The Nation Newspaper

Category: Opinion

  • When teachers get their rewards on earth

    When teachers get their rewards on earth

    By Elijah Udofi

    SIR: It was Sydney Hook who said, “Everyone who remembers his own education remembers teacher, not methods and techniques. The teacher is the heart of the educational system”.

    Teachers, the world over have power to mould and remould the lives of young people. Teachers, according to Henry Adams, “affects eternity; he can never tell where his influence stops”. In other words, teachers are very influential, as no one, not even the teacher, can say with certainty, the extent his work can go.

    The teaching profession in Nigeria, to a very large extent, has not received the desired attention. The fortune of the profession, popularly regarded as mother of all professions and producer of professionals, has been dwindling, thus becoming unattractive to would-be practitioners.

    Regrettably while many has continued to taunt the profession as dumping ground for the never do well or the dregs of the citadel of learning, some others view it as a stop gap measure to ascend to other professions often regarded as lucrative. In other climes, where issues pertaining to education are put in the front burner, with well trained teachers to advance the course of education, the reverse is the case.

    For some time now, there had been outcry concerning morale decadence in the society, especially among the young ones. It is no longer news that our young ones now involve in all manners of social vices including examination malpractice, gangsterism, pickpocketing and cultism among others. All these, to some extent, can be attributed to the kind of teachers we have in our schools, as it is a known fact that no society or country can develop or rise beyond its teachers.

    Low self-esteem occasioned by poor pay package, non-recognition, lack of training and retraining, poor welfare packages, lack of conducive working environment and most importantly, lack of respect from members of the society, has led to low morale, which no doubt, is at its lowest ebbs and gradually leading to despondency.

    Gone are the days when teachers were treated like kings. In those days, in communities where they resided, teachers acted as administrators, mobilisers, motivators, role models and even judges as people respected their judgments as a result of their knowledge and professional calling. But today, the reverse is the case.

    Poised to reverse the trend, the government at the centre has taken some steps and these include the approval of a special salary scale for teachers in the country and also upward review of their retirement age to 65 years or 40 years in service.

    Added to these is the construction of low cost houses for teachers to be built in the rural areas. Teachers are to benefit from Conversion Programme and undergo Information and Communication Technology (ICT) training, to mitigate the current dearth of qualified teachers in the schools.

    In Ogun State, the governor, Prince Dapo Abiodun rewarded teachers who had been adjudged the best in the primary, junior and senior secondary schools categories in the state in the last one year. These are Ayodele Odeogbola, a teacher in the junior school section of Abeokuta Grammar school and one of the initiators of OGUNdigiclass, who emerged best in junior school category with two bedroom bungalow; Adewale Abayomi from Odua Comprehensive High School Imoru, the best in senior secondary got a cash prize of N2.5m, and Mary Adeyemi of St. Paul School II,Makun Sagamu, who emerged best in the primary school category went home with a cash reward of N2m.

    With such gestures from President Buhari and Governor Abiodun, I believe teachers are now in a new deal, as the old saying that teacher’s reward is in heaven, is gradually giving way to teacher’s reward being right here on earth.

    • Elijah Udofia, Laderin Estate, Abeokuta.
  • The restructuring rumble

    The restructuring rumble

    Lawal Ogienagbon

     

    JUST five years ago, the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) was an advocate of restructuring. It campaigned with the issue, promising the electorate that restructuring was a done deal under its government. Five years after, the party has yet to fulfil its promise. Is restructuring still on the party’s agenda? It is hard to say considering how the government now views the idea. Whether or not it restructures the country as it promised in 2015, the truth is restructuring cannot be wished away.

    The idea keeps popping up at every turn, evoking comments from  politicians, pastors and patricians. You can understand when politicians talk about restructuring. You may say that they are playing politics with it. But when those who are not partisan veer into the matter, it sends a message across immediately that it is time for government to act. And when one of such people is the revered Pastor E.A. Adeboye, it clearly shows that it is really a serious matter.

    Adeboye, General Overseer of the Redeemed Christian Church of God (RCCG),  hardly comments on national issues. For him, politics is a no go area. He keeps to himself and his calling, but encourages his spiritual children to participate in politics and even vie for elective office. He played a key role in the emergence of Prof Yemi Osinbajo as vice president. Adeboye may not talk when people expect him to, and when he does, he speaks in parables, leaving people wondering about what he means. He calls to the deep and only the deep can understand the message of Daddy GO,  as he is fondly called by Redeemers and non-Redeemers.

    When he implores the language of the Spirit, his comments are subjected to various interpretations. He has since learnt  to keep quiet because of some of the wild interpretations given to his comments. By doing so, he was probably avoiding a clash with those in authority, who will not take kindly to any criticism of the government. The GO may have changed tactics lately.

    He has been coming out forcefully with his position on some burning issues. At the monthly thanksgiving service of the RCCG in September, he declared that the government had enough money to provide palliative for every citizen, but noted that it could not do so because of  corruption and lack of accountability. “To say there is not enough money to give juicy palliative to Nigerians is an understatement because Nigeria has the money. But the problem known to everyone is corruption and lack of accountability”.  He was unsparing of the government on the fuel price hike, asking it to reconsider introducing such policy at a time people were getting relief from the scourge of COVID-19.

    Is this the making of a new Adeboye? Those who know him describe him as someone who always speaks his mind, explaining that his priestly office has stopped him from doing that in the past few years. No matter, the public is excited with  this new Adeboye, who says it as it is, no matter whose ox is gored. Adeboye is loved by many in and out of government for his fatherly and mature disposition to issues. He is not one of those flippant priests who love to make noise for the fun of it. The GO talks when it is necessary and not to impress anybody. When he spoke on restructuring last Saturday, the nation paid attention. Not a few wished he had spoken earlier.

