The Nation Newspaper

Category: Opinion

  • Crisis in the citadel

    Crisis in the citadel

    By Kayode Robert Idowu

     

    It is trite to say these aren’t the best of times for frontline citadel of learning, the University of Lagos (Unilag). The institution has been in turmoil since the purported removal of Professor Oluwatoyin Ogundipe as vice-chancellor by the governing council led by Dr. Wale Babalakin, which also named sociology Professor Theophilus Soyombo as acting vice-chancellor. As at the close of last week, Soyombo had assumed office; but it was at best a nettle reign considering the majority in the university community refusing to recognise his leadership while affirming residual recognition of Ogundipe as head of the institution.

    Ogundipe’s removal climaxed a long-running crisis of confidence between Babalakin’s council and the university management he headed. The pro-chancellor announced the vice-chancellor’s sack at an emergency meeting of council in Abuja on 12th August, 2020 where he said six members had voted for the removal and four against, with one voting for suspension. But the tally Babalakin announced was at variance with accounts of attendance at that meeting and publicly declared preference of members. Representatives of Unilag senate at the council meeting were reported recounting to their colleagues that 15 members of council were on hand for the parley, as against the 11 votes announced. The council chairman had held Ogundipe guilty of a slew of financial misdeeds and other administrative misconducts ranging from his allegedly spending some N90million on renovating official quarters without council approval to seeking underhand professorial appointment for a non-existent chair (library science) in the institution. But without prejudice to the veracity or otherwise of those allegations, opposition to the professor of botany’s sack derived mainly from the arbitrariness of his removal and questions about due process by council.

    University (Amendment) Acts, 2003 prescribes that when a proposal is made for removing the vice-chancellor, council shall constitute a joint committee with senate comprising three members of council, one of whom shall chair the panel, and two members of senate, “provided that where the ground for removal is infirmity of the body or mind, the council shall seek appropriate medical opinion.” That regulation also stipulates that the panel shall conduct investigation into allegations made against the vice-chancellor and shall report its findings to council. “The council may, where the allegations are proved, remove the vice-chancellor or apply any other disciplinary action it may deem fit and notify the Visitor accordingly, provided that a vice-chancellor who is removed shall have right of appeal to the Visitor,” it further states, adding: “There shall be no sole administration in any Nigerian university. In any case of a vacancy in the office of the vice-chancellor, council shall appoint an acting vice-chancellor on the recommendation of senate.”

    Objections to Ogundipe’s removal stemmed from the procedure adopted being totally at variance with these provisions. Some dons who represented Unilag senate at the 12th August meeting of council reported that the meeting was ostensibly convened to consider the 2020 budget of the institution and ancillary matters referred for the pro-chancellor’s attention; but the agenda was peremptorily changed by Babalakin who brought up the report of a council sub-committee earlier raised to probe university expenditures from 2017. That sub-committee headed by Dr. Saminu Dagari had indicted Ogundipe and many other officials including two of his deputies, a former vice-chancellor, ex-deputy vice-chancellor, a former registrar and two former bursars among many others for gross financial malpractices. The catch is: whereas the Dagari report was taken by council in March 2019, Ogundipe and some other accused officials had filed their defenses, but these have not been taken by council in plenary. Besides, in the drive to foster peace at Unilag, the House of Representatives had interrogated those allegations and cleared the university management last May.

    It was same report, however, the pro-chancellor brought up for council to decide Ogundipe’s fate at the 12th August parley. Unilag senate representatives, Professors Olukemi Odukoya and Bola Oboh recounted that Babalakin asked Ogundipe and deputy vice-chancellor, development services, Professor Folashade Ogunsola, to excuse themselves from the meeting, and he stood his ground against their protestations that they be allowed to defend themselves before their accuser. “The pro-chancellor then asked Dr. Dagari to summarise his findings, which he did and despite the procedural flaw in not asking another panel to look at the allegations and VC’s response, went ahead and called for a vote on the removal of the VC,” the dons said. According to them, the Ministry of Education rep who raised a point of order that the removal of the vice-chancellor was not listed on the agenda was told by Babalakin that he came late and could not alter the proceedings. Eventually, the council chairman called the vote and gave the envisaged verdict.

    Prior to that vote, Babalakin had been in a running battle with Ogundipe over the administration of Unilag. After the initial armistice over the Dagari report, hostilities flared again early this year over the 51st convocation of the institution. Whereas the management publicised that event as scheduled for 9th to 12th March, the pro-chancellor wrote Education Minister Adamu Adamu and the National Universities Commission (NUC) barely 72hours before then to say council approval had not been secured. This resulted in the convocation being suspended till date. Angered by that move, the Unilag chapter of the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) passed a vote of no confidence on Babalakin and declared him persona non grata on campus, such that when council initially scheduled its meeting to hold at the institution, the union warned him against showing up to avoid violence. It was the postponement of that meeting that led to the 12th August meeting in Abuja where Ogundipe was fired.

    Following that council meeting, the university community massed up to reject its verdict. But the pro-chancellor insisted there was no crisis in the institution, saying only a vocal minority who benefitted from Ogundipe’s reign were trying to protect him. On ground though, besides the university senate, all staff unions threatened to withhold recognition for the acting vice-chancellor and demanded dissolution of the Babalakin council. Ogundipe himself claimed that he remained vice-chancellor and filed a legal action against the governing council. But he was obviously on tenuous grounds, having lost council recognition for the power of expenditure. Besides, he was at terminal odds with university registrar, Oladejo Azeez – a principal officer without whose collaboration administering the institution would be impossible. Azeez, as secretary to the governing council, had announced his sack.

    For his part, Soyombo has moved to consolidate his position. On Wednesday, last week, he addressed Unilag community members who gathered before the senate building for his initial appearance as acting vice-chancellor and struck chords obviously aimed at enlisting support – like promising better welfare for Unilag workers. He was on solid ground because the power of expenditure deriving from council approval had relocated to him.

    Meanwhile, it isn’t all insistence on due process within the university community. There is another view, namely that the institution must be built up as an ongoing concern whether or not Ogundipe was rightly removed. Those holding this view argue for institutional sanctity and preservation of university autonomy, by which they mean the clamour for government intervention was totally unwarranted.  They also argued that even if he hadn’t been removed, respect for institution dictated that Ogundipe should step aside on the basis of allegations against him to allow for institutional stability and seamless survival. Soyombo apparently alluded to this thinking when he said he accepted his appointment by council only as a call to service.

    But we must ask if it is valid to expect that something could be built on nothing. If the foundation of institutional continuity is substituting the rule of law with rule of vendetta, the soul of that institution is irremediably poisoned. This can’t be what Unilag deserves, and it is why government must urgently institute a visitation panel.

    Addendum: This piece was written before government raised a visitation panel for Unilag and asked Babalakin and Ogundipe to step aside.

     

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

     

  • The return of History

    The return of History

    Usman Bulama

     

    SIR: It is good news that history is now restored as a subject of study in schools by the federal government after years of thoughtless and unpopular decision of taking off the subject from the school curricular. What is History? And why is it important to merit a study? History is a study of past events. This suffices, except for historians in the academia and elsewhere whose polemical interpretation of the subject serves them well in respect of their intellectual discourses and pedagogical duties.

