The Nation Newspaper

Category: Opinion

Who will help the NCC?

By Anthony Kolawole PhD.

“Your subscription to The Guardian monthly has been renewed successfully and 150.00 deducted from your account. Your service will be renewed on 2016-05-31. To cancel, text NO TGM to 4900. Thank you!” That was one of the frequent and obtrusive SMS that delivered to my phone. Was that a problem? Yes. The problem was that I never subscribed to any ‘Guardian Monthly’ news alert and the bigger problem was that N150 was deducted from my voice call balance.

At N150 per week, I was going to be losing N7, 800.00 just for this rogue service each year. If I multiply that by ten out of the more than 37 other shorter codes that send me unsolicited offers every other fifteen minutes then I stand to lose anything in the vicinity of N78,000 each year and that is minus the caller tunes that can be accidentally subscribed to.

Following the direction given, I sent ‘NO TGM to 4900’ and the response I got was “you are not a subscriber of requested SMS Alert Service. To Know About More Services, Please Type HELP and send it to 3307*.” Yet, my N150 remained deducted.

Contacting the network provider’s customer care via the online chat platform was a lesson in time wasting. Ifeoma at the other end of the chat maintained or feigned that sense of helplessness throughout the duration of the exchange. I simply terminated the chat and resolved to never use that line again since I have been similarly debited for a caller tune I didn’t order as well as countless other deductions that I didn’t know of until I notice an unusual speed at which my remaining airtime balance is depleted.

I find it difficult to blame the network provider for this theft, instead I blame the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC), which has the power and regulatory wherewithal to protect me from this criminality. More than the N150 that was extorted from me, I also hold the NCC responsible for every single kobo that I lost to bad quality phone calls that I was charged for. If NCC did its work of enforcing standard and quality these unwholesome and sharp practices by the telecoms would not be happening.

My hope that a recent consultative forum organized by the NCC to discuss its draft regulatory framework on Value Added Service (VAS – which forms part of those robo calls and marketing SMS) in Lagos would bring an end to my troubles was dashed.

It was immediately clear to me that the NCC has little muscle to call the shots in the face of the big telcos. The network providers more or less shoved its draft regulatory framework back in its face even though the media reports that followed attempted some damage control.

I don’t know what compromise rendered the NCC into such a toothless bulldog or impotence, but to the extent that my phone line is serviced with my hard earned money, I have my demands for our dear regulator.

There is a reason why regulatory systems exist worldwide and we cannot be an exception in Nigeria. The NCC cannot come up with a draft framework that is meant to protect Nigerian consumers of telecom services and then quickly back away because the network operators are not comfortable or agreeable to it. If they can get away with this how soon before they would unilaterally decide to impose other outrageous tariffs regimes on us?

The concept contained in the draft framework hinted at taking away the value added service component away from the network operators and vesting same functions to other segments of the sector like developers, hosting companies and aggregators. Since this concept is said to be in my interest as a subscriber then the NCC has no business compromising my interest the way it is doing.

If I understand correctly, an aggregator would have been able to evaluate, screen and vet a content before sending to me only if I have indicated interest in receiving such by signing up for it.

The freedom from being bombarded with unsubscribed, unwarranted and unwanted messages and the like is something that the NCC and its partners – as the network operators have become – must not attempt to take away from me.

I further gathered that the framework would have made it possible for me to see the phone number of the organization or person that is spamming my phone so that I can call them back to deliver my own version of ‘cease and desist’ order. Since this will firmly put me in charge of what content gets sent to my phone I want this guideline approved like right away.

These changes are not too much to ask even though I must concede that it would be too much to ask if the NCC is an enforcer for the network operators instead of working for Nigerians.
This piece is therefore a wakeup call to other Nigerians to demand that the NCC pushes through the necessary policy framework to make sure that the exploitation of subscribers under any guise is stopped forthwith.

Kolawole is a University Lecturer.

Wrote from Keffi, Nasarawa State.

May 10, 2016
Last chance to deregulate

By Sunday Attah

The discussion on the deregulation of the downstream sector of the Nigerian petroleum Industry has been on for decades without any visible decision in sight. The sorest point around the issue is the debate for the removal or sustenance of subsidies for refined products.

You would want to think that Nigeria being the largest producer of oil in Africa and the 5th largest exporter of the product in the world would have a clear stand on the way forward for such a crucial industry, but alas the country is neither here nor there on the issues of deregulation.

In one breath the government says it has deregulated the market partially, yet the same government does not want to rule out the continued payment of subsidies. This to me is a sign of indecision on a critical issue such as this.

Since deregulation was a major point of discussion during the last election campaigns, I would have thought the Buhari led APC government would have taken time out to debate the issues surrounding deregulation deep within its ranks and take a decision once and for all.

The inability of previous governments to be decisive on this issue is part of the reason why growth in the sector in Nigeria is stunted. We cannot afford another round of policy uncertainties. The Buhari government has to come out clear, if his government will fully deregulate the downstream sector of the oil industry or not.

Nigeria in the last five years has consistently spent over 1 trillion Naira that is about $5b USD annually on petrol subsidies, the same country that spent less than 20 billion Naira on roads in the year 2015, but spent over 1 trillion Naira on petrol subsidies in the same year is unacceptable.

The major reasons given by those who resist the deregulation of the downstream sector of the oil industry is that the subsidy on petrol will be removed and pump price of petrol will go up. Whilst that may be true initially, the side of the story they however don’t talk about is the benefits of deregulating.

The deregulation of the downstream sector will open up the sector to private investors who hitherto developed cold feet to investing in the sector due to heavy government interference. Those who have had refining licenses approved several years ago will now go ahead to build the refineries, this will tackle the incessant scarcity of petrol due to importation. Petrochemical industries will spring up alongside local refining; these will create jobs and jobs and jobs unlike what we have now where jobs are being exported to countries where we refine our petroleum products.

We will save the economy the unnecessary pressure put on the Naira due to the heavy demand for forex to fund the importation of petroleum products rather we will be exporting refined petroleum products thereby earning foreign currencies to shore up our reserves.

The bone of contention for those against deregulation is the fuel subsidy regime that the government runs. This group has argued that the masses hardly benefit anything from the government, hence their insistence on the government keeping the subsidy.

Whilst I am not against subsidies in general, I however have a problem with a blanket subsidy that cannot be measured or directed at a particular target group.

