The Nation Newspaper

Category: Opinion

  • Anti-corruption war: Repeal, re-enact EFCC Act

    Dear President Buhari,

    I hope this letter finds you well. First, let me congratulate you on your recent election for another four-year term. Second, because you promised to fight corruption, the central theme of your campaign/presidency, I will like to offer my unsolicited advice on how you can effectively achieve your most important objective—tackling corruption.

    Mr. President, what I am proposing is short of what I had previously proposed, a specialized tribunal on corruption. My recommendations herein, however, call for concurrently repealing and re-enacting our existing anti-corruption laws, particularly the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission Establishment Act (2004) (“the EFCC Act”); this way, your administration can better tackle the issue of corruption. If you want to go big, however, you should seriously consider creating a specialized anti-corruption tribunal, such as the Philippines’ Sandiganbayan, the oldest specialised anti-corruption court in the world.

    In a nutshell, my recommendations are as follows:

    1. Bifurcate existing statutory powers—investigative and prosecutorial—under the EFCC Act.
    2. Statutorily delegate the Ministry of Justice, or a special prosecution department, to prosecute all matters investigated by the EFCC.
    3. Statutorily delegate the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (“the EFCC”) as an investigative body only.
    4. Statutorily create an equitable sharing formula that allows the EFCC to keep parts of recovered loot.
    5. Strengthening other anti-bribery and anti-corruption (ABAC) laws

    Let me begin by unambiguously stating that the EFCC Act should be amended in a way that strips it of its prosecutorial power, consequentially making the EFCC, which derives its statutory power from the EFCC Act, an investigative body only.

    In practice, the EFCC should primarily be involved in gathering evidence on serious financial crimes, bribery, and political corruption; once it has completed its investigation, then it should send its evidence to the Ministry of Justice, which should statutorily function as a prosecutorial body on matters investigated by the EFCC, and career prosecutors, with the help of external lawyers (usually senior lawyers), can make a determination as to whether the case should be prosecuted.

    Right now, under the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission Establishment Act (2004), the enabling act that established the EFCC, the EFCC has both the investigative and prosecutorial powers. It is wrong.

    If I were you, Mr. President, and as stated in paragraph 2 of this letter, I will concurrently propose a repeal and re-enactment of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) Act, bifurcating its original statutory obligations. The overall objective of this proposal is to bring the EFCC into compliance with the global best practices.

    Mr. President, because you are interested in creating strong institutions, this proposal, if implemented, will insulate our institutions from undue, or/and criminal, influence from bad actors. In a constitutional democracy, the concentration of too much power in a bureaucratic body can lead to abuse of power and bureaucratic inefficiency, which is why it is imperative that you throw your support behind this proposal. My proposal will invariably create extra layers of protection, sort of checks and balances, between the EFCC and the Ministry of Justice, helping both institutions to effectively work collaboratively.

    Mr. President, the EFCC, like the FBI, its counterpart in the United States of America, does not prosecute cases. Its statutory mandate is clear: Investigate cases. Once the FBI is done with its investigation, it sends its evidence to the Department of Justice, and career prosecutors will bring appropriate charges against those who have been investigated for serious crimes. That is how it done in most countries.

    Because Nigeria is still a nascent democracy, and considering the fact that the EFCC had lost more cases than it had won, particularly PEP cases, reform-minded people should be championing a proposal that is likely to strengthen our institutions. And extricating the prosecutorial power of the EFCC, as recommended above, is a good step in the right direction.

    Alternatively, Mr. President, you can propose a special prosecution department, operating outside of the EFCC, to prosecute matters arising from the EFCC’s investigations; after all, The Nigerian Financial Intelligence Unit (NFIU), which was once domiciled under the EFCC, is now an independent agency, after the Egmont Group suspended Nigeria from the prestigious organization.

    Mr. President, we do not need another external threats before we do the right thing, and I am hoping that you will seriously study my recommendations.

    Mr. President, I did not reach this conclusion with levity, for I had given it a serious thought, and comparatively examined my recommendations. There is no doubt in my mind that we need a centralized and independent prosecutorial body to prosecute matters investigated by the EFCC.

    Furthermore, because the EFCC prosecutes Politically-Exposed Persons (PEPs) and non-PEPs cases, and because observers have consistently raised serious questions concerning its lackadaisical and lackluster prosecution of PEP cases, it is more imperative that an independent prosecutorial body, comprising of disinterested prosecutors/reputable private lawyers, takes the lead in handling PEP cases.

    These revered professionals will be acting as special prosecutors, and their decisions won’t be influenced by political appointees, for a special clause will also be included in its enabling statute that criminalizes undue/corrupt influence. To strengthen the rule of law, we must include extra layers of protection in our ABAC laws, insulating them from unintended influence from corrupt actors.

    Mr. President, legitimate questions have also been raised as to whether the EFCC can keep parts of the recovered loot. This question is not difficult to answer, from a comparative point of view. My guiding principle is to always look at the global best practices. In light of that, I can summarily say that the EFCC should be allowed to keep parts of the recovered loot.

    Right now, the EFCC is underfunded, even though it carries out one of the most important investigations in Nigeria. That is not good.

    Mr. President, because you have consistently talked about seriously fighting corruption, and I want to give you the benefit of the doubt, then you should not only adequately fund the EFCC, for you should also statutorily create an equitable sharing formula program. This would ensure that the EFCC gets a piece of the pie, which it can then use to undertake other important obligations.

    If our legislative drafters need some guidance on how to draft an effective equitable sharing formula, they should peruse the United States’ equitable sharing program (21 U.S.C. § 881, 18 U.S.C. § 981, and 19 U.S.C. § 1616a), the gold standard in this area.

    A typical sharing formula will look like this: 70 percent to the federation account, 20 percent to the prosecuting agency, and 10 percent to the investigating agency. Of course, this is just a hypothetical breakdown, and I reasonably expect our legislative drafters to iron out technical details that involve difficult issues of law in a proposed legislation.

    Mr. President, at a time when similarly situated countries are strengthening ABAC laws, Nigeria, given her history of romancing with corruption, must continue to strengthen our domestic ABAC laws in conformity with the global best practices.

    Mr. President, given your pedigree, you are better positioned to tackle the issue of corruption, and I am hoping that you will avail yourself to pragmatic solutions that are capable of further strengthening our institutions.

    Mr. President, let me remind you that the strengthening of our institutions will preserve our countries for generations to come, and I want you to always remember that. One day, you will die. One day, I will die. And our institutions will survive all of us. If we don’t strengthen our institutions, bad actors will continue to undermine them, and future generations, particular poor people, will bear the brunt of corruption.