    Aso Rock was stunned. It did not expect the GO to come out with such a bang on restructuring. Interestingly, Adeboye, the Northern Elders Forum and others are not saying anything new. They are merely echoing what the ruling APC said in 2015 when it was campaigning for power.  At a 60th Independence Day Celebration Symposium jointly organised by RCCG and the Nehemiah Institute of Leadership, with the theme: Where will Nigeria be in 2060? the GO said: “Why can’t we have a system of government that will create what I will call the United States of Nigeria? Let me explain. We all know that we must restructure. It  is either we restructure or we break up; you don’t have to be a prophet to know that. That is certain – restructure or we break up.

    “Now, we don’t want to break up. God forbid. In restructuring,  why don’t we have a Nigerian kind of democracy? At the federal level, why don’t we have a president and a prime minister? At the state level,  you have the governor and the premier… Without any doubt, we must restructure and do it as soon as possible. A United States of Nigeria is likely to survive than our present structure”.

    The government’s reaction was swift. It said President Muhammadu Buhari would not succumb to threats on restructuring. Can the clamour for restructuring be described as threats by any stretch of imagination? The answer is no. If those calls are threats then the APC-led government is also guilty because it campaigned with the issue. The party also raised the Governor Nasir El-Rufai panel on restructuring to finetune the idea for execution. What has happened to the panel’s report? Should it be taken that the party has abandoned its restructuring promise? It is unthinkable that APC, which styles itself as a progressive party, will campaign on an issue and subsequently turn round not to live up to its word.

    Is that how to be a progressive? Progressives are known to stand by their words come rain come shine. They do not make promises and break them when it is politically convenient to do so. They do not play the progressive card to win election and become something else when they assume office. Ultimately, the final decision rests with the people, who will determine what and who they want with their votes, in future elections.

     

    Trump unmasked

     

    THE media was awash last Friday,  with reports of American President Donald Trump and wife Melania testing positive for COVID-19. As expected, Trump tried to play the tough guy with the deadly disease, which knocked him out throughout last weekend.

    Thanks to steroids, he was quickly helped back to his feet. Rather than be humbled by what happened to him, he is still going about the entire place, pretending that COVID-19 is not real. The people now know better. As president of the world’s most powerful country, Trump has the best of everything at his disposal.  If he is ill, the best of doctors and drugs, are there for him as we have seen in this case.

    He cannot compare himself with others, so he should stop telling the people not to allow COVID-19 to disrupt their lives.  His was actually disrupted for days by the virus before he forcefully discharged himself from the hospital on Monday, despite his personal doctor publicly admitting that “he’s not yet out of the woods”.

     

  • Cross River judiciary and arrogance of executive power

    Cross River judiciary and arrogance of executive power

    Kene Obiezu

     

    SIR: Amidst a simmering crisis of confidence the Nigerian judiciary is currently undergoing, members of the executive arm of government both at the federal and state levels have often taken it upon themselves to sanitize this most crucial arm of government. This they do by seeking to control and determine who heads the judiciary at any point in time and keeping in check the supposedly bad eggs.

    So, each time there is a vacancy in the leadership of the judiciary whether at the federal or state level, the highest forms of intrigues are employed to determine who fills the vacancy.

    Seniority is one of the chief hallmarks of the legal profession in Nigeria. Seniority makes precedence and by tradition and training, lawyers, no matter how cantankerous they get, know when to invoke seniority and what to do when seniority is invoked.

    This tradition of seniority giving rise to precedence in the legal profession naturally flows from the bar as mother, to the bench. Judges by virtue of appointment dates take precedence. When the margins get   very fine, very minor details are invoked to determine seniority.

    Seniority in the judiciary is especially sacred because it is what determines who heads the judiciary thus helping to bring the indispensable benefit of experience to this position which crucially takes the lead in justice‘s unenviable task of upholding what is compliant with the law and denouncing what runs counter to it.

    In Nigeria, the executive at all levels have always sought to control the judiciary. Recognising the amount of constitutional powers it wields   and its ability to disrupt any party not convened in accordance to law, the members of the executive, especially those ill at ease with the checks and balances inherent in democracy, always seek to trample the judiciary under their boot heels.

    In what has gone down in the annals of Nigeria‘s history as the highest interference with the independence of the judiciary, last year, horrified Nigerians, and even more horrified Nigerian lawyers, watched as a sitting Chief Justice of Nigeria was forced out of office in bitterly acrimonious circumstances.

    The travails of the Chief Justice of Nigeria was only the loudest echo of the voices that had been lifted against the judiciary in many states. The lesson it would seem is that whenever a state judiciary begins to exhibit the streak independence which should be its distinguishing mark, some form of unpalatable consequences follow.

    The National Judicial Council which is the body reposed with the constitutional powers to begin the process of appointing, disciplining and removing judges have had its plate full with many cases where seniority was given a short-shrift in filling the position of the head of the judiciary. In this, Cross River State is the latest theatre of the ugly.

    The governor‘s insistence and intransigence in eschewing seniority in appointing the subsistent Chief Judge has left judiciary in a limbo, leaving weighty matters of justice unattended to.

    Executive pettiness could have no better exemplar. The judiciary which should be independent and impartial to do what it is set up to do is being subjected to the caprices of the governor who should by the workings of democracy mind his own office.

    What is happening in Cross River State does not bode well for democracy in Nigeria. It is ominous for our democracy and because it has happened in other states, it is safe to say that unless it checked and stamped out, the perverse pattern of executive interference in the judiciary will only continue to find new theatres.

    • Kene Obiezu , Abuja.
  • Sixty years of elite betrayal

    Sixty years of elite betrayal

    Jide Oluwajuyitan

     

    WE concluded on this page last week that efforts at resolving the national question through constitutional negotiations like statesmen ended with the British-midwifed 1958 Independent Constitution.  Every other attempt starting with the home made 1963 republican constitution has turned out to have been driven by greed and intrigue of Nigerian political elite who instead of liberating the masses of their people on whose back they rode to power, from poverty, ignorance and disease, engaged themselves in deadly battle over what they would personally gain by prolonging the nightmare of Nigerians.

    Both the north and the east got what they wanted from the 1963 republican constitution. The structure was retained especially with violent suppression of Tiv popular uprising and Isaac Boro Ijaw-led insurrection. There was silence on the controversial issue of boundary adjustment. For the Okun and Kwara Yoruba that had asked to be  merged with their kith and kin in the west , it was a hope betrayed. But for the north, it guaranteed there would be no threat to their electoral fortunes as long as democracy is accepted as a game of numbers.