Different revelations have emerged of massive fraud in the fuel subsidy process, trillions of Naira are alleged to have been fraudulently stolen from the government purse in the name of fuel subsidy payments. It is heart wrenching to discover that the country is bleeding on the side despite its already anemic financial status.

For a country that is deficient in almost all critical infrastructures, paying over a trillion Naira annually on petrol subsidies does not make sense. Such monies if spent on critical sectors such as health, education, policing, roads, railways etc. Will impart the lives of the citizenry more than whatever impart the Petrol subsidy is having on their lives at the moment.

Let’s imagine for a moment, that we spent the over one trillion Naira which is about $5b dollars we were handing out to subsidy contractors annually in the last 5 years in our health sector, I can bet we would by now probably have a better health sector than any country in Africa and probably be competing with some European countries in quality health care.

If we consistently spent $5 billion on our health care in the last five years as we have done on petrol subsidies, we would have created more than 500,000 quality jobs: from those building the new hospitals, to those who will work as medical staff, administrative staff, support staff, contractors, suppliers and others. We would have saved lives; we would have reduced the demand for foreign currency to go on medical tourism, thereby reducing the pressure on the Naira.

What of our ailing education sector, Poor road networks that continue to kill thousands of citizens yearly, just imagine for a second that each of these sectors got a trillion Naira each to spend in a calendar year, can we imagine the transformation that would happen in this sector.

We simply cannot continue to shy away from the realities that stare us in the face. We not only need to deregulate, we need to do it fast. Nigeria has wasted too much time on this road of indecision. We now have to take the bull by the horn. Though deregulation may not be that one single silver bullet that solves all of our problems, one sure thing is that it will grow the oil industry like we have never experienced since the discovery of oil.

It is time we do the next big thing after the great telecoms revolution that came with the liberalization of the sector in the early 2000s. I can predict that the boom economy will experience with the deregulation of the downstream oil sector will make the telecoms experience a child’s play.

Attah is a public affairs commentator

And President of Baba Do Something (BDS). He writes from Abuja.

May 10, 2016
The Mail-on-Line’s diatribe

In the past few days, a couple of my friends have drawn my attention to what they consider a demystification of President Muhammadu Buhari by a so-called Mail-on-Line medium in the United Kingdom. Upon reading the story, I got thoroughly disappointed, not at the story, but the fact that some well educated Nigerians could be taken in by what is no more than a red herring masquerading as the smoking gun that it pretended to have unearthed.

What is the story? What are the facts leading to President Buhari’s unwarranted vilification by the Mail-On-Line newspaper? There appears to be a four-count charge against the President of Nigeria by a newspaper that ought to be more preoccupied with the Panama Papers and the uncertain fate of Britain in the European Union, aka Brexit.

Count 1: That he sends his daughter to a 26, 000 pounds a year school and, perhaps without the approval of Mail-on-Line, had allegedly spent 150 thousand pounds on the education of his daughter Zahra, a University of Surrey student.

Count 2: Without recourse to Her Majesty’s media, Buhari had allegedly allowed his 16-year old daughter, Hanan, to indulge in the royal privilege of flying first class from London to Abuja when her father had banned ‘public officials’ from the same privilege. Perhaps, she should have travelled by sea or better still, through the Sahara desert escorted by some Bedouin Arabs.

Count three: Buhari’s anti-corruption claim is spurious and sectional unlike what obtains in Britain where the election of Saqid Khan, a Muslim, as the new mayor of London, is being ‘applauded’ by all Britons.

Count Four: The Mail-on-Line describes Buhari, the popularly elected President of Nigeria as “the self-styled people’s President”. By implication, he is an impostor.

What is my take on this? First, as a Nigerian, I am conscious of the public image of our leader, whomsoever that person may be; in this instance, it is President Buhari. I concede that not every Nigerian agrees with his policies, his style or his actions. The same applies to David Cameron, Prime Minister of Britain. I will also be the first to admit that there is no consensus among Nigerians on these matters, including Buhari’s achievements. But that does not warrant this spurious attack on his person to the extent that he is being described as a “self-styled people’s president”.

Pray, was he not elected by the people? Yes, he flew the flag of a political party. But once elected, had he not become the president of Nigeria and its peoples? To the best of my knowledge, at no time has Buhari ever arrogated to himself the title of the ‘people’s president’, if, by that, the Mail-on-Line was referring to a long disused epithet by maximum rulers of old. The paper can conveniently spew its pejorative gibberish because Nigerians choose to be gullible and refuse to draw the line between partisan disagreement and patriotic consensus on matters of national pride and survival. If that had not been the case, for a medium in a country that taught Nigerians the ignoble art of corruption (read Professor Peter Ekeh’s Colonialism and the Two Publics), for a newspaper in a county that, for long has provided safe haven for funds stolen from Nigeria, the newspaper would have adopted greater circumspection in talking about Nigeria or President Buhari whose anti-corruption credentials date back to over three decades.

My take on the story is that it was timed as a distraction from the unprecedented anti-graft war taking place in Nigeria; the fact that in the past few weeks, millions of dollars have been traced to shoddy processes and transactions. Coming on the eve of the London conference on corruption, one is tempted to suspect that the Mail-on-Line’s poorly executed diatribe could have been timed to take the sail from whatever presentation the Nigerian leader planned to make at the conference. In that case, we are bound to ask: whose interest is the newspaper serving?

I do not necessarily subscribe to the style of the Buhari administration. But it will amount to sheer perfidy for any Nigerian or friend of Nigeria, to ignore the uncontroverted revelations of misuse of public funds by public officers of all political colouration. If the Mail-on-Line speaks for Nigerians, it must be the tiny cabal that turned our collective patrimony into personal wealth and turned all of us beggars either as individuals or as a country. Had that not been so, the medium wouldn’t have had the temerity to talk about the British government giving 250 million pounds to Nigeria over a period of one year because, under Buhari, there wouldn’t have been need for that.

The Mail-on-Line should be told that the anti-graft war is achieving results, one step at a time. Nigerians are not under any illusion that this is just one event, no, it is not. It is not a sprint; not even a marathon. It is a process, a long term engagement with the future of the country; a process that Nigerians of every persuasion must not just buy into but take complete ownership of, if the future promised by the change agenda is to be guaranteed.