    Mr. President, during the last presidential election, my fellow Nigerians constitutionally empowered you, hoping that you will use the instruments of the state power to fix these anomalies in our porous system. I am cautiously optimistic that you won’t disappoint us. Let me say this, though: If you strengthen our institutions, it will last for centuries, if not in perpetuity.

    Mr. President, because democracy is a game of number, which you have in your favor, you can now use your powerful office to implement changes that will perpetually strengthen our institutions.

    Mr. President, in your second term, which begins on May 29, 2019, your party, the All Progressives Congress (“APC”), will control the most important branch in our constitutional democracy—the legislative branch of government—and I am humbly lobbying you to use your unique position to convince lawmakers to codify the most stringent ABAC law in our hemisphere, if not in the world. It is doable, Mr. President, if the political will is there. Thankfully, you have enough political capital to embark on this mission—tackling corruption.

    Mr. President, if you need model ABAC laws, there are many out there, and here are some examples: In the United States of America, we have “the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO Act”) and the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977 (“FCPA Act”). Interestingly, these provisions, particularly the FCPA also covers corruption/bribery perpetuated by American entities that operate in foreign territories.

    Unsurprisingly, former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, your rival in the last presidential election, and his 4th wife, Jennifer Douglas Abubakar, were investigated by the United States Senate under the FCPA Act.

    The United States is not alone.

    “The Bribery Act of 2010 (“the Bribery Act”),” the most stringent anti-corruption law in the world, was codified by the Parliament of the United Kingdom. Unsurprisingly, former Governor James Ibori was prosecuted by the British government under this statutory provision.

    Recently, Italy, Malaysia, and Rwanda made significant changes to their ABAC laws, too, but they didn’t include more punitive provisions as contained in that of the United States and the United Kingdom. Mr. President, even at that, all these statutes are stronger than what we currently have in Nigeria.

    Mr. President, if you were to adopt my recommendations, I humbly ask that you follow the guidance in the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention, the FCPA, and the Bribery Act. By so doing, and in addition to fighting corruption, foreign investors will have more confidence in our legal system.

    You may not know this, Mr. President, but you are revered on the global scene as a man who is capable of fighting corruption in a country where corruption had brought, and continues to bring, untold hardship on millions of ordinary Nigerians.

    Mr. President, using your bully pulpit, you have to convince old and newly elected lawmakers that, if they don’t pass stringent ABAC laws, millions of people will continue to suffer. And remind them that, when money meant for constructing local hospitals is siphoned by bad actors, millions of people are denied access to healthcare, and the consequences are dire.

    Finally, Mr. President, time is of the essence. Nigerians cannot wait any longer, and they are counting on you to demonstrate some badly needed leadership that is required to steer Nigeria to its promised land. I wish you all the best.

  • In Nigeria, election is warfare!

    Let’s be honest with ourselves, in our country election is warfare! It is not even the equivalent of war but real war, period! It is a savage, mortal combat, a blood spot where gladiators and their loyal warriors are armed to the teeth with physical weapons…guns, machetes, knives, even cudgels and blunt weapons to bludgeon their opponents, not forgetting the spiritual and metaphysical ones (charms, amulets, incantations) which are freely employed alongside various battle tactics, all for the accomplishment of the ultimate “strategic objective” of capturing political power.

    That’s right, capturing power…not winning it in a fair contest…is the essence of political contestation in our country. Anybody who believes the contrary is either being plainly mischievous or is living in a fool’s paradise, an Orwellian sugar-candy mountain of his own creation, so unreal to those of us who live here and witness the sheer murderous violence that elections have become.

    The evidences of elections as warfare are there on the ground and in plain view for all to see. I couldn’t help but laugh aloud when the ambassador of one of the major Western nations in Abuja declared to Nigerians that election is not warfare. I must say that he was neither being mischievous in that statement nor can anyone accuse him of living in a fool’s paradise, after all elections are always peaceful in his own country. He was merely being diplomatic, i.e., saying the nastiest things in the nicest way as diplomats are wont to do. At another level, the statement could be seen as exhortatory, urging Nigerians to see electioneering not as a savage contest but rather as a civilized method for the mass of the people to participate in deciding who governs their country.

    In a purely technical sense, the 2019 general elections may be ranked as the best so far, in terms of its meticulous organization and implementation, though not without considerable hiccups, shortcomings and attendant violence. The clever deployment of modern ICT tools throughout the entire electioneering process, from voter registration, voter sensitization, through to the actual voting, collation, recording, announcement and display of the results, is unrivalled in the annals of election administration in Nigeria. Without question, it must also rank as one of the most violent and by far the most disrupted elections in recent memory. The numerous incidences of murder of politicians, security personnel, party agents, electoral officials and even ordinary Nigerians; the forcible kidnapping of politicians, INEC staff and security agents; the burning down of INEC offices and facilities in different places before and during the voting and collation exercises; the massive threats of violence against, harassment and physical intimidation, of regular INEC and ad hoc staff, which forced many collation officials to hurriedly announce results under duress while looking down the barrel of guns wielded by paid political thugs, are so mind-boggling they shouldn’t be spoken of in the 21st century. If judged by the sheer naked display of banditry and hooliganism that marred the voting and collation processes in many parts of the country, there is no doubt the 2019 will rank as the most uncivil.

    Elections have always been a zero-sum contest since independence when Nigerians themselves started conducting it. The national general elections of 1964 and the Western Region elections of October 1965 were so badly riddled with irregularities that caused Nigeria to spin out of control until the military struck in January 1966 to put an end to a democracy that had gone totally berserk. Elections since then have been marred by contrived irregularities, violence, mayhem, kidnapping, murder and arson because of the incurable desperation of politicians for office. President Olusegun Obasanjo in a Freudian slip in 2007 famously warned that the general elections of that year were going to be “a do-or-die affair”. And they truly were as he went on to superintend the greatest electoral robbery that even its principal beneficiary, President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, had to openly own up to the grand heist.

    What is it that makes electoral contests that are conducted so easily and peacefully in other climes such a zero-sum contest in Nigeria? It is simple: political office gives unrestricted access to power and unearned wealth for self, family and cronies. The late Nigerian political scientist, Claude Ake, in his book, Democracy and Development in Africa, reflected the reality that holding power is everything as it guarantees unrestricted access to unearned wealth from the common patrimony. According to him, it is also the main guarantor to personal security and well-being, and that those outside the power loop cannot afford to take both their personal safety and even their entrepreneurial activities for granted. For the power elite, entrepreneurial engagement is a distraction since wealth can be made easily from the national treasury. There is so much money to be made just by holding a position of power; hence great premium is placed on acquisition and retention of state power!

