The Nation Newspaper

Category: Opinion

  • Atiku’s lamentation of PDP’s loss of South-west

    Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar’s piece in The Nation on July 2, titled “How to Resolve PDP Crisis” was such an interesting read. Atiku seems to believe that the crisis rocking the Peoples Democratic Party is largely self-inflicted because it had derailed from the vision of its founding fathers. The Turaki Adamawa also harped on what the party must do to reclaim its lost glory in the piece.

    Although, Atiku may have riled a significant segment of his supporters and admirers for being unprincipled, having gone back to his own vomit in light of the humiliation he suffered as a sitting vice president from his boss. But consistently principled he has been in denouncing the crude and reckless power play of his party’s leadership hierarchy. As a key founding father, one can hardly fault Alhaji Abubakar for shouting himself hoarse in his attempt to draw attention to a party that seems to be taking a rapid nose dive less than five years after, in his exuberance, a top party apparatchik boasted that the party would rule for the next 60 years.

    Atiku’s piece can be divided into three distinct parts. In the first part, the former vice president went down memory lane as he tried to acquaint his readers with what seems to be the philosophical underpinning and vision of PDP’s founding fathers that conceived and gave birth to this behemoth, which Atiku probably believe, and rightly so, that may have lost its soul. As one of the founding fathers, Atiku’s conviction that a party platform with “credible internal capacity to produce leaders who will be committed to the public purpose…because it is within such a national party that…can guarantee national harmony, promote human development and safeguard the freedom and dignity of all citizens” is no doubt noble.

    But it appears Atiku is probably the only founding father with this noble ideal. And if not, it had since been jettisoned and replaced with acquisition of power in its crudest form, flagrant violation of the rule of law, inordinate and reckless pursuit of personal wealth in the name of politics, and in-your-face looting of the collective patrimony ever since those founding fathers made that singular blunder of inviting the chicken farmer from Ota to be the party’s CEO. The party had never known peace since and probably never will as the acorn seed of discord he sowed before he left the helm had grown into a mighty oak.

    The mid-section is the former vice president’s lamentation of PDP’s loss of the South-west to the opposition and his admonition to the South-west party leaders that the “trend be reversed” in the region. He also suggested what needs to be done for the party to rid itself of its self-inflicted crisis and return to that philosophical ideal for which it was founded in the last leg of his piece.

    One is especially curious as to why the former vice president suddenly developed this nostalgic feeling about the South-west and hence, his insistence that “PDP cannot afford to depart” from the region. If the basis of his reasoning is that any government in Nigeria can hardly be considered relatively successful if it’s not at peace with the South-west, then he’s probably on point. But if he had chosen the South-west as a case study in order to show the extent of the party’s degeneration in the region’s body politic, then he’s being clever by half as the facts did not support his case study.

    As a veteran politician who has been in the trade probably longer than he can remember, Atiku knows full well now that a party does not need the South-west to be the government at the centre. But he is also politically astute enough to know that God helps that government at the centre that had not only lost the South-west but also the respect and acceptance, no matter how tacit, of the people of this region as that government may never know peace in its lifetime. It’s politically naïve of the former vice president to think that his PDP have even a fighting chance, outside of doing what it does best, in coming back to political reckoning in the South-west geo-political zone. And this is why.

    Contrary to his assertion that “PDP became a very strong political party in the South-west as a result of the efforts and commitment of leaders who commanded the respect of the generality of the people of the South-west” which culminated in its control of the region’s levers of power, its control was primarily due to the massive and blatant rigging of the 2007 elections which have gone down in infamy as the worst election in Nigeria’s history. It was an election in which INEC, the electoral umpire was in full collusion, and the stage for it having been set by then President Obasanjo with his “do or die” declaration. The rigging was so egregious that the facts of any case in respect of that election brought before any judge with any iota of conscience left in him/her could not have been overlooked. And that was why the courts overturned the governorship elections in three South-west states of Ekiti, Osun and Ondo.

