mandate in his hands. No one knows what his intentions are concerning a second term bid but there’s a lot of guessing going on that a man would be 77 in four years could choose not to run again.

    Were he to spurn the chance of running again, the usual suspects are positioning powerful allies in the positions that could positively impact their ambitions. The backing of those with these presidential ambitions no doubt have encouraged the rebels to take the contest to the floor of the National Assembly.

    One other factor that sustained the rebellion was the anti -Bola Tinubu sentiment whipped up by one side in the contest as well as the PDP still bitter about the role the former Lagos State Governor played in its downfall. For them this was the perfect opportunity to retaliate as he was perceived to be the driving force behind Ahmed Lawan and Femi Gbajabiamila.

    Most of those who have gone overboard to vilify Tinubu have been less than honest in their presentations. The Gbajabiamila project was initiated by his colleagues in the House who felt he was the natural person to rise to be Speaker having led them admirably as Minority Leader.

    That he supported Lawan is no secret. But didn’t other APC leaders back other candidates? All of the senators from Buhari’s home state, Katsina, voted for Lawan in the primaries. So how did he become a lapdog that Tinubu was seeking to impose on the Senate?

    Success has many friends but paradoxically the successful are often hated for doing well by those less fortunate. The Saraki and Dogara camps tapped into the deep anti-Tinubu sentiment and played the card for all it was worth.

    However, all those writing political obituaries of the APC leader are being unduly hasty. Politics is not like football – a game of two halves. It is more like a towering bestseller where one action-packed chapter opens into another and builds to a climax. He may have had a bad day at the office but his foes would be foolish to read too much into what has just happened.

    Many of those gloating over Tinubu’s perceived loss in the scheming for the National Assembly leadership should be reaching out to him to mend fences. If God permits, many who have ambitions beyond today would be seeking his support and that of his South-West base to actualize them. Just ask Muhammadu Buhari.

    Bar the shouting and the threats of legal action, Saraki and Dogara are the new reality that APC and the Buhari presidency must deal with for the foreseeable future. What are the implications for the individuals caught up in the controversy and for the polity?

    The new leaders of the National Assembly may have achieved their ambition but they have left something broken in their party. People keep referring to what former Speaker Aminu Tambuwal did in the last House – using members of the defunct Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) to seize power against the wish of the PDP leadership.

    That precedence has come back to bite the APC as the Tambuwal scenario has been repeated in both chambers of the legislature. The new governing party finds itself in an awkward position where it cannot really moan now that it is being paid back in its own coins.

    That said the brazen and long-drawn campaign of defiance against their party which Saraki and Dogara carried out, along with the Tambuwal episode would weaken the authority of Nigerian political parties – not just APC – for a long time to come.

    Powerful individuals would continue to rubbish the concept of party supremacy knowing that the cold reality of political calculations would shield them from harsh punishment.

    We saw it when Tambuwal defied PDP. The ruling party chose to grin and bear it so as not to make matters worse. The same scenario has played out again in APC.

    On an individual level the implications are equally grave. The new Senate President is the undisputed Lord of the Manor in his Kwara fiefdom. His word is law and you cross him at your peril. Now that he has played the card of disobedience in Abuja it would be interesting watching him try to impose the party line in Ilorin.

    Don’t be surprised if many who have been chafing under his rule suddenly acquire a taste for rebellion. Whatever a man sows he usually reaps with interest.

    For a man known to nurse presidential ambitions it would be virtually impossible for him to realize such dreams on the platform of the APC. He would never be trusted again and would now have a very awkward relationship with the party high command. It was the same experience Tambuwal had with former President Goodluck Jonathan and the PDP leadership.

    One of things that the Fourth Republic Senate enjoyed under David Mark was an extended period of stability after the initial years of turbulence. Given the manner of his emergence Saraki has just steered the upper chamber into stormy waters.

    Truly he’s in the saddle right now, but whether he would sit there comfortably is a different matter. He may just have placed that saddle on what in American rodeo circles is called a ‘Bucking Bronco.’ Anyone who ever sat on those wild horses would tell you it’s not the most stable seat in the world.

    APC may not be able to oust either the Senate President or Speaker because they wouldn’t be able to muster the required two-thirds of members to get the job done. That effectively makes Saraki and Dogara hostages of the former ruling party on whose votes they must now depend for survival.

  • Still on Buhari and national conference

    Still on Buhari and national conference

    In my column last week, I promised I would go into the greater details of why I said President Muhammadu Buhari should ignore calls that he should complete the job of amending our constitution, which was started by his predecessor, former President Goodluck Jonathan, in the twilight of his administration. I said I would do so in a not too distant future.

    Instead, I have decided to go into those details today in spite of the fact that the elections yesterday of a new leadership of the National Assembly in total defiance of the wishes of the new ruling party, the All Progressives Congress (APC), is a more immediate, if not more compelling topic for discussion. Those elections bode ill for our democracy, at least in my view. Certainly they suggest fears that, except for Buhari, little has changed with APC as the ruling party from yesterday’s Peoples Democratic Party’s (PDP’s) politics of self-aggrandisement and self-service.

    This, however, is a topic for another day, possibly next week.

    Today I’ll go into the details of why I believe Buhari should not waste his time heeding calls on him to finish the job of amending our constitution started by his predecessor. And these calls have come not only from Elder Chris Eluemuno, a chieftain of Ohaneze, whom I mentioned last week. Afenifere elders and militant Yoruba leaders like Dr. Frederick Fasehun in a two-page advert in The Guardian (May 31), and Otunba Gani Adams in an interview in Sunday Vanguard (May 10), have also made similar calls.