    It is not surprising that because such huge premium is placed on acquisition and retention of state power, “political competition tends to assume the character of warfare”. The struggle for power is often so intense that every other activity pales into insignificance by comparison. For Nigerian politicians and office seekers, the maxim is: winning isn’t everything, it’s the only thing! This desperation for electoral victory is certainly at the root of the series of inconclusive elections, as well as the associated crimes and criminality.

    Something urgently needs to be done to make elections less violent and less traumatic for Nigerians. It is time for INEC to think outside the box and design an entirely novel, innovative, much more efficient and less costly electoral administration for the country. And this should not be difficult, given the calibre of scholars and other experienced Nigerians in INEC. Ekiti State governor, Dr. Kayode Fayemi after casting his vote for the March 9 state House of Assembly elections, advised INEC to devise a new system that will allow all elections to be held in one day through the use of electronic voting that will make the exercise less stressful, save time and reduce needless paper work and logistics. INEC should take this suggestion very seriously. The federal government and the National Assembly should get on board as a matter of urgency. It is not beyond INEC to design such a template that will be effective and efficient. It’s time we gave it a try.  It is not expected to be perfect at first try, but we will continue to improve on it until such a time electronic voting would be so perfected and become a routine activity. Nigerians must be saved from the evil machinations of political desperadoes and protected from the sheer drudgery and trauma that elections have become. It’s time to do something new. We are in the digital age and cannot escape it. INEC must ignore the naysayers who argue that we are not ripe or sophisticated enough for e-voting. The journey of a thousand miles must begin with the first tentative steps away from home. Let INEC not be shy of taking these first steps.

     

    • Prof Fawole writes from Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife.

  • On ASUU strike and truce with FG

    After more than three months away from work the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASSU) has suspended its industrial action and returned to work. This is consequent upon a deal between the union and the Federal Government to, among other details, pay some N25 billion arrears of earned academic allowances and another N25 billion to be paid between April and May for the revitalization of the universities. Since 2009, the universities have periodically been on strike. This latest deal will not foreclose another strike or two in the near future. In fact, the 2019 elections may have forced the government to bend backward to reach an agreement with ASUU. This government has no one in their ranks to inspire that new deal that would move education forward in Nigeria. Until people who value education comes into office, every deal such as the one reached recently is a waste of time.

    Since the beginning of this decade, allocation to the education sector has remained below 10% of budget except in 2013 when it was 11.49%. Prominent among the demands of ASUU before the latest strike was the funding of the universities, they had demanded for the expenditure of N1.1 trillion to prevent the collapse of the tertiary level of education. Given the huge financial outlay, one would have thought that the Federal Government would propose a staggered payment of the sum over a period of five years starting from 2020 when the Federal Government would have removed subsidy on petrol to fund its payment. Despite the efforts of bodies like TETFUND in funding projects, many of our public universities have remained glorified secondary schools. Even now, the supply of funds from that source is being constrained by bureaucracy, which seems to indicate that the political class is totally against quality education or human capital development in the country. To that extent, strikes must be pursed to the logical end.

    • From Orfegah Jerry Jen

     

  • Newspaper stands as informal lecture halls

    Newspaper stands can be described as informal lecture halls where many readers gather on daily basis to acquire education. Great thanks to journalists, vendors, writers, publishers and publishing companies who make this possible.

    Reading newspaper help to nurture and develop the minds, ideas, knowledge, habits, value and attitudes of those who value reading them. Some of the strategic newsstands in Anambra State include the one at the Old Market Road in Onitsha near the post office, newspaper stands near Eke Awka and Urban Mass Transit depot in Awka. Others include one near Foot Bridge at ACO Estate Lugbe-Abuja, Douglas Road Owerri and at ACB lane near Ekwulobia Motor Park in Anambra State. There is another near the pedestrian bridge at UNIZIK Temporary site junction in Awka and at Aroma junction also in Awka, among many others across the country.

    Newspaper has the power to trigger public discussion and influence public opinion. In Nigeria today, you see many people at the newspaper stands reading newspapers. It is another forum to discuss the situation of our economy, the politics of Nigeria, and the business of the day. The habit is on daily basis as they gather at the newsstands to know the latest happening of the day. It is an opportunity for those who don’t have formal education to have informal education. That is why I am describing newspaper stands as informal lecture halls.

    Reading newspapers is like feeding your mind and heart with foods. Just like music, it is the food of the heart. People who keep themselves busy reading newspapers have no time to gossip or engage in character assassination. Instead they engage themselves in discussing public opinion from what they read from the newspapers. There is joy derived from reading newspaper that cover all aspects of human interests namely; politics, social activities, current events, advertisement, business, tourism, academics etc.

    Newspaper have shaped culture, influenced politics, played vital role in business and affected the daily life of millions of our people. By seventh Century, the Chinese were producing the world’s first printed newspaper called Dibao. In Nigeria many newspapers were established towards the end of 19th and early 20th centuries. Some of them include The Lagos Observer, The Times of Nigeria, The Gold Coast Colony Advertiser, The Lagos Times etc. In 1926 Daily Times was established. During 1983 general elections, some of the popular newspapers in circulation to mention but a few; National Concord, Daily Star, Daily Times, Trumpet etc. In Nigeria today so many newspapers are in circulation namely; The Authority newspapers, Sun Newspapers, The Nation, National Light, This Day, Guardian, The Punch, Vanguard, TIDES, Champion, Orient and so many others. It is good to note that the first newspaper that appeared in Nigeria was “Iwe Irohin” in 1859 which was established by Rev. Henry Townsend at Abeokuta. The paper was using Yoruba language. The paper was serving as a link in the chain of those missionary journalists who sought to encourage education and enlightenment.

    The role played by newspaper and their editors in the formation of various parties then in Nigeria can easily be identified. The Nigeria National Democratic Party (NNDP) formed in 1923 was co-founded by Horatio Jackson editor of The Lagos Weekly Record and Herbert Macaulay of the Lagos Daily News. The influence of the press and journalists did not end with the formation of the early political parties. It extended to the three main parties in the country before the advent of the military regime in 1966. The National Council of Nigeria and the Cameroons (NCNC) and the Action Group (AG) came into being as a result of the feud among journalists-politicians like Zik and Awolowo on the one hand and between supporting newspapers on the other hand. Newspapers provide a network of communication through which ideas, information and directives can be diffused through the gate of the press and the government to the doorsteps of the people and vice versa. Newspapers as print media like other media and the press in general are the mirror or vision for the people. The press is the Fourth Estate/level or Realm of the government. It is necessary to realize that mass media in general, Information and Communication Technologies and improved transportation have literally turned the world into a small space or global village. By reading newspapers, books, magazines etc and more importantly with Information Communication Technologies (ICT’s), one can stay at home and know literally more about the whole world.