The good news is that the anti-graft war has started in earnest, with all its imperfections. Back home in Nigeria, over one trillion naira has been recovered, discovered or saved. That is far in excess of 250 million pounds. For any medium that is worth any credibility not to see this as a step, in the right direction, and to mock the effort as the Mail-on-Line has done smacks of outright mischief, professional amnesia or culpable duplicity.

I am tempted to take the view that the Mail-on-Line is being misinformed by those Nigerians who shamelessly plundered the national till for selfish reasons. It is convenient today for people to pander to ethnic, political or every other perceptible subterfuge for their woes. But how many of them obtained the permission of their restricted groups before dipping their itchy and insatiable fingers into the public purse? How many of them deployed such proceeds of official malfeasance towards satisfying the legitimate needs of their primordial groups rather than oppressing them?

I do not think we should waste our time on the little matter of Buhari’s children as the Mail-on-Line provided us with no evidence of any wrong doing on the part of the President. The newspaper did not claim that Buhari, a former head of state, a former governor, a former minister of petroleum resources, a very successful farmer and a pensioner, dipped his hands into the public till to pay the fees of his children or fund their travels. If I read the medium correctly, it is simply saying that for Buhari’s anti-corruption war to receive its endorsement, he must first commit class suicide and subject his family to the same level of penury as the poorest Nigerians. That is utter hogwash. It sound’s completely illogical and uncharitable.

If the Mail-on-Line is honest in its love for Nigeria, if it is not singing the tune being dictated by some unseen malevolent sponsors from Nigeria, the newspaper should back Buhari’s effort to repatriate all of Nigeria’s money stashed away in Britain and other Western countries. When that is done, I can assure the paper that Nigerians are prepared to swallow any home brewed bitter pills to take us out of the present situation.

There are times I begin to wonder if the media in the western world is not bothered that some of their financial institutions look and act like receivers of stolen goods. In Nigeria, receivers of stolen goods are treated as suspected accessories to the crime. But Buhari has not threatened to take the British financial institutions to the dreaded Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) in Nigeria. All he is asking is for the looted funds to be repatriated to Nigeria to prosecute the agenda of his government. Therefore, Buhari should walk tall to the London conference and, with the support of the Mail-on-Line newspaper, boldly announce to those holding our money and our relatives to release them to us now!

May 10, 2016
Nimbo: State negligence and liability

The recent decision by the federal government to sue Shell Petroleum Development Company on behalf of the communities affected by the Bonga oil spill is commendable. To maintain such an action in court, the federal government may have to rely on the principles of liability for tortious negligence. I commend the government of President Muhammadu Buhari for daring that behemoth unlike his predecessors whose officials obviously condoned and connived with erring International Oil Companies. I however wish that the Nimbo community, recently sacked by armed herdsmen, following the negligence of our security agencies, could have similar right of action, particularly against the police who owed the community the duty of protection from the invaders.

After all, as posited by learned author, Ese Malami, in his book, Law of Tort (2nd edition), at page 284, “the purpose of the tort of negligence is to identify breach of a duty of care, and offer remedy to a person who has suffered harm”. Without much ado, our security agencies, particularly the Police owed a duty to provide protection and security to members of that community which from the available reports, they neglected to do despite reassurances to the state government. For the Nimbo community to gain such redress though, the courts must be willing to extend the culpable negligence in tort to damages arising from a failure by a pubic authority to do its public duty which I earnestly wish the courts would courageously do, in special circumstances like the Nimbo attack.

For it will amount to a double jeopardy for the Nimbo community or indeed any other community considering that the constitution, expressly provides for only a single police force, as provided in section 214(1) of the 1999 constitution, thus: “There shall be a Police Force for Nigeria which shall be known as the Nigeria Police Force, and subject to the provisions of this section no other police force shall be established for the federation or any part thereof”. Yet, when the community needed that constitutionally guaranteed police protection, and despite giving an advanced reassurance to the community, which was unkempt, the community is unable to seek redress in court and get compensated by way of damages, for the glaring failure to provide such police protection.

This argument some would say is far-fetched. But that will only be so, if the courts decide not to do the needful. For in determining whether or not a duty of care existed, Brett MR in Heaven vs. Pender, said: “Whenever one person is by circumstance placed in such a position with regards to another, that everyone of ordinary sense who did think, would at once recognise that if he did not use ordinary care and skill in his own conduct with regards to those circumstances he would cause damage or injury to the person or property of the other, a duty arises to use ordinary care and skill to avoid such danger”.

It is my argument that the courts should consider the failure to provide police protection to the Nimbo community as one glaring failure to use ordinary care and skill for which the police should be liable. Understandably, it may be unwieldy and not in public interest, to hold that because the police generally owe all of us a duty of care, an omnibus right of action against all breaches should be available; but the Nimbo experience is distinct, considering that the Police and other security agencies were allegedly informed in advance about the pending attack, and they claimed to be ready to provide necessary protection, but never did.

So, I think this express information of a pending attack and the false promise to provide necessary security gives rise to a distinct duty of care in favour of the community; and the failure to provide same amounts to a negligence, which the courts should recognize. The negligence that the courts would recognize was defined by Lord Wright in Lochgelly Iron & Coal Co vs. McMullan, thus: “In strict legal analysis, negligence means more than heedless or careless conduct, whether in omission or commission; it properly connotes the complex concept of duty, breach, and damage thereby suffered by the person to whom the duty was owing”.

Closer home, Akpata JSC, in Odinaka vs. Moghalu, defined negligence as “the omission … to do something which a reasonable man, under similar circumstance would do or the doing of something which a reasonable and prudent man would not do”. Expatiating on this judicial pronouncements, Ese Malami at page 286, of his book, reemphasised: “Negligence is the failure of a person to exercise a duty of care that rests on him, and which causes harm to another person”. The author went ahead to distil three vital ingredients for a successful cause of action in a claim for negligence, namely, a duty of care, a breach of that duty and the suffering of damages as a result of the breach.

Proceeding from this premise, the question would be whether the police owe the Nimbo community a duty of care, the type that the law recognises. I guess they do. By the provisions of section 214(2)(b), the 1999 constitution: “the members of the Nigerian Police force shall have such powers and duties as may be conferred upon them by law”. In furtherance of this powers, the Nigeria Police Act, gifts the police the responsibility for the internal security of lives and property, of all Nigerians. If these express provisions of duty of care by our laws do not constitute a duty of care, then what would?