    Perhaps even more importantly, the relatively restrained Guardian itself had made a similar call in its editorial of March 12. It argued that because, in its view, the content and conduct of the campaigns for Election ’15 were “disappointing”, the report of the National Conference “cannot but be factored into the process of governance by the next government.”

    As the Americans say, “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” I will be the last person to argue that our Constitution is not without its flaws; it is manmade and nothing manmade is, or can be, perfect. If nothing else our constitution is fundamentally flawed in its revenue and legislative allocation among the three levels of government, to the extent that local governments can be regarded as a level of government. It is also fundamentally flawed in the way it has stood our true federation of the First Republic on its head by turning it into a centralised system in all but name.

    There are, of course, other ways in which our constitution is flawed. Still, I dare say it is not as broke as its loudest critics say it is. Certainly it is not so broke that little or no good can be achieved without amending it or replacing it. I believe that in spite of its shortcomings Nigeria can be transformed into a prosperous nation under it if only we, leaders and led alike, strive to cultivate the right attitudes.

    The definitive proof of this is America itself, whose constitution is universally adjudged as the most precise, eloquent and successful in the world because it has produced the most prosperous and freest democracy to date. Yet under the same constitution the country has in recent times deteriorated progressively into a gridlock between the executive and legislative arms of its central government, a gridlock that is already undermining its leadership of the world.

    The difference has been a dramatic change in the attitude of its people, whereby its leaders have become increasingly self-aggrandising and self-serving while its common folks have been driven into indifference to politics as has manifested in their increasing low turnout during elections.

    In other words, our problem as in today’s America is, in one word, much more a problem of attitude than of constitution. After all, no constitution in the world is, or can be, self-executing. Unfortunately it is difficult, if not impossible to legislate attitude. Ultimately, the solution to our problem therefore is to look inwards into ourselves and change our attitudes individually and collectively.

    Meantime there are, needless to say, provisions in our constitutions that seem to need fixing, provisions like those of the size of our executive councils, especially at the centre, the financial and administrative “autonomy” of our local governments and the justiciability of the fundamental objectives of state, etc. However, most of these can be dealt with without having to amend or change our constitution.

    For example, with the right perception the problem of the big size of our Federal Executive Council where Section 147 makes it mandatory for the president to appoint at least one minister from each state can be dealt with.

    Here the problem, on reflection, is clearly more of lack of frugality in our expenditures on offices than of their numbers as is also clearly the case in our humongous and unsustainable expenditures on our legislators. After all, our federal cabinets have been more or less the same size since the First Republic if you count the junior ministers.

    So far I have given two reasons why I think our new president should ignore the calls on him to complete his predecessor’s initiative of amending our constitution, namely our beggar-thy-neighbour attitude among leaders and followers alike, but more importantly among leaders, and our all too often wrong diagnosis of problems arising from wrong perceptions of the problems.

    There are at least two more reasons. One is the self-contradictions of some of the recommendations. The other is the fact that the conference was convened in bad faith, composed in bad faith and was conducted in bad faith.

    On the first reason, the same people, for example, who talk glibly about returning to the old autonomous regions of the First Republic, with, of course some modifications, also want at least 18 more states created out of the current ones. Similarly the same people who talk about the imperative of freedom of choice also simultaneously want power rotation and zoning entrenched into our constitution.

    As for my second reason of the bad faith that surrounded the national conference, this much was obvious from its timing when the president knew he had only enough time and money to select its members rather than have them elected as should be the case, and from the way its membership was deliberately skewed heavily against Muslims and Northerners, in gross violation of the religious and regional composition of the country.

    The bad faith was also obvious from the attempt by some key members to sneak in key provisions into its report that were never agreed upon by the conference and even title the reports Draft 2014 Constitution instead of amendments to the 1999 Constitution that they were.

    Last, but by no means the least, the bad faith was obvious from a correspondence dated August 6, 2014 between Chinweizu, author and an unrepentant Biafran, and some key elements at the conference led by Professor G. G. Darah, an intellectual fountainhead of militants from the Delta region, in which Chinweizu urged them to regard the excision of a section of the country as their main objective at the conference.

    “Excise them by talking and voting”, he said. And if excising what he called “Caliphate colonialists” from Nigeria failed, he said, “at least get a resolution passed by the Greater South majority postponing the 2015 election till after a new constitution is approved by referendum.”

    That Darah and his co-travellers failed in achieving either objective was not for want of trying. In any case their attempts framed the conduct of the national conference which, above all, is why it is not worth any serious consideration.

    A catalogue of yet greater errors

    Last week I apologised for a catalogue of errors I made in my column the week before, only to commit even more egregious ones at the same time. It was as if, as one elder friend said to me over the phone, I needed strong coffee to keep alert when writing!

    The more egregious ones last week were the years I gave of the enactment of the constitutions of Generals Ibrahim Babangida and Sani Abacha. The first was 1988 not 1996 – by then the man had “stepped aside” by three years – and the second was 1995, not 1998, the year in which Abacha died in office.

    Then there was my mix-up of homophones; words that sound similar but have different spellings and different meanings. In this case I wrongly used the word “seized” instead of “ceased” in the phrase “Unfortunately, our own federation seized…” in the last but four paragraphs of the column.

    Once again my apologies.