    • From Livinus Nnebedum

    Anambra State Agricultural Development Program (ADP).

    E-mail: livynnebedumadp@yahoo.com

     

  • AMCON: Beyond the here and now

    It is 10 years since Nigeria was engulfed in a financial crisis of unprecedented proportion. The Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON) came in 2010 when the banking sector had undergone, for the first time, massive structural reforms, which involved bank consolidations, recapitalization and managerial changes at some banks, and portfolio clean-ups. These reforms provided a solution to the banking crisis that Nigeria experienced in the years preceding. In the end, the soundness in the banking sector was restored.

    AMCON was established to fulfil the following objectives:Assist eligible financial institutions to efficiently dispose of eligible bank assets; manage efficiently and dispose of eligible bank’s assets acquired by it; and obtain the best achievable financial returns on eligible bank’s assets or other assets acquired by it.

    AMCON’s initial achievements were tremendous.In an unprecedented move, AMCON acquired about 13,774 Non-Performing Loans (NPLs) worth N3.6 trillion from 22 commercial banks. That move saved our banking system, while its provision of financial accommodation of N 2.2billion protected about N 4.7trillion of depositors’ funds and interbank takings as well as saved approximately 14,000 jobs.

    With the settlement of about 56 percent of the total N3.7 trillion (about N2.072 trillion) bad debts, AMCON is certainly not doing badly with recovery efforts, putting into consideration the historical success of other asset management corporations in other climes with even much better working environments.

    This feat is commendable if one looks at the fact that the country went into recession in 2016-2017. During this period Nigeria experienced a very sluggish growth in the economy, which was aggravated by inadequate supply of foreign exchange and accentuated by a falling of the price of oil, the nation’s main foreign exchange earner, accounting for about 75% of its export revenue.

    Conveniently out of the recession, the renewed efforts at non-oil revenue collection are helping to reduce fiscal vulnerability caused by oil price shocks.

    Thanks to the reforms pursued by the Buhari administration to lay a foundation for renewed growth, increased revenues from the non-oil sector are also helping the country.

    The enforcement of the treasury single account (TSA) blocked financial leakages. Renewed efforts also went into enforcement of tax compliance, which increased the ratio of capital to recurrent expenditure to 30:70. Above all, there has been continuous support for agencies saddled with the responsibility of stabilising the financial system such as Assets Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON) are fast yielding results.

    AMCON’s impressive performance is no doubt a tribute to the hard work by many players. In the last three and half years, AMCON has hadat the driver’s seat, a risk management expert-Ahmed Lawan Kuru. Since his arrival on the scene, he has further entrenched professionalism in the way and manner AMCON operates. His idea of assets management partners (AMP), from example, is helping AMCON’s recovery efforts, particularly the over six thousand accounts with loan balances of N100 million and below.

    So also is the close cooperation with key financial regulatory institutions and important stakeholders –the Federal Ministry of Finance, Central Bank of Nigeria, Nigerian Deposit Insurance Corporation of Nigeria (NDIC) and Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

    Underpinning the success of AMCON has been the adoption of liquidation option to safeguard depositors’ funds and to restore investor confidence. An element of AMCON’s activities consists of supporting businesses with a view to enhancing their productivity. It includes transforming their NPLs to RPLs (re-performing loans). Doing this provides liquidity to the banks, which in turn help them meet their own obligations as well.

    Proof of the efficacy of AMCON as pillar of Nigeria’s financial stability mechanism can easily be found in the relative stability despite occasional hiccups experienced in the financial system since it came on board.

    Overall, I see similarities in the path taken by Nigeria and Europe in managing the financial systems in the post-crises period, including the role of institutions like AMCON.

    Europe implemented three fundamentals policies in the post 2008/9 financial meltdown. Firstly, it implemented massive reforms. Some of the countries that received financial assistance from the European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF)/European Stability Mechanism (ESM), such as Spain and Ireland, have among the highest growth rates in Europe today.Secondly, closer economic policy coordination between the euro area countries now makes it harder to repeat the mistakes that led to the crisis in the first place. Today there are concerted efforts for a Banking Union through the establishment of the Single Supervisory Mechanism, which now oversees the 130 systemically important banks at the European level, and the Single Resolution Board, which was set up to wind down failing banks across Europe.

    I liken the European Stability Mechanism (ESM) to AMCON. This institution serves as a rescue mechanism for euro area countries that have lost market access. Like AMCON, ESM were not there at the beginning of the crisis, but the ESM is today a permanent institution ready to fight the next crisis when it comes.

    The ESM has disbursed a total of €279 billion to programme countries. Funding these programmes has made ESM a key market player. ESM has issued more than 100 benchmark bonds and 130 bills over the last seven years (2010-2017). Like the achievements of Nigeria’s AMCON, these achievements by ESM would have been unthinkable only a few years back, but, as a result, the euro area economy is now back on track and rapidly growing again.

    I recall here one of the famous quotes of the AMCON’s CEO which is “that debt in itself is not always a bad thing. The problem of debt arises when there is default”. So the question is always how do we avoid defaults, and if they eventually happen, how do we manage the crisis that follows?

    There is no one-size-fits-all answer to these questions. Every nation studies its economic peculiarities and adopts the best approach that will mitigate the potential for a catastrophe. AMCON is Nigeria’s stabilisation mechanism of choice and it is the serving the nation.Europe sees the ESM as a permanent institution moving forward ready to fight the crisis of the future. Why shouldn’t Nigeria take a similar, long-range view and allow AMCON to remain for many years to come?

    At its establishment, it was designed to last for just 10 years. With the benefit of hindsight, and considering the effective stabilizing role it is playing in our economy, our next National Assembly will do well to amend and extend the term of AMCON for it to continue with its good work, which is in tandem with the global best practices.

     

    • Hassan, a financial analyst, wrote from Abuja.

  • PMB, Atiku and Nigeria’s future

    The greatest challenge facing the democratic process in Nigeria, as in most developing nations, has to do with management of the post-election transition process. The political tension and acrimony between parties and politicians peaks at the polls and tends to escalate during collation and announcement of results, giving electioneering a “do-or-die” tendency. This situation impacts negatively on the democratic process as election-related violence often takes a heavy toll on lives and property, disrupts elections and ultimately threatens national stability.