But assuming that in the interest of public policy, an omnibus liability would not arise from these provisions, shouldn’t the call to duty, by the Governor of Enugu State and the promise by police, to provide safety for the Nimbo community amount to a specific duty of care? Again, I think, it does, for the promise reinforces the statutory duty, as provided by the law, and a failure should naturally give rise to a liability. So, if the logic of duty of care, negligence and harm is properly applied, the people of Nimbo and other communities that have suffered similar experience should be able to maintain an action in Tort of negligence against the police.

The matter of public policy and the limits the courts must set was in the mind of Lord Denning, in the case of Dorset Yacht Co. Ltd vs. Home Office, when he held: “it is, I think at the bottom matter of public policy which we, as Judges, must resolve. This task of “duty” or “no duty” is simply a way of limiting the range of liability for negligence”. So, while not asking the courts to open a floodgate of litigations against the failure to do a public duty, the peculiar circumstances of the Nimbo community, calls for specific action or exception.

Now, if a duty of care is founded in an action and there is a breach, the law provides for damages. In determining the amount of damages, learned author, Ese Malami at page 322, wrote: “The amount or quantum of damages a Plaintiff may recover is determined by the amount of damage he suffered”. To forestall paying exemplary damages to the Nimbo community, I urge the federal and Enugu State governments to rebuild Nimbo community, to ameliorate their pains and sufferings.

May 10, 2016
Herdsmen: When reasoning goes on break

By Abdulmalik Inuwa Suleiman

We are again at crossroads as a nation with the farmers/herders’ clashes being the latest test facing us as a people. We are daily confronted with gory pictures coming from Benue, Nassarawa, Plateau most recently Enugu State while other States have reported incidences.

Given our diverse identities, reactions have been polarised along ethnic and religious lines and several of the interventions border on the extreme with the like of Ekiti State governor, Ayo Fayose threatening that the water sources in the State would be poisoned to deal with the herdsmen.

Online, people have been coming up with contents that could only serve to aggravate an already bad situation. One report spoke of how women in a particular community sprinkled chili pepper on their farms to deter cattle from destroying their crops leading to the death of some of the herds that ventured into the farms. Some blogs have even gone to the extreme of instigating reprisals; some persons of northern origin have relocated from a few southern towns and cities over this.

The extreme ones among these interventions are condemnable with the only excuse for them being that those behind them mostly reacted from the sheer shock of the gruesome images of death they saw prior to stating their positions. But there are those contributions that were driven less by human reaction to terror but propelled by greed as they sway the situation only from the prism of “man must wack” and immediately see potential for blackmail or at least make some money from the highest bidders.

Among these unpatriotic entities was one that took the cake for its daring attempt of making fools out of Nigerians. Anyone not familiar with Dr. Peregrino Brimah’s antecedents could be forgiven for thinking that his recent piece, “North`s Fulani Denial: Did Arase And Buratai Negotiate With Terrorists?” was well intentioned and that he genuinely loves Nigeria.

His dubious antecedents aside, the premise postulated in the questionable write up are full of holes that should alert the discerning to his true intentions. While I am not a mind reader, Brimah’s true intent is one of two things: he is either out to arm-twist Nigeria’s top military brass as has always been his desire or he is out to prove himself a loyal attack dog to his Iranian masters. Either way, the write up marks a new low for a confused being that is too disoriented to realise he should stop digging deeper into infamy after hitting rock bottom.

For those who don’t know much about this Iranian mercenary, he is the same chap that wailed he was the loudest online about what he termed the Nigerian Army’s “disproportionate” response to the apparent threat to life of the Chief of Army Staff, Lieutenant General TY Buratai with officers and men on his convoy. This was the fellow, who in a deranged fit of sponsored activism, virtually demanded that Nigeria ceases to exist to make way for a Shiite operated racket that answers to the Islamic Republic of Iran because this was what his recommended inaction on the part of the military would have amounted to.

This same character went on about how those that died in the resulting military operation were buried alive, or where still alive when buried. At the risk of trivialising this piece, Brimah’s assertion about burying deceased persons alive – between 24 to 48 hours after the operation easily reminds one of that spoof headline that read “Man commits suicide, runs away”. The idea is to show his lack of clarity in thinking through his allegation and overall stand and position.

In all his intervention for the Islamic Movement of Nigeria (IMN), he never accepted for once or even gave any hints that his clients have a history of violence and visiting oppression on the residents of Zaria, Kaduna state put up with for several decades. He never let on that members of IMN have been radicalised to the point of extremism and that the combatant training they have received – evidenced in video released online by the same sect – has positioned them as the replacement for Boko Haram as Nigeria’s new terror nightmare.

He also did not address security analysts who expressed concerns that IMN militants could infiltrate the ranks of aggrieved herdsmen or even Boko Haram to realise their desired goal of destabilizing Nigeria to entrench Shiite rule. What matters to Brimah was for Nigeria to allow the IMN extremism to fester.

Now, compare the “peace loving” Peregrino Birmah (MD or PhD?) to the ranting loose cannon that is angry that efforts are on to stop further loss of life in the farmers/herders clashes that has sparked off a regime of tit for tat killings. In an analysis that would be unbecoming even for someone just discharged from a psychiatric facility, Birmah labelled the move as “negotiate(ing) with terrorists”. Anyone familiar with his style will realise that he was expressing his preference for a massacre on ethnic basis and the target was meant to be persons of Fulani origin.

The marauding herdsmen that unleashed death on several communities have been severally labelled as Fulani in a controversy that has proven to be highly divisive. I think the true identity of these attackers would be known when the security agencies, which have been ordered by President Muhammadu Buhari to end the herdsmen’s reign of terror, start making progress in apprehending these killers. Like the Boko Haram horror, we may later find out that those behind the attacks are not limited by religion or ethnicity and possibly not by occupation. Birmah’s sick suggestion to massacre Fulani would thus be as crass as asking that the Kanuris be exterminated to rid the nation of Boko Haram because the group operates in their ancestral home.

The writer’s shallowness was further exposed when he concluded that the mere fact that legitimate groups held press briefings to highlight what angered them as an association is the same as their being responsible for the killings of entire villages. He possibly has never come on the concept whereby the same people affected by and agitating for the same thing adopt different approaches – one choosing persuasion and dialogue while the other opts for violence, killing and depression – while neither is able to prevail on the other to change tactics. This does not rule out the side that favours dialogue from those perpetrating violence in the name of the same struggle. If the writer of that poisonous piece knows half of this perhaps he would have adopted a different approach to deliver the slave’s errand he was running for his paymaster.

