By Niyi Akinnaso

They are a nuisance. And all the network providers are involved. I have encountered at least 20 distinct senders from a single network provider alone, each one sending multiple messages. You delete them. But they keep coming, occupying significant real estate on your phone. They are unsolicited messages directly from the network providers or their associates.

Particularly vexing are those from MTN. For the avoidance of doubt, here are the different types of MTN senders I encountered within the past few months: MTNFreeData; MTNDataDeal; MTNSpecial; MTNShare; MTN Topit; MyMTNAPP or myMTN App; MTNXTRATIME; MTN12XBONUS; MTNOnDemand; MTN; MTN4ME; MyMTN; MTNN or MTN N; MTN4G; MTN SIMSwap; MTNBACKUP; DATA4ME; and AYOBA

I once allowed the different messages from these MTN senders to accumulate on my phone and, within a few days, the number hit 100! I have received over 60 in the month of August alone, and today is only the 11th. And all these messages hit my phone line while I was out of the country. A strange one joined the ranks recently. It is AYOBA, which implores me to click a link for national and international news. I never did and I never will.

Read Also: Maradona’s latest dribble

The most recent addition to the MTN senders is MTN AT 20. Here’s what it says: “Let’s celebrate 20 years together. Today Your 1st call is FREE for up to 5 mins & 200 MB data bonus. Thanks for being part of the Y’ello family. #TogetherAt20”.

Congratulations to MTN. But I don’t want this celebratory message on my phone. It belongs to the TV screen or a radio commercial. Pay TVC, Channels, or Arise to air it for you, rather than freely occupy space on my phone. No network provider in civilized nations would bombard subscribers’ text inbox with this kind of unsolicited message and the other promotional messages for that matter. It will be regarded as a violation of their privacy. True, promotional messages are not uncommon in such nations, but the option to opt out often accompanies such messages. You can even decide while setting up your phone not to receive such messages at all.

I am aware, of course, that the Nigerian Communication Commission established a Do Not Disturb (DND) protocol to protect network subscribers from receiving unsolicited text messages. The service is meant to provide subscribers the freedom to choose what messages they want to receive from a given telephone network or not to receive promotional messages at all. All the networks are mandated to set aside a common short-code for the service. It is 2442.

I first checked the DND status on my MTN line, by sending STATUS to 2442, as stipulated by the protocol. The message did not go through. I also sent STOP to 2442 on my MTN line, again following the protocol, in order to opt out of receiving their promotional messages. The message failed to “send”. I have made numerous attempts without success.

Just for comparative purposes, I tried the status message on my Airtel line. It immediately went through, with an instant response: “The Full DND service is active on your line”. In fairness to Airtel, I have received only essential messages from them, all dealing with mutual transactions, such as data purchase and data balance check. From their perspective, the DND service works.

Not so, however, with MTN. Out of frustration, I once approached three of their major offices in three different state capitals. The agents at all the offices told me the same thing. One said, “Delete them sir, if you don’t like them”. The other said, “You have a choice, sir. Just delete the ones you don’t like”. I responded, “That’s not the kind of choice I mean. I want to be able to choose whether to receive them or not. I really don’t like any of them and I don’t want to receive them any longer”. Her instant response was discouraging, “Ah, that’s not possible, sir. Just keep deleting them”.

The critical question now is: Why is MTN so recalcitrant? It will be recalled that only four years ago (see The Punch, June 5, 2017, for the full story), the Court of Appeal in Abuja unanimously ruled against the network for violating a subscriber’s right to privacy guaranteed under Section 37 of the 1999 Constitution, which states, among others, that “The privacy of citizens, their homes, correspondence, telephone conversations and telegraphic conversations is hereby guaranteed and protected”.

The Court further held that MTN violated Rule 14(1)(b), (2) and (3) of the General Consumer Code of Practice Rules as well as the Consumer Code of Practice Regulations 2007. Both regulations derive their potency from of section 70 of the Communications Act. At the end of the day, MTN was fined N3 million.

However, this hardly compares to the whopping N5.2 billion judgment against MTN two years earlier, in 2015, for non-compliance with a deadline set by the same NCC to disconnect all non-registered SIM cards on its network. It eventually settled out of court but still paid a substantial sum.

If MTN could violate NCC’s regulations, leading to payment of fines, two years apart, there is no reason to believe that it would not relapse into the same habit a few years later. This, at least, is my own finding about its non-compliance with the DND protocol as stipulated by the NCC.

This means that the NCC should not relax in its oversight functions. And that leads me to a much wider problem-the poor quality of network connectivity in Nigeria. To be sure, all networks suffer from the nation’s infrastructural deficit. However, a more critical problem on their part is greed, typified by over-subscription. For example, a given network provider could issue 10,000 subscriptions on a node that was meant to carry a maximum of 5,000.

When the node is full, the pre-recorded message in line at the time of your call will answer the call. That’s why the response may vary from “the number is unreachable” to “the number does not exist”, even if your call was through to that same number moments earlier.