    The East got the president and commander-in-chief of the armed forces that later became politicised with the imposition of Aguiyi Ironsi as head of the armed forces against the preference of the departing British head and the North  recruitment drive,  first by Col Gowon and later by other northern political leaders for young northerners to enter into the military in response to Igbo domination of the officer corps. They even lowered the entry point from WAEC/Ordinary Level GCE to typewriting qualification, as entry point. The only loser was the West that could no longer seek redress from the Privy Council of London.

    But it was a pyric victory as Zik discovered when he approached the military for support over the constitutional crisis that followed the disputed 1964 elections. He was a titular commander-in-chief of the armed forces, in reality, they owed loyalty by virtue of the republican constitution to the prime minister. The January 1966 coup and the July 29 counter coup were the fall-outs of polarization of the military by our political elite.

    Unfortunately, in the absence of Big Brother Britain threatening to apply the big stick, every other attempt at addressing the national question through a negotiated constitutional frame work ended up being worse than the previous one.

    Thus, when General JTU Ironsi took over power in January 1966, he set up on February 21, 1966, a study group on constitutional review with representatives from the then four regions whose report was to be submitted for a referendum before promulgation.

    However, Ironsi inexplicably came up with Decree 34 which turned the country to a unitary state on May 24, 1966.  With Ironsi surrounding himself with Igbo advisers including Dr Nwabueze who was widely believed to have drafted the decree, this was considered too much of a coincidence because Zik and NCNC had up to 1959 wanted a unitary system. It was just as well that what could not be achieved through constitutional debate was effortlessly achieved with a military decree. But what goes round, comes around.

    Yakubu Gowon reversed the decree and reinstated the country’s federal system with 12 states structure with six each from the north and south with his own decree.  He then set up his own ad-hoc group with representatives from the four regions and Lagos to work on constitutional proposal. But this was abandoned following riots and mindless killing of Igbos in the north which eventually led to a civil war that lasted from August 1967 to January 13, 1970. The war led to consolidation of power in the hands of the north.

    Murtala Muhammed inaugurated his own Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC) on October 18, 1975.  At the end, Obasanjo who succeeded him and the military inserted about 17 different items into the draft submitted by the Constituent Assembly. With the adoption of the presidential system with a very strong centre, the country seems to operate a unitary system – the very antithesis of what the federating nationalities that lost their freedom in 1966 and those struggling for self-actualization in the country wanted.

    Besides the introduction of federal character principle designed for sharing of spoils of office and political offices by the elite, neither the national question nor the fate of the masses were considered. Even when they half-heartedly inserted Fundamental Objective and Directive Principles of state policy viz right to free medical care, free education, they added that they were not enforceable even in courts of law.

    The self-serving short-lived Babangida’s 1989 constitution which further empowered the centre at the expense of the states collapsed along with his decreed parties – National Republican Convention and Social Democratic Party when he was forced to step aside following his annulment of June 12, 1993 election.

    With his five political parties adopting him presidential candidate, after widespread assassination of political opponents, banning of newspapers and detaining of journalists, General Sani Abacha who died on June 8, 1998 had railroaded his 1995 largely boycotted constitutional conference to come up with a constitution that would allow him to transmute himself to a civilian president.

    The 1999 constitution has been described as a military decree as no one saw it until the inauguration of Obasanjo on May 29, 1999.

    Obasanjo’s own National Political Reform Conference (NPRC) of February 2005 submitted a report to the National Assembly in May 2006 which focused more on tenure-elongation as against nation building which he today champions.

    The 2014 Confab was an after-thought by President Jonathan to seek support of southwest, the region that has been in the forefront of the struggle for restructuring.  He shares the same affliction with all his predecessors for whom constitutional review or restructuring is not about resolving our crisis of nation building, but about greed for power.

    Perhaps this explains why the lot of ordinary Nigerians today under the new inheritors of power is far worse than it was under the colonial masters, one of the reasons the late first civilian governor of Ogun State, Chief Bisi Onabanjo, alias “Aiyekoto” had advocated the return of the British shortly before his death.

    The northern political elite remain the greatest beneficiary of independence. Yet with their near monopoly of power in the last 60 years, for the average northern poor, the offspring of the generation of farmers credited with the ‘groundnut pyramid’ miracle, it is still a matter of “labourer born labourer”.  Over 80% of about 11million of out-of-school Nigerian children are from the north.

    The Southeast is in league with the north, its rival. The poor masses of the East share the same fate with those of the North. Eastern political elite often fraudulent swear in the name of their poor to secure power only to build palaces among the squalor of their people in their villages while their youths hawk on the streets of Nigerian major cities.

    In the Southwest where there was already a template for development, the current political elite are not different from their other Nigeria’s unambitious political elite. Compared to the first and second republics, Southwest political elite, the current inheritors of power are a disaster. Primary school education was free in the West in 1953. There were four equivalent of today’s RUGA located in different parts of Southwest besides imported cows called “malu’ for home- domestication. Today, 10,000 heads of cow are today daily consumed in the southwest. The only surviving cattle ranch set up in Ekiti by late Adekunle Ajasin collapsed under governors Fayemi, Fayose and Oni whose only enduring legacy is fighting over political offices.

  • Between Pastor Adeboye and Shehu Garba

    Between Pastor Adeboye and Shehu Garba

    By Chris Edache Agbiti

    SIR: The opinion expressed by Pastor Enoch Adeboye in his sermon last Sunday vide a live telecast, on the impropriety and danger of Nigeria’s piling foreign debts and other sundry national issues cannot appropriately be regarded as inciting nor an attack against the federal government contrary to what presidential spokesman, Garba Shehu erroneously suggested in his media response.

    Being neither one of the government’s public officers bound by the bureaucratic ideal of impersonality nor one pursuing any opposition agenda, Pastor Adeboye is inhibited but entitled, like any other citizen of Nigeria, to express his opinions, which he has done in his characteristic constructive manner, on burning national issues.