To accuse the north of propping up the herdsmen to carry out attacks portrayed desperation to pitch one region of the country against the other in addition to the equally grievous and treacherous crime of pitching the nation’s over 250 ethnic groups against the Fulani. There has been no verifiable document to prove that our Dr Peregrino Brimah is a pyromaniac that enjoys explosions and conflagrations for the kicks of it so something else must be driving this desire to see Nigeria burn. Could this be the actual brief from his client that he has been unable to achieve with IMN’s militarisation?

Unfortunately, the average criminal in the world and especially Nigeria will today claim persecution for being an activist when legitimately arrested for a crime. But for this, one would have prescribed that Brimah be invited or extradited to explain what he knows about mercenaries being hired by the herdsmen. Could he have added outsourcing IMN militants to herders to the long list of nefarious things he does to pick his bills? With the veiled threats he had issued severally in defence of extremism this cannot be put past him.

While the foregoing are credible possibilities, they could also be giving too much credit for the capabilities of Dr Peregrino Brimah, who is living a false life style in a foreign land and is thus under pressure to do whatever is necessary to survive. Driven by hunger and want, he is prepared to mortgage the wellbeing of the rest 170 million of us to get his mess of pottage and that is what riles me. I will not sit by and stomach what I find it sickening, which is that in this contemporary time, in 2016, some self-acclaimed activist is trying to bamboozle us into rising up against an entire ethnic group over the crime of a few persons of that extraction; he is trying to pitch the north against the rest of the country at a time when right thinking citizens mention their nationality first before ethnicity or geo-political zones.

We should all be equally outraged that this character tried to diminish national institutions to achieve these nefarious goals by accusing the Inspector General of Police and the Chief of Army Staff of negotiating with terrorists.

The IGP and COAS must dismiss Birmah as what he is, a fifth columnist already paid upfront to sabotage Nigeria and consign his ranting to the dustbin where they belong. They should disregard this apparent attempt at blackmail – either for money or for the security bosses not to be able to deal with the rampaging herdsmen as they see fit. If he is no longer able to ingratiate himself to his paymasters with his outbursts he will likely be compelled to seek other revenue sources aside blackmail and being paid to destabilize our country.

Suleiman is a public affairs commentator,

Writes from Dutsima,

Katsina State

May 9, 2016
Deafening silence of Lawmakers over MTN fine

There comes a time when silence is not golden, when policy makers and decision making institutions deliberately and needlessly extend prompt decision on an issue of national importance or even refuse to proffer an amicable way forward in line with national interest.

From the delay in assenting the 2016 budget, to the muting of the Social Media Bill and even the muting of the Gender and Equal Opportunity Bill, there have been several efforts by the Nigerian legislators to remain silent instead of promptly and actively standing up to address them.

Perhaps one of such glaring circumstances, is the MTN and NCC regulatory fine issue it is almost two months now since the House of representatives summoned the leadership of leading telecommunication provider MTN Nigeria, to explain its role and the circumstances surrounding its initial payment of N50b fine. But rather than instantly resolving the issue, it is unfortunate there just seem to be no head way. As it is, we are all stuck!

It is interesting to note that the CBN and the five banks recently fined for some regulatory irregularities have quickly dispatched the matter even without so much ado. That the matter only became a ‘public knowledge’ from the reports is a demonstration of expediting actions in matter of critical national interest.

While the legislators are backed by the law to investigate, what they have failed to do is to quickly and promptly conclude on the matter through its house committee to support on-going efforts towards an amicable solution.

We must commend the efforts of the Attorney General of the Federation and the Minister of Communication both of who have shown desire to ensure a quick resolution but unfortunately as the Minister of Communication said in one of his chat, the legislators have to conclude their investigations before negotiations can continue.

Many experts in law, economy, business and finance have expressed worries on the unnecessary delay of the legislators to come up with a decision especially as the president had earlier ordered a renegotiation of the 780 billion Naira fine imposed on the company. The experts have expressed in their several analysis that the best way to stimulate growth in the economy is to ensure that investments keep flowing into sectors that need them which in-turn progressively lead to improved revenue for the government.

It has been agreed that Nigeria’s best example of success in attracting and retaining foreign investment has happened in the telecoms sector and that experience in the past 15 years ought to encourage Nigeria to solicit more in sector even outside telecoms. The knowledge of the need for an economically stable Nigeria is behind the loud criticism of the silence of Nigerian legislators on this matter like many others, with many experts calling on the legislators to take prompt action now on the MTN and NCC matter. We wish Nigeria a successful digital switch over in 2017.

May 5, 2016
Kaduna religious bill versus 1999 Constitution

The Kaduna State Religious Preaching Bill has generated controversies. Some have held that the Bill is irredeemably unconstitutional on the authorities of sections 10 and 38 of the CFRN 1999. But are they right in the light of the balancing provisions of section 45(1) CFRN?

Some believe that the provision of section 4 of the Bill which recognises Islam and Christianity as the two major religions in Kaduna State breaches the provision of section 10 of CFRN 1999 which prohibits recognition of state religion by either the State or Federal government. The relevant question however is whether recognising “two major religions” is the same thing with adopting a state religion. It is my view that the two are different. The Kaduna Bill does not seek to impose a state religion; it only seeks to regulate two major religions (out of others recognised in the state) with divisive and violent intolerant tendencies. To flout section 10 of CFRN 1999 therefore, a state or federal law must clearly provide that it is now adopting religion A or B as the official state religion to the exclusion of all others. This, obviously, is not the case here. We can equally argue that by establishing institutions for pilgrimage (to Mecca and Jerusalem only) at both state and federal levels, these two tiers of government have adopted Christianity and Islam as official religions on Nigeria. This is an argument that will be dead on arrival (DoA).

Others fervently justified the unconstitutionality of the proposed Bill on the ground that most of its provisions contravene section 38 of the CFRN 1999 which recognises the right of every citizen to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. Since this constitutional provision recognises the enjoyment of this right either in private or in public or in community with others, those who hold this view argued for an absolute (as opposed to a qualified) application of the provisions of section 38 without admitting or acknowledging the possibility of a derogation even within the ambit of the CFRN 1999. This explains their absolute assertion that people can decide to practise his Christian or Islamic religion and belief alone without regard to other members of the society.