    The “startling reverse” that the fortunes of the party took from 2011 in the region was not only due to the people’s realization that the party is really clueless as to what governance was about, but they had come to terms with their inherent progressive political philosophy, which is fundamentally opposed to the conservative political ideology of PDP at the centre. His assertion that his “party didn’t come to this sorry state in the region because the party men failed to deliver good governance to the people” where their “landmarks of achievements…dot the region” is at best delusional.

    It is also important to put into proper perspective the emergence of PDP in the political landscape of the South-west, in case Atiku did not know or conveniently choose not to know. The emergence of PDP in the driver’s seat of the politics of the South-west in 2003 was the result of the dummy sold by Obasanjo to the region’s progressive governors before the elections, but which was steadfastly rejected by then Governor Ahmed Bola Tinubu who consequently became the last man standing among them. Secondly, the people of the South-west, with their votes, made it abundantly clear to their leaders then that they were in a hurry for development in all its facets.

    Atiku Abubakar would do well by focusing his attention to fixing the big umbrella at the centre as well as the smaller ones in other geo-political regions that are drenching their members and the hapless people where these umbrellas are still open. The only renegade state left to be liberated and brought back into this regional family of progressives is the degenerate government in Ondo. And it’s only a matter of time.

     

    • Odere is a media practitioner. He can be reached at femiodere@gmail.com.

  • Corruption and anti-corruption watch

    The world over, Non Governmental Organizations (NGOs) are to agencies, organizations or social movements that open up the liberal political space, engender equalization of opportunities; improve the circumstances of disadvantaged peoples and institutions and hold governments to account.

    Ordinarily, NGOs are expected to be not profit-oriented and are supposed to be independent of the control of government. These usually value-based institutions or organs pursue activities to relieve suffering, promote the interest of the poor, protect the environment, provide basic social services, or undertake community development.

    But in Nigeria, the mushrooming phenomenon in the third world has prompted some scholars to contend that it has suffered some “explosion, derailment, and displacement”. This is because charlatans who merely masquerade as NGO operatives have infiltrated the rank of these social, popular democratic movements.

    Drawing from his experience with his hitherto leftist friends, associates and acquaintances, Edwin Madunagwu in 2006 underscored the proliferation and bastardization of the NGO sector thus: “Almost every friend I know, every comrade of mine has an NGO. I know someone who is running three non-governmental organizations, is involved in about five others, and has about four others already registered awaiting activation when the need arises.”

    Any keen observer of the events that have shaped the nation’s politics in the last few months will discern the unwieldy tendency of political actors to use these “change-agents” to foster acrimony and disunity in our dear nation. A case in point is an unknown organisation that goes by the name, Anti-Corruption Watch and its recent activities.

    Existing only on newspaper advertorial pages, it has made it a business to teach independent government agencies their modus operandi only to please their paymasters.

    Currently, the amorphous Non Governmental Organization played the devil’s advocates by inciting the public and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to beam searchlight on Niger State over some spurious allegation that first sprouted in 2009 at the height of the political shenanigans orchestrated to filibuster the job of the Chief Servant, Dr. Mua’zu Babangida Aliyu. Being a whistle blower, the Anti Corruption Watch can only be applauded if the job that it has elected to do is anchored on truth. But the present exercise is a failed attempt to put spanner in the work that has been internationally acknowledged as exemplary.

    The climate has gone sully again because of 2015. Now, time is ripe for political do-gooders to dig into things known and unknown to convince their paymasters that the Aliyu administration does not justify the rating that has put Niger as a frontline state in terms of poverty reduction and great developmental strides. The same state that is currently rated as the least poverty-stricken state is now being tarred by those without empirical basis as corruption-riddled and enmeshed in sharp practices. Had they known that the allegations of wrong-doings have been investigated and dispensed with by the agencies accused of ineptitude, they would have covered their faces in shame.

    Scooping money from their gullible promoters to incite the masses against the administration only exhibit the limitations of the paymasters and their hack men. This was the same route of perdition that ended grievously and many of them had to eat their words when the administration set out to develop all the sectors of socio-economic life of the people.