    History is an old academic discipline that has been studied for ages and that has produced a legion of internationally recognized scholars; with Nigeria having its own share of internationally acclaimed historians. History helps us develop a better understanding of the world and according to a source: you can’t build a framework on which to base your life without understanding how things work in the world. History gives us on elaborate picture of how society, technology and government worked way back, so that we can better understand how it works now.

    In the 70s, history lessons were so engaging, interesting and rewarding. For instance, the history of West Africa was taught and therefore we got to know about the ancient empires of Mali, Ghana, Oyo, Kanem-Borno, the Hausa states and other smaller kingdoms and fiefdoms. In higher secondary school classes as we prepared for the West African School Certificate we were taught: Africa in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries; an interesting chronicle of contemporary African history. We got enlightened on how Africa was colonized, climaxing with the sharing of African territories amongst the colonial powers at the Berlin Conference of 1884. Then, the struggles for independence via the rise of nationalism. African nationalists such as Nkwame Nkurumah, Azikwe, Balewa and Awolowo and a host of other nationalists along with the roles they played in pre and post independent Africa. Elsewhere in Africa, there were the struggles for independence in North Africa (Maghreb) especially Algeria’s bitter war with France over independence; and a little to the east there were the imperial dictatorship of the Mamluks of Egypt, along with the British overloads. This subjugation of Egypt was laid to rest by the free officers’ movement amongst whom was Gamal Abdul Nasser in the 1950s. Down South, there was the Mau-mau crisis in Kenya and the struggles for independence in that country. Further south, the Boer wars of South Africa and the subsequent imposition of Apartheid in South Africa were all subjects of study.

    It is pertinent to say our country needs the study of history so as to make the younger generation know about our so many troubles starting from the struggles for independence, the pioneer political leaders, the first coup and the civil war that followed. Most importantly without knowing the past especially on how the British colonized the country; called it Southern and Northern protectorates and later the now contentious Lugardian 1914 Amalgamation through colonial fiat. The population needs to understand why our current intractable problems emanated from disparate backgrounds and how the patchwork remains a hard task as calls for restructuring and outright secession gets cacophonic by each day.

    The study of history is very important just to be jettisoned by some so called experts just because they don’t fancy the subject.

     

    •Usman Bulama, Mairi Village, Maiduguri.

  • More public libraries please!

    More public libraries please!

    Daniel Ighakpe

     

    SIR: As gateways to knowledge and culture, libraries play a fundamental role in society. The resources and services they offer create opportunities for learning, they support literacy and education, and they help shape the new ideas and perspectives that are central to a creative and innovative society. They also help ensure an authentic record of knowledge created and accumulated by past generations.

    Without libraries, it would be difficult to advance research and human knowledge, or preserve knowledge and heritage for future generations.

    What are some of the challenges facing public libraries in Nigeria today? One problem faced by public libraries in Nigeria today is their scarcity. For example, someone who lives somewhere in FESTAC Town, Lagos would have to travel a long distance to somewhere around Mile 2/Amuwo Odofin, in order to access the services of a public library. This library (The Borno House Library), under the Lagos State Library Board) seems to be the only functioning library in the entire FESTAC/Amuwo Odofin area. So, it will be appreciated if more public libraries are established across various communities/neighbourhoods.

    These public libraries are often unattractive and poorly maintained, while in most cases, the facilities are inadequate. This could be because the library buildings and the systems that sustain them are underfunded, and probably overrun.

    This problem can be tackled by improving funding for the public library system. More public support – such as through the contributions of philanthropists – can be of much benefit in this regard.

    Also, the books in stock at the libraries are usually outdated. It is rare to find new and current books or journals. Also, reference materials, where they exist, are old and dusty. Audio-visual materials are also hard to come by. The quality of manpower is also frequently not up to expectations. These and many other problems are currently plaguing the public library system in Nigeria.

    A functional library is expected to stock all kinds of items that add to knowledge – from books to audio and visual materials, internet access, artefacts that advance the cultural and recreational needs of the society, etc. Libraries are essential not only for community vitality but also for buffering all variety of personal problems – including isolation and loneliness. This is especially so, as the rate of unemployment and poverty in the country continues to rise, leading to idleness, among other ills.

    Therefore, the relevant authorities will do well to establish more public libraries, maintain existing ones, and make our public libraries attractive to meet the informational, educational, and recreational needs of the people.

    • Daniel Ighakpe, FESTAC Town, Lagos.

     

  • Face masks @N20,000: The president must hear this!

    Face masks @N20,000: The president must hear this!

    By Tiko Okoye

    Civic Hive, a nongovernmental organisation (NGO), recently opened a can of worms by accusing the Federal Ministry of Health of engaging in hanky-panky business with regards to recent purchases of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE). A spokesman of the NGO disclosed that going by the information it obtained as at August 1, 2020, from the Nigerian Open Contracting Portal (NOCOPO), the ministry reportedly spent about N860miliion to acquire assorted PPE, including ordinary face masks.

    He further disclosed that “A single entry by the name Marvellous Mike Press Limited was alone awarded 15 out of the 29 contracts (little over 50 percent), amounting to N444.28million.” In addition, the ministry claimed to have spent N37.06million of the amount to acquire 1,808 pieces of ordinary face masks, bringing the unit price to approximately N20,500!

    The imputed purchase price of the ordinary face mask is ridiculously expensive. Here in Abuja at major street intersections, motor parks, markets and departmental stores, such ordinary face masks are sold for N100 to N1,000 depending on the quality, indicating a mark-up of nearly 2,000 percent for the most expensive brand without even taking cognizance of quantity discounts!

    When journalists sought clarifications on the mindboggling allegations from the health ministry, the Director of Information, Media and Publicity, Olujimi Oyetomi, was quoted as saying, “Don’t let us (journalists) reduce our noble profession of journalism to playing mischief. I will not be surprised if you come up with nothing truthful about the so-called expose. You should be able to know fake news.”

    It benumbs the mind why and how most senior government officials just fail to get it. Public distrust of government officials is the major reason why so many people already believe that COVID-19 is a scam designed to corruptly enrich our public officials under the guise of speedily responding a health emergency. Nigerians are sick and tired of wishy-washy responses to allegations of corruption. And contrary to the thinking of Oyetomi, majority of Nigerians would not be surprised if, upon digging deeper, everything is truthful about the expose!

    Oyetomi did a great disservice particularly to Civic Hive and the journalists he spoke to, as well as the rest of us in general, by insinuating that journalists and other stakeholders seeking answers to vexatious questions somehow dishonour their calling by spreading news still in the process of being ascertained as fake or factual. No sir! The situation would have been more appropriately handled by having the ministry counter the allegations by way of displaying verifiable documentary evidence indicating that the ordinary face masks in question were indeed purchased at more reasonable prices. Or is Oyetomi claiming that the ministry never purchased any PPE, including ordinary face masks, as is being alleged?