    Those who predicted the chaotic demise of the Nigerian state in 2015 based their pessimism on the high level of political antagonism and general insecurity. They expected the elections to ignite the explosive situation with the usual winner takes all-bad loser outcome that unleashes deadly ethno-religious mayhem across the land. Though political leaders routinely preach against political intolerance and vandalism, their sermons do little to prevent election-related violence, necessitating increased deployment of military forces to effectively restore and law and order.

    It took the historic telephone call by incumbent President Goodluck Jonathan to General Muhammadu Buhari, victorious winner of the 2015, conceding defeat and congratulating him even before the full results were released by INEC, to dramatically turn the tide from high tension and imminent civil disturbances to unprecedented peaceful transition of power from an incumbent government to an opposition party.

    Instructively, this welcome departure from do-or-die politics of uncompromising competition for power at the expense of national stability and safety of lives and property, was predicated on the profound pronouncement by the former president that his “political ambition was not worth the blood of any Nigerian”, which he eloquently demonstrated by opting for voluntarily conceding defeat rather than rejecting results, alleging rigging, stoking political tension and eventually resorting to protracted court action that could provoke more post-election crises.

    The victorious President Muhammadu Buhari was equally instrumental to the peaceful transition by accepting the unexpected gesture with reciprocal espirt de corps, commending his erstwhile rival in the tradition of good sportsmanship thereby projecting the principle of no victor-no vanquished to douse the potentially provocative celebrations among his elated supporters.

    With the benefit of hindsight, it was all a matter of two statesmen, then President Jonathan and General Buhari magnanimously rising above the fray of competing political interests and conscientiously relegating their individual self-esteem in favour of preserving the divine dignity of life of their respective supporters as well as the peace and stability of their fatherland. Such basic humane thoughts and actions by two leaders, with profound, inestimable and indelible physical and spiritual dividends for themselves, their people, their country and, indeed, humanity as a whole! By the same token, Nigerians have proved to the world that they cannot be perpetually predictable as a failed nation state.

    Nigeria has not only survived 2015 intact and consolidated as a viable democratic nation with exemplary statesmen as leaders who cherish their citizens, it has also endured the political strains of another general election without “falling”. The country has also admirably managed its election-related trauma though not without the inevitable skirmishes here and there. These instances further testify to the resilience of the political fabric of the country and the citizens’ collective commitment to sustain the integrity of the federation and viability of the democratic dispensation against all odds. This patriotic trait has always been a timely intervention and saving grace in desperate times, notably deployed as pragmatic approach to unforeseen eventualities, such as ending the civil war, June 12 crisis, Abiola’s death and the memorable “doctrine of necessity” during the Yar’Adua health crisis.

    However, Nigerians are still apprehensive about the prospects for achieving the much desired lasting post-election political reconciliation to effectively bury the hatchet between the two leading parties and their political leaderships as the surest anti-dote against election-related antagonism and outbreaks of civil disturbances. With simmering challenges to national security like the Boko Haram terrorist insurgency, resurgent skirmishes between herdsmen and farmers as well as the deadly sporadic attacks on rural communities by gunmen still engaging our combined defence and security forces, we cannot afford any prolongation of no less calamitous post-election turbulence.

    Unlike former President Jonathan, former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, the PDP presidential candidate in the just concluded presidential elections, has chosen to challenge the outcome at the election petitions tribunal. Obviously, not only are the personalities different, the circumstances surrounding the elections are not the same. Besides, the option of seeking judicial review of the results remains the most civilized and lawful alternative to unleashing violent unrest or making Nigeria “ungovernable”.

    Nevertheless, seeking judicial review of presidential election results does not preclude exploring promising possibilities for adding Atiku Abubakar to the roll of honourable, selfless, patriotic, people-oriented and, above all, God-fearing Nigerian political leaders who share former President Jonathan’s noble political principle that his “political ambition was not worth the blood of any Nigerian”. Atiku surely will, as a God-fearing, people oriented patriot and political leader, find greater fulfilment in this post-election attainment!

    Remarkably, President Buhari has not lost touch with the glorious inspiration he gained from his noble predecessor’s “call to honour humanity”. Even as an incumbent president, savouring the revalidation of his momentous 2015 election, he has found the humility to promise to run an inclusive administration that will be willing to partner with all patriotic stakeholders in the Nigerian Project to keep the country on the track of progress and development. He had earlier dissuaded his exuberant supporters from subjecting the opposition to humiliation while celebrating, emphasizing that after electioneering, all hands should be on deck in the national interest, irrespective of party affiliation.

    Clearly there is an enabling environment for enthronement of the much-anticipated no-victor-no-vanquished spirit of post-election goodwill, cooperation and common commitment to national unity and stability waiting to be fully exploited. Just as in 2015, it is essentially a matter requiring the focused commitment of both President Buhari and former VP Atiku Abubakar respectively, to heroically rise above the fray of competing political interests and consciously suppress their self-interest to prioritize preserving the dignity of human life and promoting the peace and stability of Nigeria. They both must actively adopt constructive engagement to create avenues for political reconciliation and ultimately resist the pressure of hawks to be uncompromising.

    Atiku Abubakar has certainly attained the age and national stature to think more about leaving a living legacy that will preserve his patriotic value to the progress and development of our democratic dispensation as a more befitting recourse after his unsuccessful presidential bid than the acrimonious judicial challenge of election result that has rarely, if ever, reversed the expressed will of the people. President Buhari too should now be enlisting the goodwill and support of all leading political leaders across partisan and geo-ethnic divides, including Atiku Abubakar, to form an impactful inclusive government and also restore and strengthen national dialogue and consensus, desperately required to heal several open wounds and mend many fences, so as to bequeath a more united, peaceful and purposeful nation as a parting gift in 2023. This is another doctrine of necessity that must be applied in the national interest.

  • Nigerians are still living in a dream

    Buhari is not good enough for Nigeria. Yes, I agree but who is good with this present political system?

    It saddens me to realise how people are still naive to the problems of Nigeria. The most unfortunate things are that we think we’re running a democracy because we set up political parties, campaign for election and win. The question is: is that how successful democratic countries are running their own?

    Many of our problems start very small, but instead of fixing them on time, we keep sweeping them under the carpet. Today we have mountains of problems that have grown too difficult to solve. We have legislators whose duties are to find solutions by creating strong policies to sort things out and establish law around them to stop the recurrence. But they lack the political will and knowledge to tackle most of these problems.

    There are lots of things to put in place before we can see positive change. Our political system is not designed to serve the country enough, and this has to change. Good government doesn’t automatically fall into place, and it cannot be willingly done by the set of politicians we have without pressure from the public.