    Having said the above, the thrust of this post is really about the now trending practice among some pastors on self-appointed mercenary missions in defence of other senior pastors wherever they perceive that they are being unfairly criticized, as we have witnessed lately in the most embarrassing manner from the pulpits.

    With all sense of responsibility, while any other senior pastor may need such proxy interventions from other pastors in their defence, the Pastor Adeboye I know is one who “died” long ago to such fleshly gratifications of human defence where he is being criticized, a fact he had made the congregation to understand times without number.

    If Pastor Adeboye will scarcely bother himself to join issues with anybody over any critical remark arising from a sermon he had delivered, but to concern himself with more with his passionate commitment to his evangelical mission of soul winning, does it not, therefore, amount to a disservice to him, and a mere quixotic exercise, for any one out there to think that he owes Pastor Adeboye a duty or he is fulfilling God’s mandate, to speak in defence of the cleric against his traducers?

    Pastor Adeboye fully understands his mandate of Christlike conduct to expect or approve any overzealous follower picking up his sword to slice off the ears of his attackers. It bears repeating to caution all those out there sharpening their carnal swords in readiness to offer themselves as defenders of Pastor Adeboye in reaction to Garba Shehu’s media response to his Sunday Sermon, that the same way Jesus Christ never needed Peter’s physical intervention, Pastor Adeboye will not need their dysfunctional ill-service of turning their pulpits to a theatre vengeance in defence of a man who already has God’s back.

    God alone is Pastor Adeboye’s sufficiency. Keep your defence to yourself and do not distract the genuine man of God from his apostolic mission, please.

    • Chris Edache Agbiti, Esq Guzape District, Abuja
  • Eni-B and Tinubu’s supposed conundrum

    Eni-B and Tinubu’s supposed conundrum

    By Rotimi Adebayo

    Mr. Eniola Bello, also known by the popular sobriquet, Eni-B, is one of the finest prose stylists and perhaps compelling political analysts in contemporary Nigerian journalism. His skills in this regard were on display in his recent column in the THISDAY newspaper titled ‘The Tinubu Conundrum’. The columnist jumped on the bandwagon of those who mischievously sought to put the blame for the loss of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in the last Edo State Governorship Election on the video broadcast by Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu urging the people of that state to reject the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) candidate and incumbent governor, Mr. Godwwin Obaseki, in the intensely-contested governorship election. The narrative, according to those who peddle this perspective, is that Tinubu’s broadcast kindled a perceived Edo sub-nationalism, which detested what was seen as a Lagos-based godfather interfering in the politics of Edo State and trying to impose a governor on the state.

    Eni-B argues that Tinubu, through the video, made himself the issue in the politics of Edo State. The columnist is able to sustain this position because he, deliberately or inadvertently, studiedly ignored the message of the video appeal to voters in Edo State. He submits that the video in question “was dumb in concept, poor in messaging and weak in presentation”. But he only asserts this rather than make an attempt to demonstrate his position logically and empirically. And one wonders when Eni-B turned a Nollywood film producer! According to his generalization, “it was ill-advised of Tinubu, the last of the godfathers, whose persona is synonymous with Lagos, to have made a video broadcast appealing to the Edo people, a few days before the election, not to re-elect incumbent Governor Godwin Obaseki”.

    Now, did Tinubu appeal to the people of Edo State to reject Obaseki at the polls on the ground that he was a godfather in the politics of Lagos State seeking to extend his sphere of influence to Edo State? For the eight years Comrade Adams Oshiomhole was governor of the state, was there any evidence Tinubu tried to influence him in appointment or sought any contract favours? Eni-B is silent on the concrete content of Tinubu’s message in the video broadcast. Tinubu’s argument was simply that by preventing a majority of duly elected members of the Edo State legislature from sitting for most of his first term tenure, Obaseki had violated the tenets of democracy, deprived the majority of Edo people representation in the legislature and was thus not eligible to be described as a democrat. It was within this context that Tinubu rightly described himself as a democrat and, as one of those who fought for the present democratic dispensation, duly qualified to appeal to the people of Edo State to reject Obaseki at the polls as a result of his proven anti-democratic inclination.

    While ignoring the content of the video broadcast’s message, Eni-B chose to focus on largely irrelevant stylistics. He opines that Tinubu should not have sat down bent over in his chair but rather should have sat straight or better still stood up to deliver his message. But why should this necessarily be so? Tinubu was not engaged in Nollywood play-acting or showmanship. His message came across as sincere and straight from the heart. Again, Eni-B remarked on what he perceived as the seeming hesitancy of Tinubu in delivering his message. Yes, the columnist is understandably not aware of the relationship between Obaseki and Tinubu. Both are no strangers to each other. Asiwaju knew Obaseki before his election in 2016 and encouraged Comrade Oshiomhole when recruiting him for leadership position. During the colloquium to commemorate Tinubu’s 65th birthday, which held in Lagos with President Muhammadu Buhari in attendance, it was Governor Obaseki that delivered the toast. And in doing so, he revealed that Tinubu was one of the major influences that persuaded him to go into politics. Surely, Eni-B could not have expected Tinubu to be enthusiastic or happy to deliver his appeal to the Edo State electorate to reject the same Obaseki at the polls. It was just a duty that had to be done giving the fact that Obaseki turned out to be a calamity to democracy in his first term.

    Again, Eni-B makes heavy weather of Tinubu’s appeal to the Edo electorate based on his own democratic precedence and credentials. Notably, the THISDAY columnist quotes Tinubu as describing himself as “a leader of all democrats regardless of political parties”. Instructively, Tinubu did not describe himself as “The leader” of all democrats across party lines. He is only one of a number of Nigerian politicians who can be justifiably so described. The columnist argues, dubiously, that Tinubu sought to extend the honorific title of ‘National Leader’ by which he is addressed within the APC to perceive and describe himself as the leader of democrats in all parties. Eni-B even suggests that President Buhari conferred the title of National Leader on Tinubu in the early years of the APC’s formation just to humour the Jagaban. But was Buhari the only one addressing Tinubu by that title within the party? Why did Buhari and other leaders within the party not confer that title on anyone else just to humour them? Did Tinubu seek to be addressed as National Leader? Is the honorific title not an indication and recognition of his phenomenal role in the formation and consolidation of the emergent party?