This then is yet another area where the NCC needs to enforce compliance. No network provider should subscribe consumers beyond extant capacity. Similarly, NCC should look into problems of inter-network connectivity. Again, in this regard, the MTN line is often the most difficult to connect, when calling from another network provider. In the meantime, however, the compliance with the DND protocol should be fully enforced with MTN.

In Nigeria, the terms “the presidency”, “Aso Rock”, and “Abuja” are used in metonymic relationship to the executive branch of the federal government. In comparison to the United States on which our democracy is modelled, Aso Rock is like the White House, while Abuja is like Washington. However the presidency is not a direct equivalent of the administration in American political usage. Rather, it is a creation of President Buhari’s media team. What in the world does it mean?

Well, in Nigerian usage, it refers simultaneously to Aso Rock, Abuja, the Buhari administration, and even to the President himself. Whichever way you want to interpret the term, Buhari is top of mind, that is, he is the person that comes to mind whenever you hear or read about the presidency in Nigeria.

That is the case, however, only until you realize that, sometimes, the presidency is Garba Shehu, Buhari’s Senior Special Assistant on Media. At other times, it is Femi Adesina, the President’s Special Adviser on Media. At yet at other times, it is the opinion of the President’s men or cabal. This is believed to be the extended sense of the term.

It would appear that the goal of the usage is to provide a screen between President Buhari and the public, thereby shielding him from direct communication with the public, if not responsibility and accountability, forgetting that the buck stops on his desk. That’s why it is the presidency that speaks on major issues rather than the President.

In that regard, the brains behind “the presidency” have been very successful. Their success, however, is one of Buhari’s outstanding failures, because it allows two of his major foibles, taciturnity and tardiness, to come to the fore. Buhari neither talks nor acts as expected of a President. And when he does, it is always way too late or inadequate.

One example will suffice for now. This past Monday, August 2, 2021, the tenure of as many as 14 heads of major agencies in the Ministry of Education expired and they reportedly handed over to the most senior officer in their agencies. They were all appointed on August 1, 2016, and inaugurated into office the following day.

True, this has become common practice in the federal bureaucracy, but it has been taken to new heights by President Buhari. Ever since he was first inaugurated as President in 2015, he has never filled any vacancy on time. This is particularly true of vacancies in the Ministry of Education, a delay now playing out again before our eyes. This practice must stop, because it comes with numerous setbacks for accountability, continuity, and good governance.

First, the intervening period between end of tenure and the official appointment of a replacement is fraught with many dangers. How is full accountability guaranteed in the handing over process? How can collusion be averted between the official handing over and “the most senior official” who unceremoniously takes over? Recall that both officials would have worked together for possibly five years. How long will the acting official be in office and how can corruption be checked during the temporary tenure?

I raise these questions not to impugn the integrity of the officials, who handed over last Monday, and those who took over from them; but to point out the loopholes in the process. I also raise them because they could have been avoided altogether.

Buhari, who appointed these officials is still in government. Even if he was succeeded by another politician, there should be records of who took which office and when. In Buhari’s case, he had five full years to consider the extension of their term or replace them. Why wait until their term has ended and still no action?

This is a typical Buhari practice. Recall, for example, the long delay in appointing a Chief Justice after the retirement of Justice Mahmud Mohammed in 2016. Justice Walter Onnoghen, being the most senior Justice on the Supreme Court, was appointed in acting capacity. His appointment was confirmed nearly four months, only to be forced to resign prematurely about two years later under highly controversial circumstances.

Situations like this could easily be avoided. In this digital age, record keeping should no longer be a problem, no matter how large the bureaucracy is. All that is needed is a combination of appropriate computer hardware, software, and well trained ICT hands.

The last time I checked, the Ministry of Education and each of its agencies budgeted for ICT and computers. Save for the excellent job the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board has done in this regard, you would wonder what the other agencies have done with this budget item. Even more importantly, you would wonder what effort the supervising Ministry of Education has put into keeping track of personnel matters in these agencies to avoid prolonged vacancies in key agencies and federal universities.

All that is needed is to record every appointment made, date by date, and the duration of tenure. Then get a person in the Personnel or Establishment Department to keep track of every appointment and notify the appropriate ministries six months to the end of tenure. Indeed, appropriate personnel management software exists that could be used to flag such information and bring it to the attention of the appropriate official.

In many states, it is the office of the Head of Service that keeps track of such matters. The example of Osun state is instructive. The current Head of Service, Dr. Olowogboyega Oyebade, a cerebral essayist and public intellectual in his own right, publishes a weekly newsletter that contains vital information about the activities of government and personnel matters, including who retires and when.

This brings me back to the president and the presidency. How is information within the government acted upon by the Head of Service, the Chief of Staff, and the Secretary to the Government of the Federation? Assuming that the president may not be able to keep track of everything, what is the presidency (in the extended sense) doing about collating information within the government and advising the President about same? Why do the president and presidency always wait to react, instead of being proactive?

Only a lame president and presidency will continue to act this way and expect effective governance and favourable results.