    And if indeed the ministry contracted to purchase the items in question, documentary evidence should be provided indicating how the contracts were allocated to disprove the allegation that only one supplier cornered as much as 50 percent of the entire order. Is the entity in question the only company in the country that has the technical skills and capacity to produce the required masks? It must also be said that the nobility of the Press is not marked by sweeping rubbish under the carpet or in trumpeting a clichéd esprit de corps. American jurist Justice George Sutherland it was who held that “A free press stands as one of the great interpreters between the government and the people.” This explains why it is universally described as the Fourth Estate of the Realm.

    But that is not to say that the NGO and the concerned pressmen are not without any blame. For instance, it would definitely have been much better if they had followed up by making inquiries at the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC) to obtain the identities of the shareholders and directors of Marvellous Mike Press Limited. Readers may recall how a superintending minister of a cash-cow agency allegedly similarly farmed out the highly lucrative business of supplying diesel to a mistress. It was revealed that normal electricity supply to the headquarters of the agency was continually sabotaged just to ensure the lady kept smiling all the way to the bank for services supposedly rendered in kind to the Oga at the top!

    It goes without saying that tackling allegations such the ones made by Civic Hive has become an endless and ineffective task in this country. Despite the Buhari administration making the war against corruption a cardinal policy plank, coupled with the draconian measures being adopted to curb it, many government officials still wallow in corrupt practices. It is either that corruption is really in our DNA and manifests as a virulent pandemic or that the administration’s policy is not being taken very seriously.

    It must also be said that the general attitude and disposition of the larger society leaves a very bitter taste in the mouth. Whether we support or oppose the investigation of a suspect largely depends on primordial considerations such as political affiliation, creed, tribe and region of origin. It has become the norm that whenever news of the pilfering of stupefying amounts of public funds makes the round, we simply scream “Aaah!” and “Ewooh!” and move on to the next breaking news. At a time when a former leader of a militant group in the Niger Delta referred to the unauthorised N81billion expended by the Interim Management Committee of the Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC) as “mere pocket change,” it is more than likely that many Nigerians would perceive N37million as “mere chicken change” not worth the bother of being talked about!

    The question begging for answers is what then is the point in expending billions of naira every year on institutions such as the Bureau for Public Procurement/Due Process Office when such shenanigans continue to fester unabated? Would it not be more meaningful to shut them down and divert the huge savings to more needy areas of the national economy?

    Be that as it may, public officials and senior civil servants must understand and appreciate the fact that Nigerians are getting smarter by the day. A law such as the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act is not there just for fun. Despite the rather ignoble role oftentimes played by a section of the judiciary, it has become a critical tool in the kit of various advocacy groups to exhume dirty skeletons government officials and politicians do not want the public to know.

    Accountants usually speak about materiality but as far as corruption goes, no amount is too small because as King Solomon – touted as one of the wisest men that ever lived – averred: “It is the little foxes that actually spoil the vine.” The buck now squarely stops at the desk of the Federal Minister of Health, Dr. Osagie Ehanire, to help Nigerians make some sense out of the ongoing nonsense on his turf. Either way, it is a case President Buhari must hear if he desires to keep the anti-corruption crusade on course and thwart the demystification of his credibility and legacy.

    • Okoye, public affairs analyst, wrote from Abuja 08054103468
  • Corruption: Why Buhari deserves credit

    Corruption: Why Buhari deserves credit

    By Vincent Uba

    Corruption is a cankerworm that has eaten very deep into the fabric of Nigeria for decades. It is a disturbing state of affairs that forced the Catholic Bishop Conference of Nigeria, 22 years ago, to compose a prayer caIled Prayer Against Bribery and Corruption in Nigeria, which is said till date, in all Catholic Churches.

    The alarming rate of the corruption scourge in Nigeria has so widely spread to the point of drawing international focus and embarrassing remarks. Recall that a former Prime Minister of Britain once referred to Nigeria as a “fantastically corrupt” county.

    This shameful state of affairs has prompted Nigerians to be treated by other nationals as social pariahs. It has become so entrenched and complicated that fighting it seems like a near impossibility.

    Leaders after leaders were afraid to deal with it, not only because of its complexities and the fear of it fighting back, but also because of getting “in over their heads”. Some leaders came and paid lip service to it, while others came and decided to play to the gallery in the guise of fighting it.

    So, it takes a leader with not only exceptional disciplined qualities, but also one who is determined to dare to embark on the fight against the scourge. That is where President Muhammadu Buhari comes in and stands out as a dogged fighter of the corruption plague.

    Buhari is one of the very few politicians who have all the trappings of leadership qualities of being genuinely sincere about fighting corruption. He is one leader devoid of any stains of corruption hanging on his neck, despite the fact that he had held sensitive positions in the country in time past.

    Recall that he was a Petroleum Minister, a Special Petroleum Task Force chairman and a Military Head of State, all being positions that would have been avenues for him to corruptly enrich himself. A man of decency and forthrightness; he was and still an embodiment of integrity.

    So when he presented himself again for service in 2015 and chose as one his cardinal objectives, to fight and eradicate corruption, most Nigerians took him seriously and overwhelmingly voted for him.

    Since the inception of his administration, the corruption fight has been doggedly pursued to the admiration of Nigerians and international communities who have openly applauded him for the feat he is achieving in tackling corruption in the face of obstacles and challenges.

    Yes, the corruption fight has not been without obstacles and challenges.  Recall that initially, the opposition parties employed different kinds of propaganda machinery to frustrate corruption. They accused the president of being selective in the corruption fight, and also said he was abandoning all other aspects of governance and focusing on corruption alone.

    Again, the beneficiaries of corruption apply different kinds of underhand tactics to suppress the fight, using the proceeds of their corruption to sabotage the institutions and compromise personnel of anti-corruption agencies. Worrisome is the fact that the citizens do not seem to co-operate with and support the government in this fight as they tend to give undue recognition to unscrupulous corrupt rich persons, and most times sympathise with them when they are being prosecuted for corruption.

    Another serious obstacle is the fact that some personnel in the anti-corruption agencies are themselves corrupt, thus making it difficult for them to give what they do not have. Even some people employed or appointed in other government agencies, some of whom were recommended by politicians, cannot be insulated from corruption tendencies.

    Given the aforementioned variables, there is no way the president himself can recognise who is who in terms of being corrupt free because he is not a spirit or God that possesses the  third eye. He needs the co-operation and collaboration of his lieutenants and partners in government to carry on with this battle.

    All in all, despite the obstacles and challenges, President Buhari is very much on course in the fight against corruption. If anything, he has to be applauded for the fact that there is no room for cover-up, no matter whose ox is gored.

    There are no sacred cows, as exemplified by the on-going investigation of Mr. Ibrahim Magu, Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), who is an appointee of the president. In the history of this country, this is the only time the anti-graft and other government agencies are being investigated in contrast to what obtained in the past.

    Exposing corruption is the first step in fighting it and getting the desired result. Look at what was exposed about Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC) and the Ministry of Nigeria Delta Affairs for example.