    Perhaps Eni-B is right in arguing that Tinubu should have left others to describe him in such terms but Tinubu can rightly be described as “a leader” of democrats in the country across party lines. His role along with others in the struggle that led to the exit of the military and the birth of our current democratic dispensation is well documented.

    After the 2003 elections in which his party, the Alliance for Democracy (AD), was routed in Oyo, Ogun, Ondo, Osun and Ekiti states, Tinubu’s Lagos remained the only state controlled by the opposition in the South-west. Many PDP leaders boasted that Tinubu would have no choice but to cross over to the ruling party. It was unusual for Nigerian politicians to operate outside the party in control of the mainstream. Tinubu never wavered. He remained the last man standing firm in opposition. Had Tinubu flinched and crossed over to the PDP at the time, it is likely that the evolution of Nigeria’s democracy would have taken a completely different turn in the direction of a one-party dominant state.

    Again, Tinubu along with others across party lines staunchly opposed and helped frustrate and abort then President Olusegun Obasanjo’s third term agenda in 2007. Furthermore, Tinubu’s role in doggedly leading Lagos State to fight for the rights of states and fiscal federalism from 1999 to 2007 is well known. Lagos State won no less than 13 cases at the Supreme Court during that period, which enhanced the rights and powers of states irrespective of the party in power. Eni-B himself captured why Tinubu cannot be described as being fraudulent or untruthful when he referred to his democratic credentials. In a feat of mischievous admonition of Tinubu’s strong democratic credentials, he said: “Long before the formation of APC, Tinubu had in 2003, as governor in Lagos, played smart politics to survive then President Olusegun Obasanjo’s decimation of the AD, the party in control of the six states in the South -west since 1999. As Obasanjo’s PDP ruthlessly took over the sub-region, Tinubu survived and became the face of the opposition, challenging the Obasanjo administration at the Supreme Court, in the media, at National Executive Council meetings and in every available public space. He received considerable support from the generality of Lagosians, including the elite who had become suspicious of Obasanjo’s desperation to make the country a one-party state”. Eni-B then goes on to describe Tinubu’s role in the formation of various parties including the Action Congress (AC), Action Congress of Democrats (ACD) and ultimately the Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) that ultimately teamed up with other parties to form an alliance that produced APC, which dislodged the PDP from power in the epochal 2015 elections.

    Although he rightly identifies the factors responsible for the APC’s loss in the Edo State governorship election including intra-party conflicts and contradictions within the APC, seeming transparency of the electoral process due to improved efficiency of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and the relatively poor performance of the APC at the centre resulting in increased economic hardship suffered by the citizenry, Eni-B allocates more weight to Tinubu’s broadcast as being responsible for the loss without telling us why. He does not reason that it could be argued that without Tinubu’s broadcast, the margin of loss could have been higher for the APC given the lukewarm attitude of key party leaders to the APC campaign, which made the candidate, Pastor Osagie Ize-Iyamu, look like a political orphan in the run-up to the elections. He fails to see the damaging effects of ousting Comrade Oshiomhole as the party’s national chairman by the presidency a few weeks into an election in which he has a major stake. He forgets to highlight the effects of APC governors who openly worked against their own party and candidate, framing the party’s victory as personal defeat because of their 2023 ambition. Again, Eni-B, like some other analysts, does not see the active campaigns of key PDP leaders and governors for Obaseki, with a number of them physically present in the state, as outside interference in the politics of Edo State!

    Eni-B strangely argues that a loss by the APC in the forthcoming governorship election in Ondo State will be blamed on Tinubu. Again, he gives no logical reason why this should be so. In any case, his take on the Ondo polls is grossly mistaken. His analysis betrays a poor understanding of the dynamics of the Ondo governorship poll. For one, all contending tendencies within the party are on one page behind Governor Rotimi Akeredolu in the state’s gubernatorial election. Asiwaju Tinubu was instrumental to this as he failed to give impetus to the aspirants massed up against Akeredolu to use him to galvanise their plan. In the end, they all dropped out of the race and filed behind Aketi. Again, those forces within the APC that worked against Ize-Iyamu’s victory in Edo State to spite Comrade Oshiomhole have no motive to sabotage the party in Ondo. Furthermore, the APC will contest the Ondo election as a more united party in the state than a PDP that is still trying to wedge various tendencies and fractions in the state into a cohesive whole. Eni-B assumes that a loss for the APC in Ondo will galvanize opposition to Tinubu’s supposed 2023 presidential election especially in the South-west. He underestimates Tinubu’s cross party appeal in the region and the likely tendency of the people of the region to give mass support across party lines to an aspirant from the region with bright electoral prospects at the appropriate time.

    While he suggests that Tinubu may be perceived as an “overbearing and grabbing godfather” in some quarters, Eni-B notes, instructively, that Tinubu “Unlike other godfathers, identified talents and empowered them, planting his associates in different elective offices, yet occupying none”. The contradiction does not appear to occur to him.  If over two decades after leaving office, Tinubu still continues to wield so much influence that even current political office-holders continue to deploy considerable time, energy and resources to thwart his perceived political ambition; a purported ambition he has not told anyone he has, that should suggest to the columnist that Tinubu’s already established legacy will not be the function of any office God Almighty may permit him to hold in future.

    *Rotimi Adebayo is former Deputy Chief Press Secretary to Governor Bola Ahmed Tinubu                 

     

  • Big Brother Naija, Nigerian youths and the future

    Big Brother Naija, Nigerian youths and the future

    By Kennedy Awowoh

    SIR: Big Brother is inspired from George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty Four with its theme of continuous oppressive surveillance. The first version of the show was broadcast in Veronica in the Netherlands in 1999.

    The format has become an international TV franchise. While each country or region has its own variation, the common themes is that the contestants (housemates), are confined to the house and have their every action recorded by cameras and microphones and that no contact with the outer world is permitted.