By Niyi Akinnaso

Two of the critical mandates for the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board are (1) to conduct the Unified Tertiary Matriculation Examination and (2) to coordinate and oversee the admission process into tertiary institutions in the country. Unfortunately, until recently, these two missions were hardly successfully fulfilled, because JAMB’s attempts to fulfill them always fell into the cesspool of endemic corruption that has gripped the country.

JAMB only began to record appreciable successes after Professor Is-haq Oleyede took office on August 1, 2016, as the new Registrar of the Board. It is not clear how much of the Board’s activities he knew in advance of his new role. What is clear is that he quickly initiated several changes to enhance the quality of the Board’s examinations and the efficacy of the admission process. The changes were wide-ranging, from who applies and how to apply to who takes the exam, where the exam is taken, how it is taken, and, ultimately, how a candidate is admitted or otherwise.

The questions the new Board sought to answer included: Was the person who applied for the exam the writer of the exam? What illegal “ammunition” was brought into the exam hall? Did the exam hall meet necessary requirements for the security of the exam and its invigilation? Did the exam questions test appropriate competencies in the relevant subjects? Did all relevant stakeholders (candidates, testing centres, parents, universities) play by the exam and admission rules?

It took only one examination cycle to figure out that these questions revolve specifically around examination malpractices and the fraudulent practices of associated with the admission process. And the answers require following the candidate from the application process all the way to placement in a higher institution. It was hoped that the sanctity of the exam and the admission process would be assured if this journey were properly monitored.

This explains why Oloyede steered the Board toward a crusade against exam malpractices. The range of malpractices and successes have been heavily documented in Nigerian newspapers (see, especially, Daily Trust, April 29, 2021). The outcome of this effort includes the pervasive use of technology for candidate registration and monitoring at exam centres and admission processing; the delisting of over 100 Computer-Based Test centers, the installation of CCT cameras in all existing 700 or so CBT centers throughout the country; the variation of questions in the same subject across candidates to limit knowledge sharing in the exam hall;  and the introduction of a Central Admissions Processing System to curb under-the-table admission. Today, UTME exam malpractices have been reduced to below 0.01% of its past peak.

Nevertheless, as Oloyede admitted on two recent occasions, the obstacles to free and fair UTME exams in Nigeria are many, because exam candidates are not the only offenders. Parents, hired exam mercenaries, CBT centres, invigilators and security officials are all accomplices. Some parents participate in cheating or encourage their children to cheat, because they want their children admitted to the university at all cost, regardless of their abilities. Other accomplices want to make quick money off the parents or the exam candidates.

The foregoing only goes to show that the Board’s task is, indeed, an uphill battle. For one thing, UTME exams cannot be divorced from exam malpractices elsewhere in the country. Nor can exam malpractices be divorced from the endemic corruption that has gripped the Nigerian society from top to bottom.

The implication then is that JAMB’s effort to cure exam malpractices can only be a drop in the bucket in a country where fighting corruption is a continuous government project, revealing fresh corruption cases daily without any indication of abatement.

Even universities and other higher institutions are victims of this national malaise. For example, JAMB’s effort to sanitize the admission process by implementing the government’s guidelines continues to be undermined by higher institutions and the parents, who corrupt the process.

Here’s how Oloyede put it to a Senate Committee as recently as last week: “There’s also indiscipline from the tertiary institutions who admit against the federal government’s policy guidelines as mandated by the Ministry of Education. At the end of the day, after admitting outside these policies, they put pressure on students at the final moments towards graduation to come back to us for what they call regularisation.”

This is not at all surprising given the corruption associated with the appointment of Vice-Chancellors, who are the Chief Executives of these institutions (see, for example, Professor Ayodeji Olukoju’s The way Nigeria selects Vice-Chancellors is deeply flawed, The Conversation, April 5, 2021). This goes to show that the whole fish eventually stinks once it begins to stink from the head.

Initially, JAMB’s crusade against exam malpractices elicited some negative responses. In particular, questions were raised as to whether JAMB was not outstepping its bounds by policing examinations. The Board was also criticized for interfering with university autonomy with regard to admissions. Having participated in JAMB’s policy meetings and evaluated the nature and range of malpractices, I am more than convinced that higher education in this country may have no future without JAMB’s ongoing crusade against UTME exam malpractices and the effective monitoring of the admission process through CAPS.

What is important now is how to institutionalize the ongoing changes and in order to sustain the gains made so far. Much too often in this country, the light from good vision often dims with the exit of the visionary. True, there are now structures in place to sustain the changes. The question is whether there is sufficient human capital to sustain them.

In this regard, JAMB needs to establish or strengthen two units, one focusing on quality assurance and the other on security of the examinations and the effectiveness of the admission process. The quality of the exams in each subject needs constant improvement in order to ensure the global competitiveness of exam candidates. The same unit will also ensure that higher institutions follow due process in the admission protocol.

The job of securing the sanctity of the examinations also needs special hands with security backgrounds, who will also be computer literate enough to use technology in its surveillance activities. Both of these units should work hand in hand with the Board’s ICT department to ensure the optimal application of technology to problem solving.

The new JAMB is on a good course. And there should be no going back.