    Some people are quick to submit and erroneously too, that because these are happening under President Buhari, his government is corrupt or he is not fighting corruption. How false! Have you asked yourself this question: why is it that, for the first time in this country, the NDDC is being put under forensic audit as well as being investigated?

    See the magnitude of the corruption scam exposed in that agency by the current administration. Again, look at the list of persons put out as beneficiaries of the contracts scam, the preponderance of who are members of opposition parties.

    Is it not ironic that the same people accusing this government of being corrupt and inept in the fight against corruption are the ones in the centre of this corruption scam?

    It is obvious that corruption is still with us, the reason the fight against it is still on because you can only fight what is in existence.

    President Buhari is the leader who has the will and commitment to confront corruption frontally. At least, the rate by which corrupt persons loot the treasury has diminished as they are now conscious of the fight and are afraid to engage in it like before.

    Given its endemic nature, it will be uncharitable to expect that corruption will be completely eradicated during Buhari’s administration. What is expected is what we are already seeing happening now, exposing it, investigating and at the same time prosecuting the culprits as can be seen from the looted amount recovered so far.

    What we also expect is for all and sundry to co-operate with and support the government and pray that President Buhari’s successor in 2023 will vigorously continue with the fight. That way, time will definitely come when corruption will drastically go down, if not completely eradicated.

    Uba is the National Coordinator of No Alternative to Buhari-Osinbajo 2019 (NATBO)

  • Bayelsa tribunal verdict evokes judicial anarchy

    Bayelsa tribunal verdict evokes judicial anarchy

    Widespread outrage visited last week’s Bayelsa governorship election tribunal judgment for affronting the law and commonsense. Palladium lends part of his space for DAMILOLA OLALEYE, a legal practitioner, to succinctly x-ray the verdict

    Removal of state governors from office through electoral jurisprudence has become a child’s play in Nigeria. Nothing exemplifies this unwholesome development than the recent ridiculous majority decision of the Bayelsa State Election Petition Tribunal which nullified the election of Governor Duoye Diri upon a belated petition filed by the Advance Nigeria Democratic Party (ANDP), which claimed it was excluded from the 2019 election. Clearly, the majority Judges, the duo of Yunusa Musa, J., and Sikiru Owodunni, J., did a hatched job that is made to look good. The jurisprudential rationale behind the removal of Mr Diri by the majority judgment of the Tribunal defies all known laws and legal procedures. It is not only questionable and unreasonable but shady and disgraceful. It is an outrageous debasement and bastardization of the sacredness of the Judiciary and authority of the Supreme Court.

    Election into the governorship seat of Bayelsa State was held on November 16, 2019. INEC declared and returned Lyon David Pereworimin winner of the election on November 17, 2019. Political parties and persons who felt dissatisfied with the outcome of the election filed petitions against the return and declaration of INEC. While the petitions were pending, the Supreme Court, on February 13, 2020 through a pre-election matter in Suit No. SC/1/2020-Peoples Democratic Party v. Biobarakuma Dei-Eremienyo & 3 Ors., nullified the declaration and return of Lyon and ordered INEC to withdraw his Certificate of Return and that of his deputy and declare the person with the highest number of votes and geographical spread the winner of the election, who happened to be Duoye Diri. By implication, all pending petitions against Lyon automatically abated by the Supreme Court’s unquestionable final pronouncement. They were accordingly withdrawn.

    With the decision of the Supreme Court in Biobarakuma’s case and the refusal of the apex court to review same, one had thought that all issues relating to the 2019 governorship election in Bayelsa State had finally been laid to rest. Of course, there ought to be an end to litigation. It is recalled, it was on account of this case that two foremost Nigerian lawyers, Chief Afe Babalola, SAN and Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, were heavily penalized by the Supreme Court.

    The case before the Tribunal was a pre-election matter regarding the validity or otherwise of the nomination of the candidate of ANDP but was railroaded and transfigured into a post-election matter. The case ought to have been declared dead on arrival at the Tribunal. Most regrettably, the Tribunal unjustifiably assumed jurisdiction over a matter constitutionally reserved for the High Court. The decision of the majority Judges itself constitutes an affront to the pre-eminence of the Supreme Court as the final court in the land, which already affirmed Duoye Diri as the duly elected governor of Bayelsa State. What the majority judgment of the Tribunal did, in removing Governor Diri from office, was simply to undo what the Supreme Court had done. The action of the Tribunal is nothing short of judicial recklessness and insubordination. It is indictable and condemnable as it is capable of introducing chaos and anarchy to administration of justice.

    Some pertinent questions arise here: which election are we really talking about? Was it the November 16, 2019 election or was there another election? It is on record that the petition was filed on February 26, 2020  three whole months after a declaration was made by INEC on the election! It is important to note that ANDP’s petition was not against the declaration and return made by INEC or alleged malpractices at the election or invalid votes cast but against the party’s exclusion from the November 16, 2019 election. Where was ANDP in all those days between November 2019 when it was excluded from the election and February 2020 when it filed its petition? What cause of action was it pursing? When did the cause of action arise? These and other sundry questions render ANDP’s petition and the tribunal’s adjudication over same suspect and disturbing.

    Certain facts about the case remain indisputable. The petitioner, ANDP, sponsored Lucky King-George as its governorship candidate at the 2019 governorship election in Bayelsa State. His name was submitted with that of David Peter Esinkuma as his running mate. INEC found the nomination of King-George defective because, his running mate, Peter, was underage. He was 34 years old as against the constitutional age requirement of 35 years. On September 13, 2019, INEC, in consonance with its constitutional duties, wrote the party, ANDP, drawing its attention to the constitutional affliction of its candidate. INEC’s power to do this is not in doubt. Paragraph 15 (a) of the Third Schedule to the Constitution, empowers it “to organize, undertake and supervise elections.”Having regards to the ordinary lexical meanings of the words used in paragraph 15 (i) of the 3rd Schedule, there is no way INEC could function effectively without being able to carry out rudimentary administrative screening of a candidate’s electoral qualification requirements, in order to satisfy itself that such particulars as presented by aspirants are in conformity with the provisions of the Constitution. This, clearly, was the essence of INEC’s letter of September 13, 2019. It was not a disqualification per se but an administrative step taken by INEC to draw the attention of ANDP to the constitutional deficiency of its candidate.

    ANDP did not take advantage of the benevolence of INEC’s letter of September 13, 2019. It was not until September 21, 2019 that the ANDP forwarded the name of another underage deputy-governorship candidate, one Miss Inowei Janet, as substitute for David Peter. The fact that Janet was underage was not contested. The point duly established before the Tribunal was, as at September 21, 2019, when Miss Janet’s name was submitted as a substitute, it was no longer possible to make a new nomination for the position of the deputy governor. This fact was communicated to ANDP through a letter dated September 27, 2019. INEC wrote to the petitioner stating that the deadline for submission of nominations had expired. INEC’s letter further notified ANDP that in the circumstance, the name and logo of the party would not appear on the ballot. ANDP, upon the receipt of the letter responded, vide another letter dated October 3, 2019 urging INEC to rescind its decision. INEC, appropriately, did not. The election, therefore, held on November 16, 2019, without the logo and the name of the party on the ballot, and rightly so, as there was no valid nomination of a governorship candidate by ANDP.