    The Nigerian version of the show, so far has five seasons-the first airing from March 5, June 4, 2006. Katung Aduwak emerged winner of that season. The second season of the show premiered 11 years after the first season on January 22, 2017 with Efe Ejeba as winner. The third season premiered on January 28, 2018 with Miracle Ishokwe as winner. The second season premiered on June 30, 2019 and unlike the previous episodes, the show was set in Lagos with an initial 21 housemates and another five a month later. Mercy Eke AKA Lamborghini was crowned winner. The fifth edition obviously premiered on July 19, with 20 housemates. Olamilekan “Laycon” Agbeleshe won the show with an improved ground prize of N85 million.

    Basically housemates are sustained by the votes of the viewers who either vote via SMS, desktop website, big brother mobile site or the DSTV or GOTV apps. While voting by SMS costs N30, votes via the mobile sites are free but data cost apply.

    The followership of the show in Nigeria by young people has become worrisome as it tends to take their focus away from nation building initiatives, citizen participation in governance and the important role of citizens holding their governments to account. Once the show is up, the youth who are obviously frustrated with the government tune in and become totally unaware of what is happening in the politics, economics and governance spaces. For instance during the season five show, the government of Nigeria increased electricity tariffs by more than a 100 per cent from N30.23 to N62. 33 per kilowatt. Similarly, the government, again, increased the pump price of petrol to N151 from N148. All of these serious economic decisions meant nothing to an average Nigerian youth who is engrossed in the show and is either an Elite, an Icon or a new tribe depending on who his/her favourite housemate on the show is.

    The importance of youth in national development cannot be over-emphasised. Their creative energies, intellect and youthfulness cannot be allowed to go to waste. We cannot afford not to be involved in policies that directly affect us and potentially have negative implications on our future and the future of our children because of a television show. To do that will be not being wise. It will mean we are engrossed in passing temporal pleasures to the detriment of the future with vast opportunities. We cannot afford to be this passionate about a television show and not be at same level, passionate or concerned about our country and its governance. We must be willing to multi-task our energies for both or be focus on nation building. Our futures are uncertain and it is dangerous to be docile.

    • Kennedy Awowoh, Lagos.
  • Buffalo soldiers

    Buffalo soldiers

    Kayode Robert Idowu

     

    BUFFALO soldiers historically were all-Black personnel of the United States Army who served on that country’s Western frontier following the American civil war, and were carved into cavalry and infantry regiments by the 1866 Army Organization Act. Established by Congress as the first peacetime all-black squads in the regular U.S. Army, their functions involved settling railroad disputes, building telegraph lines, repairing and building garrisons (Americans call these ‘forts’), helping the settler population to colonise lands violently taken from native Indians and protecting the colonisers from the displaced natives seeking to reclaim their homeland. Although they mainly served the interest of their Caucasian masters, legendary Reggae icon, the late Bob Marley, in his famous song titled ‘Buffalo Soldiers,’ linked the exploits of these servicemen to survival fighting and recast them as symbolising of black resistance. Incidentally, it was Marley as well who taught the wisdom of measured battles in his lyrics, to wit ‘He who fights and runs away lives to fight another day.’

    This piece isn’t about the American military, but we have our own buffalo soldiers. They ideally embody the collective struggle for survival by Nigerian masses, but some times they end up serving narrow class interests against the masses they purport to represent. You guessed right: we are talking about the leaders of Nigeria’s labour movement who recently appointed themselves arrowheads to get some relief for Nigerians from crushing effects of government’s floatation of domestic fuel price, tagged deregulation, and the introduction of ‘cost reflective tariff’ of electricity by which some consumers are to pay 100 percent more than previous rates. Labour had sabre-rattled over those policies, which it rightly argued left many Nigerians in life threatening penury. But on the day of battle, labour leaders settled for appeasement of narrow interests by government and pulled back. Mind you, it would’ve been okay if they said all along they were heading into battle for those narrow interests; rather, they touted calling the fight not just on behalf of unionised workers, but also grassroots Nigerians facing existential struggles in the present economic milieu. Yet, what they came away with from crisis talks with government upon which they held their fire has left many wondering what’s been gained by ordinary Nigerians.

    Recall that both the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) and Trade Union Congress (TUC) had said they were calling a joint strike because of the severe erosion of citizens’ purchasing power resulting from the twin price hike.  In serving government notice, NLC President Ayuba Wabba said the policies “brought about high cost of goods and services, which has completely eroded the gains of the N30,000 minimum wage,” adding that the price increases were “biting every worker and every family.” For his part, TUC President Quadri Olaleye argued that the issues at stake were not limited to workers but affected the general populace. Rejoining to a criticism by Labour and Employment Minister Chris Ngige that TUC’s letter of ultimatum was misplaced because it was addressed to President Muhammadu Buhari rather that to him as the official recognised by the International Labour Organisation (ILO) to presently oversee labour matters in Nigeria, Olaleye had said: “We are talking about issues that affect the general population of the country…This one is beyond labour matters.  We are not talking about salary increase here, we are talking of something that affects members of the union and the general populace.”

    With government’s argument that it had recorded a whooping 60 percent decline in national revenue, and hence that it could no longer bear fuel subsidy – or any other subsidy for that matter – especially with no provision made for such expenditure in the 2020 budget, no realist expected it would roll back those policies just because labour so demanded. Neither, for most part, was there hunger for willy-nilly strike by labour. But it was hoped labour’s challenge was an opportunity to make government come up with concrete frameworks that would comprehensively modulate the inflationary effects of the price hike policies it said were inevitable. Take, for instance, the soaring cost of petrol resulting from downstream sector deregulation. Since government offers autogas as a cheaper alternative to petrol, you would expect it would, among other things, come up with clearly outlined and timelined template on how the product would be made readily available, and how every vehicle presently using petrol would access services to convert to autogas usage at affordable – if any – cost. It is bad enough that such arrangements were not in place before the fuel price deregulation policy took off in March; now government promises delivery of 1million autogas conversion kits and dispensing units by December 2021 – more than 15 months away – in its recent pact with labour. So, how do Nigerians live with progressive price increases until then?