    It is understandable that the mouth of detractors who had failed woefully to wrestle power by hook or crook should be filled with sour grapes.

    Now in collaboration with people who feel the Governor has an eye on the top or would not brook the idea of leaving the top seat as an exclusive preserve of present occupants, they have gone back to their pastime to rake up muck. The real and behind-the-scene motives for the unrelenting mischief making by well-known detractors of the current administration in Niger State should be obvious to all thinking people.

    No one who visited Niger State before and after Dr. Mu’azu Babangida Aliyu came to power will fail to attest to the fact that he has filled the void of the same devastated state that had been abandoned in a state of helplessness.

    Because of the yawning developmental gap left between what was and what is now, it has not been easy for these lily-livered rumour mongers to come to terms with the giants stride being made to make the state one of the three most developed states in the country by 2020, a major plank of the Babangida Aliyu transformation agenda code-named 3: 2020.

    It is no wonder that as a way of trying to pull the wool over the eyes of the people, these shameless detractors who obviously do not have the interest of the masses of Niger State and by extension, most northerners and indeed Nigerians in mind have resorted to various arm-twisting tactics to sow the seed of discord in every venture that Mu’azu Aliyu supports.

    It will be recalled that the Anti-Corruption Watch is aping what an article written in 2009 under the pseudonym Engineer Yahaya Mahmood spawned through a ridiculous petition, sent to the Niger State House of Assembly, leveling all manners of tendentious allegations against the Mu’azu Babangida Aliyu administration.

    Needless to state that from the mediocrity of the presentation of the ‘facts’ in the silly petition, it was obvious that the so-called engineer who allegedly authored the report was just desirous of dragging everybody else into his natural habitat. The only aim of the allegations is to distract and divert the attention of the executive and legislative arm of the government from their busy schedule of work for the people. The writer of the petition knew that there was no chance of them coming before the state House of Assembly to substantiate their wild allegations as the petitioners are mere ghost writers.

    So how does Anti-Corruption Watch corroborate the allegations they have raked up or they simply want the taxpayers’ monies spent on spurious allegations, simply because they hate the guts of the Chief Servant?

    For the records, it is obvious that the beer-parlour gossips cannot justify the developmental strides of this administration in terms of health care delivery, sanitation, agriculture, education and road construction and rehabilitation.

    Stealing from the poor state will only be Satanic, it is a venture a God-fearing servant of the people like Dr Mu’azu Babangida Aliyu will not toe. There is however no doubt that attempts to erect such red-herrings would collapse.

     

    •Ndayebo writes from Minna, Niger State

  • Soldier meets futurologist

    Wide-eyed observers must have contemplated the very first move by Major Hamza Al –Mustapha following his freedom after 15 years of detention and trial for alleged murder. The former Chief Security Officer (CSO) to the late military dictator, General Sani Abacha, made a beeline for the Synagogue of All Nations of Prophet T.B. Joshua at Ikotun, a Lagos suburb.  It was intriguing that Al-Mustapha, a Muslim, had Joshua on his mind, for his relations and friends left no one in doubt about his religion as they reportedly shouted “Allahu Akbar” as the Appeal Court sitting in Lagos discharged and acquitted him on July 12. For those who believe in the oneness of God despite the multiplicity of religions, it must have been a vindication of sorts.

    However, this particular drama transcended such narrow interpretation. Could it also have been a meeting of confessors, one being a priest who hears confession and gives absolution, and the other someone who makes a confession and seeks forgiveness? It is incongruous that Al-Mustapha concealed his mission but exploited the photo opportunity to publicize his visit.

    Interestingly, the whole game was not lost on Joshua who seized the moment to sell his alleged prophetic powers. After giving background information on how he met Al-Mustapha and Abacha while his church was being investigated for alleged involvement in hard drugs, Joshua went on to claim bragging rights. He said: “I was able to reveal to them who I am by telling them what was to come as a prophet. One of those things I mentioned to them, and to Al-Mustapha in particular, was what he went through, though he did not believe me then. That was why, when it came to pass, I was the first person he remembered.”