    From the foregoing, the core issue before the learned Tribunal was the validity or otherwise of ANDP candidate’s nomination: was the candidate of the petitioner validly nominated to contest the Bayelsa State governorship election of November 16, 2019 or not? For some inexplicable but curious reasons, the majority judgment failed to identify this crucial issue. It proceeded on a wrong course, blindly, in my view, by ascribing prominence to ANPP’s allegation of exclusion.  Section 138(1)(d) of the Electoral Act, upon which the petition was predicated permits an election to be questioned on the ground that the petitioner or its candidate was “validly nominated but unlawfully excluded.” Basically, a candidate must be validly nominated in order to be eligible to contest an election. The position of the majority judgment, affirming INEC’s letter of September 13, 2019 as a disqualification of the petitioner’s candidate buttresses this fact. A suit arising therefrom will pass as a pre-election matter within the meaning of Section 285(14) (c) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended by the Fourth Alteration, which defines a pre-election matter as “a political party challenging the actions, decisions, or activities of the Independent National Electoral Commission disqualifying its candidate from participating in an election”.(underlining mine). Such a suit is constitutionally required to be filed within 14 days from accrual of a cause of action, which in this case, ran from September 27, 2019 when ANDP was informed of the fact that its name would not be included in the ballot. Section 258 (9) of the Constitution provides that: “Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, in this constitution, every pre-election matter shall be filed not later than 14 days from the date of the occurrence of event, decision or action complained of in the suit.”

    The learned Tribunal gravely erred in treating ANDP’s case as a post-election matter cognizable by it and also holding that Section 285 (14) is inapplicable. Nothing can be more perverse. Upon the receipt of INEC letter of September 27, 2019, it was open to ANDP to proceed to challenge the decision of INEC on the matter. The party did nothing. Janet’s name was submitted outside the widow of substitution, as demonstrated through INEC’s letter of September 27, 2019.The majority Judges deliberately shut their eyes to the content of the letter and erroneously found that Janet was substituted within time!  In any event, neither David nor Janet was qualified to contest the election, as both were underage.

    The dissenting judgment of Justice Muhammad I Sirajo, J., is commendable. His Lordship came out boldly and resisted the misguided but avoidable errors, questionable postulations and pontification of his learned brothers. His dissenting judgment is an illustration of judicial courage and steadfastness, as against the shenanigan, chicanery and vulnerability or timidity demonstrated by their lordships, the duo of Justices Yunusa Musa and Sikiru. M. Owodunni that delivered the majority judgment. The dissenting judgment appreciated the facts in their right perspectives. It appropriately treated the case as a pre-election matter and correctly held that it was statute-barred.

    The final point to address is the status of the All Progressives Party (APC), in the most unlikely event that a re-run election will hold in Bayelsa State in accordance with the order of the majority judgment. Surely, APC stands no chance of presenting any candidate at the re-run election, its candidate having been disqualified by the Supreme Court. INEC will have to conduct the election with the list of candidates used for the nullified election, excluding the APC candidate. The position of the law remains as it was in Labour Party v. INEC, to the effect that where a general election has been held and a candidate who ought to have been part of the election was unlawfully excluded and the election is subsequently either cancelled by INEC or nullified by an order of a court or tribunal and a re-run is ordered, the re-run refers to that election and does not admit of new candidates since the period for nomination has lapsed.

  • Southeast and its 2023 permutations

    Southeast and its 2023 permutations

    Emmanuel Oladesu

    How feasible is the Igbo’s quest for power shift in 2023? Is the Southeast geo-political zone chasing shadows again? How realistic is the permutation?

    It is a sensitive issue. The competition is stiff. It is because the Presidency is too powerful. Also, its occupants often lack national outlook. The power-loaded centre is cast in nepotism. The component units, in the absence of the federal principle, are paupers under the unitarist structure

    All the six zones, now aptly demarcated into two broad regions, North and South, are scheming for the Presidency. The constitution does not exclude any zone in the scramble for federal power. Zoning may later be predicated on zonal strategies of consultation, dialogue, persuasion and mobilisation.

    The reality is that no zone can solely win the battle for power shift without the involvement of other zones, or at least, two or three zones. The struggle for zoning is also better coordinated within political parties, and not on the platforms of socio-cultural organisations that may not be influential on the major parties.

    Southeast seems to evoke empathy, not because of it’s boring and unsubstantiated claims of political marginalisation; the same tool that had been used by other regions while making the same claims; or its claim that it has not been properly reintegrated in post-civil war period. While the Northwest has seven states and Northeast, Northcentral, Southwest and Southsouth have six states, Southeast has five states.

    Although Southeast has played key roles in mainstream politics in the first, second,  and aborted third republics, and now, the Fourth Republic, majorly as the second fiddle and partner in the Federal Government, the ultimate and highest office has eluded the region.

    On four occasions, the region had gazed at the Presidency in vain. Its strategies, in part, became its albatross. When the late Chief Obafemi Awolowo from the Southwest approached the Southeast Leader, Dr. Nnamidi Azikiwe, for a collaborative effort that would have made him the Prime Minister, with Awolowo serving as minister of finance, Zik turned his back. He preferred an alliance with Bello/Balewa that made him a ceremonial president between 1960 and 1966.

    During the 1966 coup, when the Council of Ministers wanted to suggest Dr. Ozumba Mbadiwe as replacement for Prime Minister, following the gruesome murder of Alhaji Abubakar Tafawa Balewa, the Army Commander, Gen. Thomas Aguiyi-Ironsi, who was from the Southeast, disagreed as he hijacked power for himself.

    In the Second Republic, when Dr. Alex Ekwueme was vice president, there was no assurance that President Sheu Shagari would have handed over power to him. The ruling National Party of Nigeria(NPN) chairman, the late Chief Adisa Akinloye, was already warming up for succession in 1987.

    Although Ekwueme had hoped to bounce back in 1999, the rainbow coalition of Generals, in deference to the hues and cries in the Southwest about the June 12, 1993 presidential election annulment, imposed Gen. Olusegun Obasanjo as its anointed candidate. The move did not placate the progressive bloc in the Southwest. But, Ekwueme was also a major victim.

    Since 1999, Igbo have been clamouring for power shift for equity, fairness and justice. The region parades many competent Nigerians who are eminently qualified to rule Nigeria. But, power, as it is often said, is never served ala carte.

    Does the Southeast has the unity of purpose or cohesion, a factor that is critical to the actualisation of its dream? What is the relative strength and influence of Ndigbo in the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) and the opposition Peoples Democratic Party(PDP)?

    As Igbo continue the campaigns for presidential zoning, APC leading lights are very careful in their reactions and choice of words. Vocal Northerners who belong to the ruling party and are disposed to zoning are only calling for zoning or rotation to the “South,” and not zoning to the “Southeast.”

    It is also a paradox that the PDP, to which majority of Southeasterners belong, is pushing for zoning to the “North,” and may only be willing to zone the vice presidency to the Southeast because of its predictable and enduring support base in the region.