    Traditionally, the thinking has been that leaders know what is good for the country, but that doesn’t work for true development these days. Obviously, we forget that Nigeria is a safe haven for corrupt politicians, where an individual person has more money than the country.

    Therefore, we need to frown on corruption. Unless we address this, we will continue to live a false dream. Buhari alone cannot do anything different until we reform our politics. We need to do our own part to support him in order for his party to deliver on its promises.

    Corruption is the dishonest or fraudulent conduct by those in power, which typically involves bribery. With corruption running in our system, nothing good can come out of the country.

    Lack of proper record is also a bane. We need an effective recording system to know how many people are real Nigerians. We don’t only need accountability from the government, we also need from the citizens and without any good record of the populace, we cannot get it.

    Lawlessness and lack of punishment culture is another ailment that is our problem. Nigerians don’t like to follow rules because our leaders don’t make it a priority. The law serves many purposes and functions in society.

    Without an effective judicial system, we cannot enjoy our democracy. We also need to establish punishment for whoever commits any crime, and the punishment must be severe so as to serve as deterrence to others.

    We need a Discrimination Act to stop people from using the tribal game that is tearing down society. We need to classify tribalism as a crime and set up a task force to fight it thoroughly. Task force is the unit that can uphold a zero-tolerance policy against discrimination of any kind. Until then, there cannot be unity and our leaders will continue to use this avenue to destroy the country for their own selfish gain.

    We also need to avoid money politics where everyone only looks for an avenue to make money in a way that is detrimental to the interests of many people and the country. This makes them inflate government contracts sometimes more than ten folds of the actual cost.

    Nigerians should wake up and hold these politicians accountable for their failure to put many things right. Self-inflicted poverty is enough to galvanise the masses to demand change more than before and they have the power to provide it. We should not continue to remain quiet. We cannot leave everything in the hands of the politicians; it won’t work.

    • From Joseph A Adams

    josephaaadams@gmail.com 

  • Laying the ghost of elections to rest

    The echoes of the 2019 elections will continue to reverberate for a long time to come.  The elections came at a huge cost; with votes buying and other sundry electoral heists; ballot snatching, stuffing, and thuggery with official endorsements.    It was an election like no other in our recent history which we shall factor in this discourse.  The result can only be compared with the epic fight between the legendary Mohammed Ali and the pound-for-pound Joe Frazier, titled the thriller in Manila. At the end of the fight, Ali was quoted to have said it was the closest thing to death.

    As patriots, it is desirous to audit the elections and interrogate its integrity and the quality of political leadership driving the state.  The 2019 basically was a referendum and plebiscite on President Muhammadu Buhari and the ruling All Progressive Congress (APC). In 2015, the people were upbeat when they rejected the ruling party, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) because it represented everything ugly and odious; there was wholesale corruption in industrial scale.  Infrastructures had virtually collapsed and the party leadership was groping without rhythm in fighting the insurgency in the Northeast and insecurity generally in the six geopolitical zones.   Even though people were still able to buy food, it was just a matter of time before the reality would have done on us that we will be feeding from the dustbin.

    It was not about the president at the time, Dr Goodluck Jonathan who unarguably was a good man; it was about good governance. He lost control of the affairs of the state which made all his appointees to use him; the security chiefs, ministers, governors, the religious people and traditional rulers.  He was not spared even by the Civil Society Organizations and Non-Governmental Organizations who ripped the state off in the name of campaigns that added no value to the people.

    The electorates were not wrong when they rejected PDP and what it represented but unknown to us, the actors in the PDP became the nerve centre of the new APC; old wine in new wine skin you would call it. It is unimaginable that just after four years, that the same PDP could make such a strong showing in a general election. This is what should worry APC and its leadership if they have the capacity of soul searching and truly evaluate and appraise the outcome of the 2019 elections in the inner recesses of their conscience. In spite of the insular, clannish and feudal disposition of the president, he appeared to have been a political capital for the ruling party.

    However, compared with the 2015 elections, it was clear that the president did not enjoy the same level of support in the just concluded elections. It is not in doubt that he has dealt some blow on corruption by taking on some hitherto untouchables in the society. It should be appreciated that the fight has commenced but it may not have gathered enough momentum to bring within its net all the known political rogues some of whom have found sanctuary in the ruling party and even as cabinet members.

    The build up to elections saw Nigerians very bitter with the state of the nation; there was heightened state of insecurity; the entire middle belt region was as bloody as the battle of Solferino in Italy with bodies littered everywhere. Unemployment was growing by the day, no noticeable improvement in infrastructure whether it is electricity or road. More than anything in the past, the campaign was very divisive and deeply sectional and was not issues-based. At the end, it was actually the personality and integrity of the individuals that were the deciding factors; especially between candidates, Buhari and Atiku Abubakar. The PDP no doubt, given the circumstances that led to their defeat in 2015 performed beyond expectation; so they need not take their luck too far challenging the victory of the ruling APC even though it is their fundamental right; after all, all the parties were involved in rigging and vote-buying.

    The elections also exposed the partisanship of the religious leaders (Christians/Muslims) and their attempt to hoodwink adherents to their faith to follow their preferred candidates as a divine direction. There was no need to have taken side by any religious leader invoking the wrath of God on members that did not follow their intuition after all; the two leading candidates were of the same ethno-religious stock. The religious leaders like their political counterparts also rob the people; the denizens who give tithes and offerings and yet cannot afford facilities provided by the religious organizations like schools for their children.

    The big lesson too from the election was that it demystified the kingmakers and so-called political godfathers who arrogate to themselves the power of choice of who becomes president, governors etc. The elections no doubt put the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) on the spotlight and in the eye of the storm. The commission is headed by an academic egghead, a professor of political history and international studies to the bargain. I am not sure we could have someone of a finer quality than that anywhere in the world that is, assuming our academics are actually worth their salt. I say this with due respect because hours before the election, the INEC chairman assured the nation that all was set for the elections as electoral materials, sensitive and non-sensitive had been deployed only for him  at the eleventh hour, as people were about waking up to go to the polling centre, he announced the postponement giving sundry excuses.

    There were issues of outright sabotage and arson on INEC infrastructures in some states, there were failures of the card readers and non availability of card readers in some states and even polling stations.  On the whole, there appeared not to have been compliance with the INEC requirement in the deployment of technology for free and fair polls. The failure of card readers and non availability in some cases is inexcusable and a subversion of the electoral process. If the POS machines that bankers and traders use on daily basis do not fail, there is no earthly reason for INEC not to have an efficient machine to run a credible election for Nigeria with the huge investment that country has made.  INEC and the government cannot wash their hands off the hanky-panky and the failure of the card readers during the 2019 polls.