    Joshua said further, “I told him that he would spend several years in prison and would be finally released, which no one else had ever told him. That is why you see him coming here as his first port of call.”

    It was disappointing, though, that Joshua didn’t go far enough in proving his claimed prophetic gift. He should perhaps have supplied the particulars of his prophecy to the soldiers. Did the priest tell Al-Mustapha of the murder charges he would face from 1998 on account of the daylight Lagos shooting of Alhaja Kudirat Abiola in June 1996? Was Al-Mustapha told that he would be set free on account of his innocence, or despite his culpability?

    Did Joshua foresee the death sentence pronounced by Justice Mojisola Dada of the Lagos High Court on January 30, 2012, after finding Al-Mustapha and co-accused Alhaji Lateef Sofolahan guilty of conspiring to commit the offence? Did he also anticipate the release of the two men by the Appeal Court, which contended that there were “gaping loopholes” in the prosecution’s charges?  If, indeed, Joshua had foreknowledge of Al-Mustapha’s troubles in connection with Kudirat’s killing, did he also know in advance that Sofolahan too would be involved as an alleged co-conspirator?

    How much really did Joshua know of the future?

    As things stand now, with the matter still open to further appeal by the prosecution at the Supreme Court, what does Joshua know of tomorrow? Can he tell whether the prosecution would assert its right to appeal? If such happens, can he tell how it would end?  Has he told Al-Mustapha of future developments, if any, in this matter?

    Joshua’s epistemological arrogance has significant implications that are truly disturbing. It is easy to see a fatalistic viewpoint in his position, which is perhaps unsurprising, given his priestly status. Beyond Al-Mustapha, however, is the more serious suggestion that Kudirat was fated to be shot to death on the road. There is a grave danger for social relations if such supposition is unchallenged.

    Kudirat’s murder apart, the spiritualization of material conditions, which is unmistakable in Joshua’s utterances, has tentacular dimensions. The logic of fatalism is not selective, and cannot be applied to some cases while excluded in others. Taken to a logical conclusion, the concept in its inclusiveness is supposed to determine every aspect of life on earth. In other words, everything that happens is predetermined and inevitable, and human beings are powerless to change them.

    By such reasoning, it would be permissible to overlook not only Kudirat’s murder, but also other politically tainted killings. However, there is no doubt that the events leading to Kudirat’s elimination had the stamp of politics. She was a politically conscious and active figure whose visibility in the campaign for the restoration of her husband’s annulled democratically given mandate in the June 12, 1993, presidential election gave the Abacha regime sleepless nights. Her assassination in a shady context was a big blow to the pro-democracy movement at the time, and even the acclaimed winner in that election and presidential claimant, Chief MKO Abiola, succumbed to death in mysterious circumstances two years later while under detention by the military authorities. Their unnatural exits in highly suspicious situations deservedly remain on the front burner years after, and it is a wonder that the country’s justice system is yet to address in a definitive way the gross injustice of their deaths.

    The Appeal Court’s unanimous lead judgment delivered by Justice Rita Pemu formulated the central question in the case in rather restrictive and counter-productive terms. According to her, “One thing is clear, Kudirat was shot, but the big question is who pulled the trigger? Certainly not the appellants. This court is not interested in the politics of the matter, nor in sentiment.”   Certainly, this matter was not only about “who pulled the trigger”. Equally important, it was also about who sponsored the killing, who abetted the killers, who had a motive for seeking her death. If the circumstances of her death indeed had political overtones, why should the judges not be interested, or why should such reality put them off?

    Also, should the expression of natural emotion by the public in reaction to the killing count against the cold facts surrounding the incident?

    It is interesting that the Appeal Court verdict bore the seal of three women, comprising Justice Pemu, Justice Amina Augie and Justice Fatima Akinbami. Could it be that they were anxious to avoid the charge of gender bias? Now, that would be sentiment! Equally fascinating is the fact that Justice Dada who initially gave the death sentence against Al-Mustapha and Sofolahan is a woman. Could she have done so on the grounds of feminine prejudice? Again, that would be sentiment.