It is however important to clarify that the word “public” must be interpreted together with the words “in community with others.” It is by so doing that we can fully appreciate that the Constitution is simply saying “your right to freedom of religion can be exercised in person in private, or in community with others in public and at designated places of worships.” This type of interpretation can be justified under the Constitution itself which requires fair balancing of all the fundamental rights of citizens. Thus even though you have a right to freedom of speech, you cannot in the process defame other people: if you do, you will be visited with a civil suit for libel or slander. This need for balancing is equally echoed in one of the witty quotations of a former US Supreme Court Justice, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr who said that “your right to swing your arms ends just where the other man’s nose begins.”

More importantly, the CFRN 1999 permits governments (state or federal) to enact legislation needed for balancing citizens’ rights. This can be found in section 45(1) of the CFRN 1999 which provides thus:

“Nothing in sections 37, 38, 39, 40 and 41 of this Constitution shall invalidate any law that is reasonably justifiable in a democratic society

(a) in the interest of defence, public safety, public order, public morality or public health (emphasis added); or

(b) for the purpose of protecting the rights and freedom of other persons”.

It will be over-simplistic and playing with human lives to overlook the fact that the Kaduna Bill is proposed to reduce religious violence/intolerance and mindless killing in that state. This is a state where several precious lives had been lost to riots resulting from the Maitatsine attack, the Danish Cartoons incident, the Miss World incident, and recently, the Shiite-Army clash. I therefore find it incomprehensible that anyone will discuss section 38 of the Constitution without referring to the above-quoted section which permits governments to come up with legislation required for rights-balancing. None of the cases cited by the writer directly deals with the power of governments to enact legislation for the purpose of rights-balancing.

In further criticising the Bill and making a case for its jettison, some are offended that the Bill subjects “Christians to the jurisdiction of customary courts” when those courts lack understanding of Ecclesiastical matters. But truth be told, the court in this case is not called upon to interpret any Ecclesiastic provisions; rather the customary court will be interpreting a purely secular law as represented in the proposed Bill. So, this criticism is also DoA.

Some have made too much issue of the requirement that any intending preacher must obtain licence from the JNI/CAN committee. In over-flogging this as a violation of the right to freedom of association, they failed to notice that the JNI/CAN group is simply performing a nominal administrative duty of issuing licence. The bulk of the work leading to license issuance (verification of personality, etc.) are within the prerogative of the local government committees. This makes a lot of sense since local governments are the closest to the people and they stand in a better position to know the characters of intending applicants. It is this local government committee which makes recommendation to the Inter-Faith committee on whether to grant or deny a license. The Inter-Faith committee simply acts on this recommendation by authorising the JNI/CAN committee to issue license. Even though the local government committee is peopled mostly by JNI/CAN members, nowhere in the proposed Bill is it provided that membership of JNI/CAN is a precondition to license grant.

In the final analysis, a law such as this is long overdue for most states of Nigeria. In Ilorin, Kwara State where I live, government roads are blocked on Fridays for Jumat prayers, and on other days for any other programmes of the Mosque. Churches conduct vigils blasting their services through loud speakers at the highest volume, not minding the peace of the people in their vicinities. Are these to be understood as exercise of their rights to freedom of religion? What about atheists? Don’t they too have rights not to be bothered by whatever you are preaching? What about a Christian or Muslim who does not want to be bothered by whatever you are “selling” in the name of Almighty God or Allah? All these are necessary balancing in virtually all democracies of the world. As a matter of fact, in some of the countries I have been to, religious activities are legally required to take place only in sound-proof apartments. While the Kaduna State Bill may not be a perfect piece of legislation as it is, it is a welcome development. Concerned stakeholders in the state should therefore attend the public hearing of the Bill to make sure their concerns are taken care of. As an example, I believe the scope of where recorded religious materials can be played should be extended to include inside private cars but at a moderate volume. It is important we exercise our rights to freedom of religion with a balancing mindset. Only then can there be peace all over the country. May I close with the words of George Carlin that “religion is like a pair of shoes…Find one that fits you, but don’t make me wear your shoes.”

Olatunji, a lecturer at the Department of Business Law, University of Ilorin, writes from the University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.

May 4, 2016
Exploring world of teachers

Do teachers really have a role to play in the growth of development of our nation? What value do they contribute in the nation building process? Are they really indispensable? All these are more are issues popping up in my mind as I take a closer and more detailed look at the world of teachers and the academia at large.

Albert Einstein once noted and I state “It is possible for those who teach to transfer ignorance”. Any attempt to ruminate on this thought of Albert will most likely begin to raise interest in our hearts concerning teachers and the responsibility that they are saddled with. To what extent have teachers been able to fulfill the demands laid upon them? Are there factors that affect their ability to live up to expectation?

I have observed that living and learning are two very close variables, in fact, it is almost impossible for one to be separated from the other. We do learn on various platforms like observation, experience and off course teaching which to a very large extent may account for the larger chunk of knowledge gained by an individual or a group.

If this is true, then I think there is every need for us to begin to pay rapt attention to the dynamics and intricacies of the world of teaching. Any attempt, whether willful or unwillful, to neglect the proper functioning and alignment of the world of teaching may yield thorns and brier that will plague or threaten our entire national life and continuing existence.

I will like us to note at this point that teaching transcends the four walls of a classroom or even a school compound; it could be formal as noted above and can also be informal. For example, if I pass by a street and I see two young boys fighting and I take out time to stop by and restrain them from doing such, explaining to them that they could resolve their conflict or differences without necessarily exchanging blows, then I just taught them.

What did I teach them? Did I transfer and sound knowledge to them that could make them better? Off course I did. I taught them not to be violent but rather be peaceful even in resolving differences. This kind of teaching could be seen as informal. Do I need to be a convectional classroom teacher in order to do what I did? Capital “No”. So what am I driving at? It is that we may need to become holistic in approaching the world of teaching if we want to create long lasting change and transformation in society through it.

A closer look at the formal teaching world of our nation today raises a lot of concern in my mind. Issues ranging from teachers’ recruitment, motivation, training, and development among others form core of this concern.