    Another prominent feature of the elections was the role played by the security agencies.

    There were damning allegations of involvement of some security agencies in ballot-snatching and destructions, harassment and intimidation of voters to secure victory for preferred candidates. The military was particularly fingered in this unwholesome and unprofessional practice. It is now becoming obvious that it a disincentive to deploy the military in civic electoral duties as it only militarizes the entire process without adding security to it. There is now an urgent need for us as compatriots to properly evaluate the requirement of security personnel for election duties for the sanctity of our democracy.

    I understand the Nigerian Army has empanelled a committee to look into the involvement of its personnel during the election.   While that is a welcome development, we should go beyond that; we need independent judicial body of inquiry to investigate the totality of the activities of all the security agencies that were deployed for the election. There was too much bloodshed, too much killings, too much destruction of properties.

    Our politicians like sorcerers always like the smell of blood and will not see anything wrong when they commission and pay thugs to go and face bullet with their bare chest just to win elections. Those who pay the thugs to go and kill and steal the mandate of the people should be the ones that should face the wrath of the law as we lay the ghost of the election to rest.

     

    • Kebonkwu Esq is an Abuja-based attorney.

  • Still on effective regulation of tobacco products

    Akeem Ogunlade in a recent article simply powdered trite arguments of the tobacco industry that an effective control policy will actually harm the economy and as such, what Nigeria really needs is the industry promoted – “Sensible Regulation,” “Balanced Regulation” which he colourfully explains away as “prudent regulation”.

    He goes on to describe tobacco control as controversial. Ironically, it is not. It is in fact, the tobacco industry that creates this perception so that it can manipulate issues and stay in business.

    Tobacco is lethal. It kills. It harms public health and ruins a nation’s efforts towards sustainable development. Tobacco currently kills more than seven million people each year. More than six million of these deaths are those who use tobacco directly, while another 890,000 die from exposure to second-hand smoke.

    Worried by the rising deaths from tobacco use, the World Health Organisation (WHO) initiated the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) which was adopted by the 56th World Health Assembly in May 2003 as the first global public health treaty. Nigeria became party to this treaty in 2005.

    Nigeria domesticated the treaty through the National Tobacco Control Act, 2015 but the journey was a tortuous one which took almost ten years. Those years were fraught with scare-mongering by the tobacco industry and their many front groups hired to hype an alternate reality: that tobacco control would lead to job losses, shutdown of tobacco companies and a cutback on government revenue.

    But public health experts know that those faulty arguments only reinforce the WHO caution in Article 5.3 of the FCTC that there exists an irreconcilable conflict between tobacco industry interests and public health policies. Article 5. 3 of the FCTC,  which Ogunlade referenced in a deliberately skewed manner,  says that “in setting and implementing their public health policies with respect to tobacco control, parties shall act to protect these policies from commercial and other vested interests of the tobacco industry in accordance with national law.”

    The ultimate goal of tobacco control is to save lives from tobacco addiction while tobacco manufacturing, distribution and retailing seek only to profit from harming the lives of consumers.  “Balanced Regulation”, “Sensible Regulation” or so-called “Prudent Regulation” as being promoted by the tobacco industry is that which diminishes the sanctity of life at the altar of corporate greed. It’s that kind of regulation that keeps the tobacco industry in their comfort zone, maintaining high record profits while our brothers and sisters wallow in disease and preventable deaths.

    Fact is, with the FCTC, nations around the world are unanimous that in the case of any conflict between the profits of tobacco companies and public health, public health should take precedence.

    The fairy tale argument on a link between high taxes and increase in tobacco smuggling and counterfeiting was brought to the fore again in Ogunlade’s piece. If not intended to deliberately confuse the public, the high tax and smuggling nexus is far from the truth. In fact, investigations show that on the contrary, the tobacco industry is actually behind smuggling of tobacco products.  It is established that taxes work to prevent youth initiation, reduce consumption rates while at the same time raise government revenue.

    Since the 1990s, incontrovertible evidence has shown that the tobacco industry has been actively involved in smuggling of tobacco products as a business strategy. This strategy is to saturate markets with products far exceeding what local populations can consume. The excess would ultimately be sold elsewhere and for the tobacco industry, it gets paid regardless of how and where the products are sold. In Canada, subsidiaries of Japan Tobacco and British America Tobacco (BAT), and a company partly owned by Philip Morris International (PMI) were found guilty of tobacco smuggling and collectively fined C$1.7 billion (£1 billion) over a ten-year period spanning 2000 to 2010 when the cases went to court.

    The Guardian of London, working with the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists in January 2000, published an investigation into BAT’s operations which included the facilitation of tobacco smuggling. 11,000 internal documents of the tobacco industry sieved through during the investigation exposed how BAT employees did not partake but condoned tax evasion and exploited the smuggling of billions of cigarettes in a global effort to boost sales and lure generations of new smokers. The target markets were in Canada, Latin America and Asia.

    Most disturbing was that the documents revealed that the smuggling “channels” which the company’s cigarettes travelled along were always operated and managed by others and it used euphemisms – including “duty not paid”, “general trade” and “transit” – to describe smuggling channels.

    Perhaps the most disturbing recommendation in Ogunlade’s article is his case for so-called “safe alternatives” to the conventional cigarettes which he described as products with “lesser risks”. We assume that he is referring to e-cigarettes and the controversial heat-not-burn products. He listed Canada, US and UK as countries where the regulatory approach to tobacco control is “progressive”. Whatever that means, this is far from the truth. The writer makes no mention of the recent US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) alarm that the number of teenagers using one of the suggested alternatives – e-cigarettes – in that country has surged by 75 percent, egged on by a boom in flavoured products. The FDA described e-cigarettes as a scourge in U.S. schools, with students often vaping in the bathrooms or between classes.

    A new study published in the Medical Journal of Australia, reveals that 60 percent of nicotine-free e-cigarettes sold contain pesticides and this is inhaled by smokers of the product. In Hong Kong, vapers are threatened with jail terms in the government’s plan to push ahead with a blanket ban on all e-cigarettes and heat-not-burn products.

    Whatever the intent of Ogunlade’s rhetoric is for advocating for more space for tobacco entities to manipulate tobacco control, it is anti-public health and anti-public good. What Nigeria needs at this moment is conscientious and stringent enforcement of provisions of the National Tobacco Control Act, 2015.

    As at today, Nigeria is not even near in ranking with other African countries like Ghana, Niger, Kenya, Ethiopia, Senegal, to mention a few, who have put in place effective tobacco control measures. Within the sphere of policy, government at all levels must act now in rejecting the ploy to make our nation a dumping ground for tobacco products.