    Besides the controversy triggered by the duo’s release, however, the elasticity of the trial is truly confounding. Why did it take so long to arrive at this juncture?  Ironically, in the light of his acquittal, Al-Mustapha’s complaint that he was kept in solitary confinement for five years and three months, and subsequently detained in about 32 facilities across the country, the last being Kirikiri Maximum Prison, Lagos, tends to give him a moral platform he may not deserve.

    One nagging question: Could the trial have been an instance of planned failure?  This possibility stretches the imagination, but it is remarkable that the Justices faulted the original death sentence, describing the charges as “a baseless indictment without evidence.”  Lamentably, the kernel of the failure, as pinpointed by Justice Pemu, was prosecutorial. “For an offence like murder, I wonder why the Nigerian police did not do a proper investigation,” she said. This statement may tragically turn out to be the defining perspective in the Kudirat murder.

     

    • Macaulay is on the editorial board of The Nation

  • 2015: North has no grounds for demanding power

    The agitation for power shift being mounted by northern leaders has reached a deafening crescendo. This high octane demand is coming from a section of the country that has held power for nearly 40 out of the 53 years of Nigerian independence. Even more irrational is the fact that this vociferous demand is being couched in terms of the morality of power rotation. But Nigerians ought to understand that as far as central executive power politics in this country is concerned, the only moral imperative is the concession of the presidency to a Nigerian citizen of Igbo extraction.

    In a recent public statement credited to “northern leaders”, aspects of which were meant to insult other sections of the country, Professor Ango Abdullahi, the putative spokesman for the “leaders”, said, among other things, that “if you look at other parts of the country that are making noise, they are small enclaves, perhaps may not be bigger than Kaduna State.” Njiko Igbo accepts that in a democratic setting, it is the political right of every section of this country to aspire to the presidency, but insists that such an aspiration must be based on considerations of the democratic ingredients of justice, equity, fair play and genuine moral conduct. The arrogance that frequently erupts from certain sections of the country is not conducive to the realisation of equality of opportunity in a pluralistic, multi-cultural and multi-religious society such as Nigeria.

    To refer to other regions of Nigeria, populated by patriotic and freeborn citizens as mere enclaves is to suggest that such regions are not qualified either to aspire to or to remain in the central executive position in this country. As far as we know, the South-East and South-South are, respectively, the major contenders for the presidency in 2015. To dismiss these regions as mere enclaves and the inhabitants who are seeking the highest office in the land as mere noise makers is the height of arrogance and betrays the imperialistic instincts that have thwarted democracy in this country and retarded its progress.

    The demographic superiority claimed for the north is a complete sham because if the regions dismissed as enclaves were to withdraw their support, no northerner can ever fulfil the constitutional requirement to ascend to the presidency of this republic.

    This point is proved by historical evidence which shows in crystal clear terms that all northern democratic heads of government had depended on the support of these regions that are now being described as mere enclaves to win general or presidential elections, and to sustain central government.

    And practical statistics tell a more powerful story: In the last presidential election, of the 13 states that delivered one million or more votes to any of the presidential aspirants, more than half of them are located in the South. Among those 7 states are Imo, Abia and Anambra.

    Others are Delta, Lagos, Rivers and Akwa Ibom all of which drew heavily from the Igbo votes to reach and exceed the one million mark. Furthermore, the northern states that reached the one million landmark also drew heavily from the Igbo votes and they include Plateau, Kaduna, Kano and Bauchi.

    In the light of these statistics, therefore, to dismiss the citizens that have such a rich and significant electoral impact as “noise makers” is not only a demonstration of political naïveté and ignorance but amounts also to a total misconception of the dramatically altered post-Boko Haram realpolitik of this nation.

    The negotiation of the power equation in this country should not be conducted on the basis of aggression, intimidation, insults or ethno-religious arrogance. It must be done on the basis of mutual respect, understanding and sympathetic consideration of the sensibilities of other elements that make up this complex nation.

    The old simple ways must yield to the sophisticated complexities of today. These are serious times ovulating serious issues that require serious people’s attention.