    A major feature of the Southeast struggle is the plan by some organisations domiciled in the zone to raise billions of naira in aid of the “zoning project,” oblivious of the seemingly subsisting 1982 warning by the boisterous Umaru Dikko that the slot is not for sale.

    Indeed, Southwesterners who still covert the highest office are studying the tactics of the Southeast and where the pendulum will swing. The trend of agitations in the Southwest is significantly different from the Southeast pattern. While the Southwest is clamouring for power shift to the larger South, with micro-zoning to the Southwest in mind, the Southeast appears to be frontally clamouring exclusively for power shift to Ndigbo.

    The implication of the seeming hostile or non-inclusive style may be the gradual and inadvertent alienation of potential visceral commitment to the isolated Igbo project by some Southwest and Southsouth leaders.

    Ahead of last year’s presidential election, some Igbo had agitated for power shift, with Obasanjo providing the tonic in his defective motivational speech, which urged them to try their luck. The timing was not right, according to observers. Even, Obasanjo later switched camp to former Vice President Atiku Abubakar from the Northeast.

    If the time is ripe in 2023, as it were, can it be a walk over? So far, there is still a huge gap to fill. Igbo elements are silent on what they want to use power for, if it is zoned to the Southeast. Equity, justice and fairness are advertised as  motives. Indeed, Igbo want to have a sense of belonging with justification. But, what principles and ideology are driving likely Igbo presidential hopefuls? Will a president of Igbo extraction resolve the national question? What will be his position on national unity?

    Also, zoning agitations may be truncated by unforeseen contingencies. For example, Obasanjo from the Southwest got the slot in 1999 because the Southwest/Yoruba made a sound case for compensation for the ‘June 12’ tragedy. In 2007, the North pressed for power shift, claiming that it had been excluded for eight years. The agitation led to the emergence of the late President Umaru Yar’Adua from the Northwest, but as the candidate of the whole North. Yar’Adua was expected to spend two terms of eight years. However, he died in office. Dr. Goodluck Jonathan’s emergence was not based on the agitation for zoning to the Southsouth, but by democratic succession based on the constitution. His elevation was even temporarily blocked by a cabal, which insisted that the North should produce Yar’Adua’s successor. Jonathan survived by the grace of the doctrine of necessity.

    In 2011, a combination of power of incumbency and serious clamour for zoning to the Southsouth kept Dr. Jonathan in office. He later lost power, based on the counter-agitation for zoning to the North as enshrined in the PDP constitution.

    What factors, therefore, may warrant zoning to the Southeast in 2023? The regions needs a strong argument and the aggregate support of other zones. The claim of marginalisation may be off the point. It is a generalised term employed by partisan interest groups to protest real or imagined injustice. It is an outdated borrowed platform for interest articulation. Although Igbo has not produced a civilian president, it has produced a vice president, many key ministers and other top functionaries in the past.

    In the First Republic, the Igbo dominated the Balewa administration. Igbo ministers held powerful portfolios. The President, Dr. Azikiwe, reigned. An Igbo Acting President, Dr. Nwafor Orizu, handed over an Igbo General Officer Commanding, Nigerian Army, Gen. Aguiyi-Ironsi, who abolished federalism and imposed a unitary system.

    Neither is the commitment by Igbo restless youths to secession an added advantage  to the cause of power shift to Igbo. In fact, the consistent call for disintegration of Nigeria by aggrieved Igbo youths may fuel nasty thoughts, particularly the prospect or fear of balkanisation of the country under an Igbo president. The resurrection of the Biafra’s agenda means that Igbo is seeking for an international passport to travel from Onitsha to Asaba, Port-Harcourt, Kogi and Lagos.

    Also, while Igbo have a better chance in the APC, its mind is in the PDP. There are five states in the Southeast. Anambra is  controlled by the All Progressive Grand Alliance (APGA). Enugu, Ebonyi and Abia are PDP states. The only state with an APC governor is Imo. Generally, APC structures are very weak in the Southeast. There is no evidence that a more formidable zonal structure would be built before 2023.

    There is also the perception or danger of the agitation for power shift to Igbo, instead of zoning to the Southeast. If the agitators continue to insist on power shift to Ndigbo, then, Igbos in Delta and Rivers states are qualified to throw their hats into the ring on the platform of zoning. Therefore, the call for an Igbo president will inadvertently translate into a crusade for power to both the Southeast and the Southsouth at the same time.

    Power will not land on the Ndigbo’s palm on a platter of gold. While alive, Chief Bola Ige had called for a working relationship and political understanding between the Southwest and the Southeast. The Northern actors, who acknowledge political harmony between the North and the Southwest for the first time in history, may be disposed to raising a successor from the Southwest in an atmosphere of mutual trust and confidence. Building political calculations on the anticipated ruptured political relationship between the North and the Southwest by Southeasters may be an exercise in futility.

  • Nigeria: Beyond the rhetoric

    Nigeria: Beyond the rhetoric

    Abiodun Komolafe

    Without being unnecessarily immodest, a period of thirty years is enough for an objective assessment of how surefooted or otherwise democracy as a system of government is in any given society. The panoramic overview of performance, functional utility, and societal relevance of the extant Public and Social Institutions, as these relate to the delivery of goods and services and dividends of democracy to the people, still remains the surest way of attaining to a credible barometer or valid and acceptable profile assessment of democratic governance.

    The critical part and key ingredient of any political struggle is that it must have well-defined principles, long-term goals, and a well-grounded ideological leaning upon which the Grundnorm and developmental objectives of the country must be based. Otherwise, any attempt at governance remains a mockery of reality; a humpty dumpty, waiting to collapse or fizzle out. So, in the last thirty-years or thereabouts, what have been our experiences from the country’s diverse attempts at institutionalising democratic ethos; and entrenching democratic values of tolerance, accommodation, issue-based politics, hitch-free succession, political participation, and electioneering processes? Well, an eclectic view of emerging regimes of governments during the period under review will give us a clearer picture of how Nigeria has so far fared.

    Let us start with Ibrahim Babangida, Nigeria’s self-styled military president. The Minna, Niger State-born combatant officer did not nurse any pretence as a military ruler. Needless to repeat also that ‘Maradona’, as he was fondly called, was a child of circumstance who came as a ‘brilliant’ and ambitious soldier but left with a bruised ego and an unfulfilled dream of becoming a civilian president of Nigeria. Babangida came in to rescue and protect the interest of the conniving elites in the country. Unfortunately, the ‘evil genius’ ended up bastardizing Nigeria’s situation the more! The late MKO Abiola was his friend. Of course, that is why a section of Nigerians is insisting that Abiola should not be forgiven for the havoc he joined IBB to wreak. After all, for the duo, it is just like a fortuitous power game, or calculated gamble, which went sideways! And, by the time the former military ruler would step aside in 1993, democratic practice in Nigeria had laid prostrate. It was only waiting to be uprooted.