How do people come into the teaching profession in our country? What impact has the current upsurge in unemployment had on the entrance of people in teaching practice? Are our teachers really trained and cultured empowered to teach? Do we have the right facility in place to support efficient and effective teaching? What alternative do we have to the traditional classroom educational system? These and many more issues are to be attended to and this we will do in our subsequent discourses. Do keep a date with the column.

The writer can be reached via: ojo_nathaniel@yahoo.com or 08024336024

April 8, 2016
Towards greater efficiencies in Public Sector
When global players in aviation industry pinned their hopes on twin-engine jetliners, experts believed it was a good bet. Jetliners like the Airbus A350 and Boeing 787 Dreamliner proved super-efficient due to ground-breaking composite designs. But with the planes set to take over more and more transoceanic routes, there were genuine challenges ahead.

To follow the most direct routes between global cities (which can save hours and lots of fuel on ultra-long-distance flights), planes can fly far from land over remote stretches of ocean. However, losing one of its twin engines could leave these jets searching for a place to make an emergency landing as quickly as possible.

Like jetliners, developing countries run on twin engines. And to transform their economies, a tested approach is pairing a dynamic private sector (corporates and SMEs, which employs a bulk of the population) and an efficient public sector. But unlike the private sector (driven by competition and innovation to match demands of customers and clients), the public sector arguably lacks that extra motivation and professionalism that makes businesses tick. Same thing the Dreamliner had over the first Airbus A350. So how do developing countries like Nigeria plug this challenge? The answer lies in the composition.

To a large extent, the efficiency and profitability of organisations boil down to composition. And by composition, I mean staffing. Of course, other factors like strategy and technology impact the efficiency of 21st century organisations. Whether public, private or non-profit, the impact of proper strategy and technological integration cannot be overemphasised. But the single unifying factor is that institutions are run by people. Also, it is people that implement strategy, and utilize technology to achieve greater efficiencies. Thus, while hiring and maintaining the best talents is key, great companies in the private sector take it to the next level – they invest in developing the capacity and competencies of their people.

So what can the public sector learn from this? According to one of the world’s most respected and celebrated CEOs, Jack Welch, great companies demonstrate a real commitment to continuous learning and development; not lip service.

One way organisations can invest in its people is through Continuing Professional Development (CPD) programmes. CPD refers to the commitment of professionals to upgrading and improving their skill set throughout their careers. It combines different methodologies to learning, such as training workshops, conferences and events, e-learning programs, global best practice techniques and ideas sharing, all focused for an individual to improve and have effective professional development. It is one of the sure ways of investing to keep staff highly competitive to achieve greater efficiencies.

Grafting such practices into the public sector will arguably foster creativity and innovation while helping to improve the competencies and capacity to align with technological innovation and the delivery of public goods. A good example is Dubai.

If you have read about or been to this United Arab Emirates city you will agree that its ultramodern infrastructure and architecture are almost incomparable. However, what is more important is that its development and culture of excellence was not private sector driven. In fact, Dubai’s excellence takes its root in the implementation of astute government policies. Many of its government departments continuously measure public opinion about their services and design training programmes and cost efficiency plans accordingly. This, in turn, improves the impact of public policies it implements, and is quite similar to what obtains in a business.

To paraphrase a chapter in Dubai leader, Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum’s book, My Vision: Challenges in the Race for Excellence, programmes civil servants take go beyond traditional public sector courses, to include development of team spirit, customer service, efficiency and productivity. According to him, the public sector facilitates international conferences, workshops and seminars that allow civil servants the chance to meet experts and specialists in the fields of management, economy and technology. Civil servants are also allowed the opportunity to make better use of all available human and financial resources, international relations and human interests; and transfer the experience and knowledge they acquire through attending such events to the next managerial level in their departments.

“Such an approach institutionalizes excellence in the public sector by promoting awareness among civil servants and motivating them to develop and keep pace with international progress,” Al Maktoum opines, and I dare say it is a winning model of increasing efficiencies in the public sector. The iconic leader also goes on to talk about not using legislative instruments to institutionalise excellence, but breeding a culture of excellence by enshrining it in the society. The logic: civil servants eternally compete to deliver excellence because the citizenry are not used to anything less.

Back to Welch, the master Manager/ former Chairman and CEO of General Electric philosophies of management are globally-acclaimed. In his wisdom, he suggests five principles that make great companies stand out. Perhaps, if adopted, it could influence staff performance and bring about greater efficiencies in the public sector.
1. Great companies are meritocracies. The private sector is arguably driven by meritocracy – you don’t become a manager if you don’t have the requisite competence and capacity to handle such responsibilities. “Pay and promotions are tightly linked to performance, and rigorous appraisal systems consistently make people aware of where they stand,” opines Welch. Cue: Make the public sector a meritocracy.
1. Great companies understand that what is good for society is also good for business. “Gender, race, and nationality are never limitations; everyone’s ideas matter. Preferred employers are diverse and global in their outlook and environmentally sensitive in their practices,” says Welch. If this culture is imbibed in the public sector, it will help public servants understand their role in driving society forward. For example, if public servants understand the global impact their roles could play, they will perform better because the reality is: although, they implement domestic policies, Nigeria’s foreign policy is a reflection of its domestic affairs, and it goes a long way in advancing its interests in the international community.
1. Great companies keep their hiring standards tight. Welch opines that great companies “make candidates work hard to join the ranks by meeting strict criteria that centre on intelligence and previous experience and by undergoing an arduous interview process.” It should be the same for the public sector. Securing a job in, say, the Nigerian Stock Exchange (NSE) is based on talent, not gender or ethnicity. That way, the NSE presently has a pool of great talent and will continue to attract more talent.
1. Great companies are profitable and growing. “A rising stock price is a hiring and retention magnet. But beyond that, only thriving companies can promise you a future with career mobility and the potential of increased financial rewards,” Welch says. But in the public sector success is measured by the impact and the delivery of public goods. So transferring private sector yardstick for measuring success might not be appropriate. But a forward-thinking government department that continuously evaluates its position, rewards hard work and challenges staff to do more, embodies the spirit of a thriving company. Cue: Lagos State Internal Revenue Service (LIRS), which continues to make sue Lagos State’s Internally Generated Revenue (IGR) remains the highest in the country while investing in people and stimulating the delivering of public goods.
1. Great companies not only allow people to take risks, but also celebrate those who do. Risk taking encourages innovation. “As with meritocracies, a culture of risk-taking attracts exactly the kind of creative, bold employees that companies want and need in a global marketplace where innovation is the single best defense against unrelenting cost competition,” Welch opines. For the public sector to thrive, managers and government department must be willing to take risks to deliver public goods.
Remember the twin-engine Jetliners? Apparently, the Airbus A350 was a little below par compared to the Boeing 787 Dreamliner, when it was launched. According to an article on traveller.com, a “clamour for both cabin comfort and better economics eventually forced Airbus into a fundamental shift in strategy.” The result: Airbus A350XWB. However, “it took another two years of sales setbacks and doubts at the highest management level before Airbus agreed to build the A350XWB,” which matched the Boeing’s 787 Dreamliner, a super-efficient jet boasting 30% fuel savings thanks to a carbon-composite design.