    In a similar vein, it is widely recognised that the category of electricity consumers most affected by the ‘cost reflective tariff’ are manufacturers and big-time service providers who are most likely to pass on the tariff burden as inflated costs of their products and services or cutbacks on overheads – especially workforces. Government ought to think through and evolve convincing action plans on how ordinary Nigerian consumers and workers, who inevitably will be affected, are catered for. That is what governance should be about, not simply renouncing distasteful obligations, which in real effect is sheer abdication. Inflation rate in the Nigerian economy officially was put at 13.2 percent in August. It stands to reason that it got much worse in September from knock-on effects of the rate hikes and needs be redressed for all Nigerians with clear policy instruments.

    Those were the broad sketches of issues at stake when labour went into crunch negotiations with government on the eve of its threatened industrial action. But rather, labour leaders secured a pact that seemed like cashing out for themselves and eking out sparse crumbs for workers, with nothing afforded for non-unionised Nigerians. Trade-offs that the leaders struck with government to hold their fire include membership from their ranks of a panel to interrogate justifications for the electricity tariff hike over two weeks, during which time the new tariff is being suspended, and another panel to oversight the restoration of domestic refineries over a drawn-out period consequent to an agreement (merely!) on the urgency of increasing local capacity for refining petrol to reduce overdependency on importation and reduce cost, among others. They also extracted a promise from government to facilitate – notice: not immediately effect – removal of tax on minimum wage towards cushioning the more vulnerable (Pray, what about other Nigerians?!); and that government would resuscitate the National Labour Advisory Council (NLAC) to ensure regular engagement between itself, the labour movement and employers (How does this benefit market women and artisans, among others?). Other terms of the agreement include a promise of palliatives to workers – mark it: not all Nigerians – in the in the areas of transport, power, housing, agriculture and humanitarian support. Specific interventions promised include a yet-to-be-specified amount that can be accessed by workers in the Economic Sustainability Programme Intervention Fund; provision of funds on the platform of NLC and TUC for workers’ participation in agricultural ventures; provision of 133 autogas-powered mass transit buses to organised labour (You could ask: where are the labour mass transit buses extracted from fuel price deregulation by previous governments?), and thereafter to states and local governments; plus 10 percent allocation of ongoing government-financed housing programme to workers through NLC and TUC.

    It can be argued that palliatives are inherently cosmetic, and sometimes intended to evade tackling burning issues at the core. There is nothing to suggest the cases in point aren’t designed for that end, which is why it is sad labour leaders got sidetracked from pressing for the core issues they touted at the outset. But it was as well a pyrrhic victory for government because now it is backed up the wall over future increases in fuel price, which should be inevitable with its design of the deregulation policy. While labour runs away to fight another day, it hasn’t come up with a total loss for non-unionised Nigerians.

     

    • Please join me on kayodeidowu.blogspot.be for conversation.

  • Africa can rise from the ashes of the Covid-19 pandemic

    Africa can rise from the ashes of the Covid-19 pandemic

    COVID-19, rather than sounding the death knell for Africa, can herald the birth of the Continent as an economic powerhouse, writes Adam Molai, an African industrialist and founder of TRT Investments which manages a diversified sector portfolio and operations in Nigeria, South Africa, Zimbabwe, Zambia, Mozambique and Botswana, and whose latest interests have seen a foray into the US and European markets.

    While Covid-19 has dealt a blow to the world economy, the portents for Africa are, according to those seemingly in the know, much more ominous.

    The African Development Bank estimates that Africa has lost a “decade of economic growth” due to the Coronavirus pandemic and predicts Africa’s recovery will be long and difficult while the UN Development Programme’s “The socio-economic impact assessment of Covid-19 in South Africa” study projects that South Africa – the continent’s second biggest and most industrialised economy – will take five years to recover.

    From virtually all quarters it is accepted that Africa is back in the red after decades of being in the black.

    This pessimism is however extremely short-sighted.

    Contrary to the prevailing view that the pandemic has dealt a mortal blow to the Continent’s economic prospects and development, I believe COVID-19 could be the birth of Africa as the alternate supply chain for the world.

    What has Covid-19 taught us?

    Beyond providing a reality check of man’s vulnerability to nature, the pandemic has also highlighted the risks of concentrating the source of production in one country. Covid has reinforced the dangers of the world’s over-reliance on one source of production: China.

    As the world looks to create a “new normal”, everyone is searching for alternate sources of production to mitigate their risk.

    And the answer, quite simply, is Africa.

    Possessed of a young population, abundant raw materials, low cost of labour and an ability to scale quickly, Africa is the only viable solution.

    The old corporate truism that people are a company’s most important resource is true too for countries.

    Africa has the world’s youngest population with a growing labour force (Africa is expected to have the world’s largest working-age population of 1.1 billion by 2034)  – a highly valuable asset in an ageing world.

    Add to this the low cost of labour, and you’re starting to complete the puzzle for success.

    From its emergence as the world’s factory with some of the cheapest labour around, CNBC reported in 2017 that Chinese factory workers were being paid average hourly wages of $3.60 in 2016, on par with South Africa which has by far the highest average hourly wages on the continent.

    This gives Africa a crucial competitive edge.

    Thirdly, Africa possesses abundant raw materials – that’s another puzzle piece already in place.

    Finally, technology and globalisation are ensuring that Africa increasingly possesses the ability to scale quickly, completing the final piece of the puzzle.

    So, the idea that Africa can easily become the world’s alternate supply chain is not just navel gazing.

    The biggest impediment to Africa’s rising is not what does exist, it’s what doesn’t – namely institutional capacity and political stability.

    In a nutshell, politics and politicians are what will hold Africa back from becoming the alternate supply chain on the world.

    The politics of the continent is unfortunately highly personalised, focussed on pleasing or meeting the demands of whomever is in power rather than guaranteeing sustainable regulatory certainty.

    When an investor’s greatest fear is what happens when there is a change in government, it is difficult to persuade them to invest in your country for a long time. When an investor is always concerned about the insecurity of politicians, they are not going to be confident in the security of their return on investment despite the great opportunity.