    Realising that there was a vacuum in the topmost leadership structure of the country, a cross-section of the ‘owners of Nigeria’ presented Olusegun Obasanjo, a former military ruler with a Messianic façade, as the preferred choice. Though what happened or did not happen thereafter is a matter for another day, Obasanjo became Nigeria’s president only to end up imposing his subtle ‘messianic dictatorial imprimatur’ on the sands of time and governance in Nigeria. Put succinctly, he came to complete the ruination of the country’s public administration, which he left-off, few years earlier. He succeeded! Obasanjo was highly self-opinionated and intolerant. He was not a team player! In fact, the retired General was everything but a democrat! Under his watch, the civil service lost the vision and the essence of an ideal bureaucracy as espoused by Max Weber. Corruption became endemic; and most choice houses in Abuja, Nigeria’s Seat of Power, belonged to civil servants whose legitimate salaries could not even pay the requisite rents for apartments in those choice houses. The fight against corruption under Obasanjo remains what it is: a selective attack on some greedy and corrupt Nigerians whose economic interests and socio-political agenda did not align with those of the General. His style of administration typified the tyrannical regime of despots and painted, in bold relief, the thoughts and meditations of Max Weber on the Limitations of Democracy. By the time Obasanjo was leaving office, following a botched third-term bid, the uprooted and battered democratic system in Nigeria had taken flight.

    Although, Goodluck Jonathan did not predetermine to ruin Nigeria, he was practically not man enough to effect any meaningful positive change either. He was a reluctant contestant who, against his desire or ambition, was persuaded become president in 2009; and he became one! Jonathan tried to please everybody but, as fate would have it, he ended up displeasing everybody; and the national economy, especially, was in disarray! A substantial amount of money was thrown at the problem of insecurity. Unfortunately, it escalated! Security arrangements were designed to fail; and they failed woefully! Some quarters were even of the opinion that some smart guys in the military industrial complex capitalized on Ebele’s alleged cluelessness to turn the national misfortune into their own personal fortune.  Human lives depreciated in value. Social tension and incohesion became the order of the day. Sad that that administration was clueless to the end; and the country is yet to recover from the shock!

    Then entered Muhammadu Buhari who, after several attempts, eventually had his way! Yes! Nigerians love Buhari, our president. We want him to succeed and be remembered, long after he will have left Abuja, with his ‘reputation of integrity’ for Daura, his country home. The raison dètre for his election and the collective mandate given to him by Nigerians is for him to fix the country. Whatever may be the conceptual limitations of the understanding of democratic principles in the country, the system we run, and how we run it predisposes common people to hunger, poverty, deprivation, frustration, anger, and anxiety. It is therefore not for him to be manufacturing excuses and lame-footed explanations as to why things are not working. After all, Nigerians knew that the country wasn’t working before Jonathan was sent packing with the thumb. The retired General may be doing his best, but, as things stand, events, especially, in the last one year have not only shown that his best is not giving us anything near the least of our expectations, it has also reduced Nigeria to an object of scorn and ridicule, snowballing into a near ‘pariah status’ among the comity of nations.

    Nigerians want to know where this government is taking the country. Since independence, nothing seems to be on good footing. No policy works as anticipated; development targets proposed were never met. Yet, governments come and go, life goes on! For the country not to implode this time, urgent steps must be taken to address salient socio-political-cum-economic issues of hunger, safety and social integrations.

    All eyes are on the forthcoming Edo and Ondo States’ governorship elections!

    May the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world, grant us peace in Nigeria!

     

  • Is the Police still our friend?

    Is the Police still our friend?

    Igboeli Arinze

    Recently, it seems like the Nigerian police has been conducting secretly a war against a group of people. These people are not terrorists, nor are they members of the mafia, cutthroats, thieves and economic saboteurs, no! The police is busy fighting a group of people, who are innocent and nearly harmless, who are not members of the class of criminals mentioned above.

    The police is at war with the ordinary Nigerian citizen; this institution, which bears the words of ” To serve and to protect” as its watchwords appears to have ditched such an idea in order to carry out this war, leaving in its trail, sorrow, tears and blood!

    On a daily basis, Nigerians wake up to now regulalry read about the demise of its citizenry, not in the hands of ISWAP, nor to the devices of villains but to the same people who are meant to protect them! Although this has been happening in the time past, these killings have become rampant and leave many with much to worry about.

    Far from the outcry which greets such brutality in its wake, the perpetrators of such extra-judicial killings have largely gone scot free, without punishment, these killers masquerading as officers are dismissed from the force and charged to court, with the trials stretching over the years. What baffles me the most, is the way and manner in which these crimes are committed; it is usually done under the least form of provocation from the victims, it is also not the case of an accidental discharge, which can be blamed more on the weapon, or negligence than on the bearer of such a weapon. On most occassions, the killings occur at points of extortion under the guise of the numerous checkpoints set up to stop and search. These checkpoints or stop and search points are nothing but extortion points in which the police pretend to be carrying out stop and search activities but in the real sense use such avenues to collect a toll from operators of public transport services as well as ordinary Nigerian citizens.

    At these checkpoints, a Nigerian citizen can be harassed for owning an expensive phone, having in his possession a laptop or because he or she is dressed in a gaudy manner! His case may be worse if he is spotting a dreadlock or some sort of appurtenance like an earring. In these scenarios painted, the Nigerian police officer pretends to possess a number of precognition powers, he immediately brands you as a Yahoo boy or a cultist, he needs no evidence further, he also becomes prosecutor and judge, sometimes you are allowed to defend yourself, but it is all for nothing, you are advised to “settle”, which they say is for your own good or you will be transferred to the station.

    It is at this point that numerous souls have lost their lives, most times because these persons refuse to play ball, insisting on their rights, the policeman becomes agitated, remember he is poorly trained and the system we also live in has failed to hold many of his likes to account, ours is one where life is short, nasty and brutish and no one seems to care. Such a system goads him into such an act and pulling the trigger one is likely to join his ancestors on short notice.

    The Federal Special Anti Robbery Squad, FSARS is chief culprit. SARS has become a law unto itself, operating beyond the confines of constitutional law and meting out to the ordinary citizen unknown scales of bestiality and brutality.

    Stories of how individuals were unlawfully beaten, put in jail and even murdered in cold blood will anger any citizen, yet they still operate without any forms of checks on them. This is indeed saddening!

    SARS has such a reputation that Nigerians now joke that should one be fleeing from robbers and encounter officers of SARS it would be better to run back to the robbers than SARS! Another one goes as this, ” May you not encounter SARS as you go about your business today, this is an underated prayer”

    The authorities, particularly the leadership of the Nigerian Police Force must be charged to put a stop to such killings of innocent citizens. No nation, except banana republics can afford to watch those charged with the sacrosanct order.of protecting its citizens turn against the same citizenry for no just cause. The Inspector General of Police, Mohammed Adamu must go beyond the solution of stun guns as his predecessor proferred during his tenure, rather we must insist that officers are properly trained and educated to understand the demands of their duties. Also, asides from dismissing officers, one thinks that holding commanders and DPO’s whose officers misbehave responsible for such gory events should do more to check these killings too.