So, just like the initial Airbus A350, Nigeria’s public sector arguably lacks the culture and innovation that brings about greater efficiencies. But, perhaps, all it needs is borrow a leaf from the private sector by implementing a fundamental shift in strategy – investing more in its composites and enshrining a culture of excellence.
- Douglas Imaralu, MILD, is a communications, international relations and development professional. He writes from Lagos. Find him on Twitter @jefumare
March 30, 2016
What does Fayose want?

His survival instinct appears permanently activated

Governor Ayodele Fayose of Ekiti state is an enigma and enfant terrible. He is loquacious, audacious, vexatious, and irascible. He is a man of many controversies. In the popular Yoruba saying, he is a man you must not meet but who, unfortunately, you cannot avoid; this is the proverbial “oniyangi” (someone carrying sand on his head) that the man carrying a pot of palm oil must do all things possible to avoid. Controversies not only surround Fayose, his second nature is controversy. There is controversy about his name – whether it is Fayose or Oluwayose. Controversies surround his relationship with family members. I am not even sure whether controversies do not surround his date, place, and circumstances of birth. Controversies trail his relationship with his wife – whether he pummels her or not. In his first stint as governor, it was controversy all the way: How he emerged as candidate was controversial; no less so how he became governor. In office, it was one controversy after another: Whether he slapped the deputy governor and seized her phone; whether he stripped some Obas; his poultry project of controversy was said by then President Olusegun Obasanjo, himself an accomplished poultry farmer, as one of the wonders of the modern world; and controversies still trail his stewardship as governor – whether or not he stole Ekiti blind. He has a date with the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) in the law courts.

Fayose’s second coming as governor has been no less controversial. Before then, his defection from one party to another had all been trailed by controversies – from PDP to Labour to AC and back to PDP. How he won the PDP primaries over and above the head of the poll’s favourite, Dayo Adeyeye, is controversial. How he went on to “trounce” incumbent governor Fayemi remains controversial. Revelations of how PDP Federal power mobilised state resources and lined state institutions, including the military, behind Fayose are all in the public domain.

Since his second coming, it has also been controversies all the way. Fayose’s pledge during the campaigns that he was a changed person was, obviously, meant only for the elections and the unwary. The man remains his old self – controversy personified. Did he or did he not instruct or supervise the beating up of state judges? Did he or did he not chase away majority members of the state House of Assembly, causing five or six members to override the majority 19 members? One day he announces the payment of salaries to hapless Ekiti workers; as the alert sounds and the workers troop to the banks, the salaries are silently and secretly withdrawn to the consternation of everyone but Fayose himself! Nigerians will not forget in a hurry how Fayose’s aircraft overshot the tarmac in his truculent opposition to Muhammadu Buhari’s presidential ambition on the APC ticket.

Fayose did his best to stop Nigerians voting Buhari into office. He said the man was sick and would not last the distance. He said he trailed and traced him to a hospital in London. He said the man, at 73, was senile; he went even to the ridiculous extent of mimicking how his own mother and Buhari’s age-mate, at 74, wastes precious time to “boot” like Pentium 1 computer! He said Buhari was analogue whereas the modern age is digital. Ultimately, Nigerians saw through his blackmail; rejected his unsolicited-for advice and voted Buhari into office.

Once Fayose saw this, he was the first PDP notable, after the then weather-beaten President Goodluck Jonathan, to congratulate Buhari and declare his loyalty! He said politics was over with the election and governance must begin apace. But not for long! Fayose soon returned to the Bastilles, as it were, harassing the new president and buffeting him on all sides. He has cried more than the bereaved and been more Catholic than the Pope. Fayose is not the PDP chairman or any other ranking PDP official but he is better known than any of these in his “defence” of the fallen party. He has become the voice, mouth-piece, spokesperson, defender, and conscience of the party, all rolled into one. In this, he has pushed aside Governor Segun Mimiko of Ondo State, who is the official chairperson of PDP governors. He has also torpedoed Olisa Metuh, the National Publicity Secretary of the PDP. Fayose has successfully installed himself a one-man Riot Squad, waging the battles of PDP on all fronts. His state is cash-strapped and does not even command 10 percent of the resources of some PDP states like Delta, Akwa Ibom, Bayelsa, and Rivers; yet, Fayose committed so much resources of his state in provocative advertisements lambasting Buhari/APC. Remember how the late MKO Abiola described the then Air Force chief, Nura Imam, and his men as “mad dogs”?

But what does Fayose want? A man cannot take up all of these troubles for nothing. To be sure, Fayose is smart, damn smart. He is cold-blooded and rigorously calculating. He cannot, therefore, be on charity. According to some reports, the prophets who prophesied his return to office also prophesied he may not last his term. To last his term was why he chased out the majority Ekiti State legislators for fear they could impeach him. To last his term is why, when his hands of fellowship were spurned by Buhari/APC, he chose to fight to the finish. It is a fight for survival but couched in the esoteric language of defence of democratic ethos and the rights/freedom/liberties of citizens. With the mountains of problems that Fayose faces, the only way he can survive his second stint is, if he diverts attention from himself to an outside enemy. That way, he can always rally Ekiti behind himself to face the external foes. It was ex-Governor Kayode Fayemi. Now, it is Buhari/APC. Unfortunately, the Department of State Security has been dumb enough to play into Fayose’s hands. If no external pressure is mounted on Fayose, the heat from within is enough to hang him out to dry in no time.

– Bolawole writes from turnpot@gmail.com (0807 552 5533)

TUNJI ADEGBOYEGA

BACK SOON.

March 20, 2016