    The second big challenge Africa faces is its lack of strong institutions.

    Strong institutions foster regulatory and policy certainty which ensure seamless political transitions, placing a lot less importance on who is occupying political positions.

    Unfortunately, most governing political parties in Africa end up destroying state institutions rather than strengthening them – thereby weakening confidence in their countries and the Continent.

    This has created a massive trust deficit between ordinary Africans and governments, which has been exacerbated by the Coronavirus pandemic.

    Just as the world has come to the realisation that there is no returning to the old ways of doing business or operating, so too do African politicians need to realise the world they knew is a thing of the past.

    And that Covid-19 provides them with a unique opportunity to set Africa on a path which emulates China’s.

    Rather than focus on how to exploit public resources or create tenderpreneurs (people who use their political connections to secure government contracts for personal advantage), they should open their markets to encourage entrepreneurial activity.

    More open markets – ones that are accessible to all players in the market – will result in increased access to cheap and patient capital – which is crucial for entrepreneurialism to thrive.

    As to that, African governments also need to rethink their over-exaggeration of foreign direct investment as the most important source of growth for African economies. While foreign investment is always welcome, they need to realise it is not the cure-all for Africa’s problems.

    Domestic investment and entrepreneurship are.

    Foreign investors take their cue from locals. Confidence, like Covid-19, is highly infectious – if Africans have confidence in their economies, foreigners will too.

    As for entrepreneurial nous, Africa certainly has no lack of it.

    Entrepreneurs thrive where there is opportunity. Wherever there is adversity, there is opportunity. And Africa – which has unfortunately always been rife with adversity – provides a lot of opportunity for the intrepid.

    What has the Coronavirus pandemic wrought, if not adversity on a global scale?

    It has left those more used to comfort and luxury seeing only a bleak future ahead.

    But for many Africans these are the conditions in which we have learned to thrive.

    Covid-19 has therefore granted Africans a unique opportunity – if politicians come to the party – to harness all the tools at our disposal – our youth and energy, abundant resources, low cost of labour and ability to scale up quickly – to become the world’s alternate source of production.

    And in so doing, we will finally take our place in the sun.

  • 60 events that helped shape Nigeria (1)

    60 events that helped shape Nigeria (1)

    By Igboeli Arinze

    As our darling, great and prosperous nation marks its 60th Anniversary as an independent nation, there are a number of mixed feelings that have greeted October 1st as a day when we broke free of the shackles of colonialism as an independent nation with its destiny in its hands to make manifest. Simply put, our nation Nigeria has failed far more than she has succeeded, and the reasons for such failures have stared us down in the face via a number of events that occurred in our past. These events have given shape to our course on nation-building, and if we agree that we have built wrongly or that the super-structure upon which we have built the fundamentals as a nation upon is faulty then it is deductive to impute such fault lines to these events.

    Let us however note that I am no historian, at least not yet, and though my knowledge of our history as a people is not in hazy straits, I am however keen to draw a line to my readers that all I offer here is a contextual interpretation of such events as I see it, i may be accused of bias, revisionism, idealism, and even the damning tag of a reactionary and every other thing under the sun as I write, much as I do not lay any claims to the infallibility ascribed to popes and a number of Pentecostal pastors by their followers, I will simply urge those who may choose to disagree with me to simply write their own and let posterity judge us all.

    No event has had a greater effect on the Nigerian people and psyche other than the annulment of the June 12, 1993 elections. The event not only trampled on the democratic rights of over 80 million Nigerians who’s votes had spoken in favor of Moshood Kashimawo Olawale Abiola, businessman, publisher and philanthropist who had contested the 1993 elections under the banner of the Social Democratic Party, SDP against a Bashir Tofa, who had also run for that election under the banner of the National Republican Convention, NRC.

    The 1993 election which had been adjudged as the freest and fairest in the annals of the nation’s history was annulled by a clique within the Nigerian Army which seemed not to be comfortable with an Abiola presidency.  It is stated that the clique  had initially raised their opposition to the Abiola candidature but had backpedalled as misleading intelligence reports had wrongly called a Tofa victory. Thus Abiola, a Southerner and Yoruba had created an upset at the elections, the clique who were majorly officers from the Northern Region and included even Christians from the Middlebelt region, mounted pressure on the helmsman then, Ibrahim Babaginda to annul the elections. Babaginda was to  cave in to such pressure, distorting the process and dashing the democratic hopes of the Nigerian people.

    Another event that was to have a great effect on Nigeria was the eventual demise of Chief MKO Abiola. Abiola, who had defied the military and insisted on the actualization of  his June 12 mandate had been incarcerated by the Sani Abacha regime in 1995 following his Epetedo declaration where he had declared himself as President. Following Abacha’s demise, the successor regime led by General Abdulsalami Abubakar did not know what to do with Abiola, who was still in detention then and had insisted on his June 12, 1993 mandate. Entreaties were made by leading dignitaries, both local and international with a number of options and  opinions to Abiola to renounce his mandate as a condition for his freedom, but an Abiola would not budge, refusing to give in to the unlawful annulment, he was to die later in rather worrisome circumstances, a martyr and hero of democracy.

    With his demise, the lid was finally placed on the June 12 mandate. A new process was thus begun, its foundation laid on June 12 with its prevailing sentiments even narrowing the election of a democratically elected president to the narrow origins of Abiola’s ethnic group. Sadly, those who benefited from the June 12 mandate struggle struggled to confine the date to the status of an ordinary day in the Gregorian Calendar, until the coming of President Muhammadu Buhari,who sought to give some justice to the June 12 mandate.

    The coup of January 15, 1966 will also stand out. The coup, ruptured our democratic experiment process, helping to terminate six years of democratic rule. Carried  out by young officers, the putsch was allegedly an attempt to overthrow the then Balewa government and replace it with an Obafemi Awolowo. The coup though a genuine attempt to halt Nigeria from drifting had like a collage of some ugly pictures, such as the killing of leading citizens of the country and senior military officers, thus its most unfortunate tag as an Igbo coup.