     

  • Are Nigerian political parties structural flawed for democratic processes?

    Are Nigerian political parties structural flawed for democratic processes?

    Nnedinso Ogaziechi

     

    For the political philosophers that fashioned the democratic system of government, they believed that the system is best suited for the people of any geographic space as a government of the people by the people and for the people. It is planned for the people to, through electoral processes elect their leaders both for the executive and legislative positions. In this way, the people are viewed as the mandate givers.

    However, the history of democracy in most of Africa seems flawed in most instances as the systemic neo-imperialism often sip into the political space. What we then have is a somewhat wobbly democracy that in most countries is controlled solely by either families or the political elite. In a country like Nigeria, the political elite is so entrenched that they almost own the electoral processes starting from the political party structures that ought to be the valid vehicle through which candidates emerge to contest for elective offices.

    The result of the influence of some ‘powerful’ party members across party lines then often make elections less democratic. The influence of godfathers, party chieftains and party financiers has greatly affected the Nigerian political space very negatively and the whole country reels from the effects thereof.

    The Roundtable Conversation this week involved an Professor of Structural Engineering at the University of Illinois, Chicago and a one-time Senatorial aspirant in Anambra state, Gene Nonso Mojekwu. Even though Nigeria seems not to practice full representative democracy in terms of allowing pace for women, youths and the minority tribes, he believes that the idea of political exclusion is not bought by every male in the society even though there is a seeming monopoly of the political space by the men. To him, the entire male segment of our population cannot be painted with the same brush even though certain actions of the male politicians seem to reinforce that feeling.

    To him, there is no political Eldorado for women in any continent including the United States, however, the only difference with the United States is that there is enough space for political growth of both genders in a very inclusive way. The reason is that personal effort for inclusion according to Mojekwu is often rewarded with an opening for entrance. To him, the political success of an Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a former waitress now the youngest woman elected to US Congress after defeating a ten-term Democratic Party Chair, the then 2018 incumbent, Joe Crowley is very remarkable. Her victory was possible because of the structure of party politics in the United States.

    She won the election at the age of 29, is of Hispanic descent and a woman. She is the youngest woman ever to serve in the United States Congress. She did not have to be selected by the political party as a favour by ‘Party Chieftains’  as often is the case in Nigeria. Again, she was not nominated as a token for the women. She worked her way through to success but the door was open for her. Mojekwu believes that all the excluded parties in the Nigerian political space, women, youths and minorities can begin to re-strategize because their world view is different from the current political elite.

    The political party operations in Nigeria in his view seem very undemocratic as there are the same old politicians recycling themselves and they are quite aged and almost out of tune with modern political economies across the globe. In his view, if the Nigerian youths are to step up and step into the political space, there would be more room for equity because the modern world takes cognizance of competences devoid of gender tags. He however believes that the younger people seem unprepared to step into the political space given the apathy they often show.

    In a way, Mojekwu believes that given the situation in the country, a no experience for the youths seems better than having a bad experience under the old politicians. He believes the youths must begin to chart a course that can give them seats at the political table. Their inexperience notwithstanding, they cannot do worse than we already see with the old politicians. The rise of the youths would bring equity in the political space.

    A major flaw in the structure of the Nigerian political space he says is the fact that instead of the people, the owners and beneficiaries of the democratic system, a few political leaders have and enjoy the monopoly of nominating candidates at party primaries and in such an instance, their anointing often goes to the highest bidder in an environment where election funds are neither monitored no barricades set.

    Prof. Mojekwu believes that elections in functional democracies are the monopoly of the masses but in Nigeria, once the primaries are flawed, the whole process gets ruined. It is the structure of our brand of democracy that is not really open to new entrants and as such the tiny percentage of ‘political leaders and financiers’ often arrogate to themselves the selection process at primary elections and in doing so, disenfranchise even better and more prepared candidates.

    In climes where the people and not a few people decide the wrong use of party machinery, the people have a wider choice and candidates sell themselves to the people and are elected on their personal merit and not on imposed or proxy qualifications. He believes that a Kamala Harris despite her qualifications is today a Vice-Presidential candidate because the democratic party is playing on her mass appeal and mass hunger for certain political trajectory. The Nigerian political parties need to listen to the people and give them what they demand for democracy to successfully thrive.

    He believes the political party structure and electoral processes in Nigeria need to change to allow candidates access to the people and not a few party leaders who are often far from altruistic in their affairs. Let candidates get through and talk to the people rather than being carried to electoral victory by party leaderships. Raising the hands of candidates and handing them a party flag is not all there is to electoral processes. The people must be free to choose and party primaries must not be sold surreptitiously through party delegates and all other forms of manipulations.

    Mojekwu believes the solution to the present situation would be a more open political party system that gives all aspirants unfettered room to reach out to the people and be accepted or rejected on their merit. The youths must step in on their own without an apprenticeship period with the old guards that might end up corrupting them, better learn on the job than learn from bad workmen. There must be a rise in individuals that are more accepting of the diversity of the nation and focused on the value of individual candidates devoid of regional tags. A non-violent revolution can ease out the dysfunctional system and open up the Nigerian political space for better and more competent leaders at all levels. But again, candidates must step up and work their way through the party machinery and be of admirable private and professional pedigree. Leadership demands those.

    Maria Mbakwe, a business woman and the People’s Democratic Party Woman leader in Imo state believes that there are too many odds against inclusiveness in Nigerian political parties but she as a woman party leader has decided to adopt certain strategies to include more women in partisan politics. As a beneficiary of another mentorship by a woman who encouraged her to be more actively partisan, she started as a Counselor in her Ifakala ward.

    However, from councillorship, she rose through the ranks to the state women leader and has been in the vanguard of pulling more interested women into the party executive and in her almost a decade as a woman leader, she has tried to come around the obstacles that prevent many women from party politics. She adopted the community advocacy style where she and her team across the state re-orientate women towards being more active politically and that has resulted in more women joining political parties and seeking more executive positions at the party congresses.

    She still sees financial muscle as one of the oppressive tools men have against the less economically strong women and youth but she believes that with some plans she is not ready to release yet for strategic reasons, the male politicians might just be doing a rethink of their own strategies because the gender parity would be more productively viable for the people.

    To her, it is time for women to rally around each other and meet male politicians at the barricade given the short end of the stick the men have for long handed the women in Nigeria. The use of violence at elections often rob women politicians of victory and in her words, she has introduced the PDP Babes – a group of young women across the state being  groomed as an answer to the male youth thuggery. To her, women too can raise modern day amazons to protect their votes as the men have sworn to always use violence to instigate flawed electoral victories.

    The idea of using financial might to edge out the women might just be a thing of the past because the women who form majority of the voters have decided to look inwards for competent women to give the men a run for their money. To her, when the voting processes at the primary and general elections are free and fair, more women would definitely win elections and have more voice and capacity to rescue the state and national economies because women actually wear the shoes and know where the shoe of bad governance pinches.

    In all, both Mojekwu and Mbakwe are hinging the progress of our democracy on improved party structures that give the power to the people as a strong democratic principle.