    • By Oluchi Joy Robert,

    Environmental Rights Action/Friends of the Earth Nigeria,  Lagos.

     

     

     

  • Atiku: The way of statesmen

    Statesmanship is an art, a noble one at that. Though many leaders love and desire the appellation, very few manage to achieve the status. And like time and tide, opportunities often bob up for statesmanship but only those who are imbued with much insight and wisdom get to grab it. Such is the stuff of statesmanship and such is the opportunity that presents itself to the PDP presidential candidate, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar. How would he react? Would he play the statesman or the politician?

    A few days after his People’s Democratic Party leaders rejected the results of the presidential election announced by the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, to have been won by incumbent President Muhammadu Buhari, former Vice President Atiku Abubakar set up an array of Senior Advocates of Nigeria to contest the election results.

    Section 134(2) of the Nigerian Constitution provides that “A candidate for an election to the office of President shall be deemed to have been duly elected, where there being more than two candidates for the election, (a) he had the highest number of votes cast at the election; and (b) he has not less than one-quarter of at least two-thirds of the states in the federation and the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja.”

    From the records of INEC, President Buhari garnered a total of 15,191,847 votes, led in 19 states, and raked in more than 25 per cent of the votes in 13 other states, to clinch the presidency. Vice President Abubakar led in 18 states, with 11,264,977 million votes, and obtained 25 per cent of the votes in 12 other states.

    From the look of things, President Buhari won the presidential election. He indeed led in most of the states that pundits thought he would win. The upsets were in Oyo, Ondo, Edo and Imo States, where Vice President Abubakar trounced him.

    But Uche Secondus, National Chairman of the PDP, insists that his party and presidential candidate will neither concede the election, nor call to congratulate President Buhari who was declared winner by INEC.

    He promises that the PDP will shock, maybe stagger, President Buhari and the All Progressives Congress with facts, figures, and videos of ways that the APC, INEC, and the military, collaborated to rig the election for President Buhari. He adds that the world and the entire country will be shown the details of what happened.

    To achieve this, PDP set up an adhoc organ called the expanded caucus meeting to formally brief members of the outcome of the presidential and National Assembly elections, and to solicit support for Vice President Abubakar’s quest to go to court over what they describe as the rigged election.

    The PDP also said it would petition the United Nations and other global democratic institutions on the role of the military and for the killings of Nigerians during the presidential and NASS elections of February 23.

    First, Livy Uzoukwu, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, and leading counsel to Vice President Abubakar, announced that he has set up a legal team, as he may have also dusted his tone of legal authorities, in readiness for what former Nigerian Bar Association President Olisa Agbakoba may probably describe as a needless court appearance.

    Then Charles Uche, another SAN, filed an ex-parte application at the Presidential Elections Tribunal sitting in Abuja to seek an order asking INEC to allow the PDP to inspect the voters’ register, smart card reader machines, ballot boxes, and other materials used in conducting the presidential election.

    While acknowledging that every aggrieved candidate is free to approach the election tribunal to seek redress on the outcome of the election, INEC had promised to provide all documents used in the conduct of the election. By law, Vice President Abubakar and the PDP have 21 days to file their petition, counting from Wednesday, February 27, the date the election result was declared by INEC.

    Vice President Atiku’s lawyers joined the INEC, President Buhari, and the APC, as co-respondents to the suit, and aver that the results collated on March 23 at various polling units across the federation are at variance with the result that was finally released.

    Unfortunately Vice President Abubakar’s wailing is turning unsavoury. The Coalition of United Political Parties, baying for blood, accuses that political parties that are asking Vice President Abubakar to sheath his sword of being bought over with N40 million apiece. If it will not be an over-kill, the Directorate of State Security should investigate this allegation.

    And then, another political quantity named Usman Ibrahim Alhaji, who was presidential candidate of the National Rescue Movement Party, has taken a cue from Vice President Abubakar. He has taken President Buhari, Vice President Abubakar himself, the APC, the PDP, and INEC to court.

    He accuses President Buhari of inducing voters with the TraderMoni loan scheme and food items, and wants the court to invalidate Vice President Abubakar’s candidacy for what he terms as breach of the electoral law.

    Even though Adams Oshiomole, national chairman of the APC, agrees that anyone aggrieved should be free to seek redress, however free and fair the election may be, warns Vice President Abubakar that the APC may file cross-petitions on areas that the APC can dispute.

    In spite of the accusation by the CUPP, the Forum of Presidential Candidates and Political Parties for Good Governance, made up presidential candidates and chairmen of 36 of the parties that contested the election, have asked Vice President Abubakar to move on.

    They claim to have counselled the federal government to be magnanimous in victory, and appoint the best of Nigeria into the next government. Some interpret this to mean that President Buhari should form a government of national unity.

    They also think Vice President Abubakar should avoid utterances and actions that may fan embers of discord, disagreement and violent conduct. They conclude that Nigeria is greater than any personal or class interest.

    It is instructive to point out that foreign observers have expressed the opinion that the election was fair to a large extent. The European Union Elections Observers to Nigeria say that though INEC operated under difficult circumstances, the 2019 election was significantly better than that of 2015 election.

    They however acknowledged that the elections were marred by operational shortcomings on the part of INEC, and this resulted in delays in the delivery of election materials and officials. But they concluded that the elections were competitive, candidates freely campaigned, and there was voter turnout despite the postponement.

    The News Agency of Nigeria reports that 91 EU Observers witnessed the opening, voting, closing in 261 polling units: They also witnessed the collation of election results in 94 collation centres across the 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory.

    Vice President Abubakar needs to pay attention to the caustic and potentially divisive exchanges going on between his Yoruba and Igbo compatriots, and take a cue. He must not descend from being a statesman to muddy himself in the abyss of blind ambition.

    Olisa Agbakoba has asked him to phone and congratulate President Buhari, the same way former President Goodluck Jonathan did in 2015. It is a shame that Vice President Abubakar eventually followed the scent of the blood, disregarded wise counsel, and took an action that can potentially plunge the nation into chaos.

    What does he really want to prove as he approaches the election tribunal? Lawyers who say that those will come to equity must do so with clean hands, may be pointing to reports of happenings in some PDP stronghold states

    But does Vice President Abubakar, who has hitherto been posturing himself as a statesman in the order of former President Goodluck Jonathan, want to create problems for his beloved Nigeria? A man who openly says that his ambition is not worth the blood of any Nigerian, shouldn’t be travelling the road that he and the PDP have now taken.

     

    • Muruakor writes from Lagos.