    The justifiable anger emanating from those who feel that they were cheated in the power game because ambitious people chose to honour a gentleman’s agreement in the breach should not form the basis for elderly patriots to shut their eyes to the fundamentals of justice and equity as well as the imperatives of morality. Njiko Igbo insists that the only moral imperative in this republic is for an Igbo man or woman to be elected president in 2015.

    It bears repeating for the benefit of those who are yet uninformed about Njiko Igbo and its mission: NJIKO IGBO is an organisation dedicated to the struggle for the ascent of a citizen of Igbo extraction to the presidency of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in 2015.

    We are fully committed to the security and peace of our nation, and to the comradeship of a common justice for all Nigerians. We are neither a political party nor are we affiliated to any political party.

    Our primary mission is to enlighten and mobilise the Igbo population, both at home and in the diaspora, to stand firm and united in the pursuit of our collective goal. Our secondary duty is to connect with and persuade the rest of the Nigerian population about the justice of our cause.

    · Senator Onwe is Director of Operations, Njiko Igbo

  • America’s ‘stunning betrayal’

    The leader of Nigeria’s 80 million Christians travelled to Washington this week and called on the United States to intervene on behalf of persecuted believers in his embattled country.

    Pastor Ayo Oritsejafor, president of the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN), met with lawmakers on Capitol Hill Thursday morning before holding a midday press conference to decry the largely unchecked violence in Africa’s most populous country.

    “America has a strong history of civil rights and my hope is that our brothers here can awaken the conscience of humanity to stop this genocide,” Oritsejafor said at the National Press Club.

    The Islamic group Boko Haram, whose name means “Western education is sinful,” is primarily responsible for the violence. Its leader, Abubakar Shekau, has said the group will not stop its attacks until Shariah law is instituted across the entire country, instead of only in the northern states.

    According to a conservative Associated Press estimate, last year Boko Haram killed about 800 people in hundreds of attacks. The U.S. State Department named it the second-most dangerous terrorist organisation in the world (the Taliban was first) and last month issued a $7 million bounty for the capture of Shekau. But so far, the U.S. has refused to name Boko Haram a Foreign Terrorist Organisation (FTO), even though it has issued five such designations since the beginning of 2012 to lesser groups.

    “If [Shekau] is a terrorist, what about his organisation?” Oritsejafor asked. “You cannot separate a leader from his organisation.”

    On Thursday, Alliance Defending Freedom, the Family Research Council, the American Centre for Law and Justice and eight other organisations submitted a letter to Secretary of State John Kerry urging him to designate Boko Haram an FTO.

    Earlier this year, Sen. Jim Risch, R-Idaho, filed a bill that would designate Boko Haram an FTO—which Great Britain did this month. FTO designation would freeze any U.S. assets, institute a travel ban for group leaders, and allow authorities to trace financing and weapons trails. The Nigerian military seized a cache of Hezbollah weapons in May. Risch said in a statement that it is clear Boko Haram meets the criteria of an FTO and is putting U.S. citizens in danger.

    The Risch bill has seven cosponsors, all Republicans, but the effort has yet to gain traction with the State Department, which seems to think the problem is an economic one, rather than theological. Emmanuel Ogebe, a human rights attorney based in Washington, said the State Department has declined to give “any clear and compelling reasons” for refusing the designation.

    “[State officials] seem to indicate there are good parts of Boko Haram and bad parts of Boko Haram, so they don’t want to alienate the good parts,” he said. “It’s hard to see the good in a group going to schools and killing kids.”

    Oritsejafor noted that once all the churches in some areas were destroyed, the terrorists turned their deadly attacks toward schools. He said 50 of the 175 schools in Borno State have now been destroyed.

    The country’s president, Goodluck Jonathan, declared a state of emergency in late May for Borno, Adamawa and Yobe states, and Oritsejafor said the declaration improved the situation in those areas. Still, he noted—pausing to brush back tears—the attacks continue and his organisation has lost two officials in the last two months, including a personal friend of his, Faye Musa Pama, Secretary of CAN’s Borno chapter and coordinator of outreach for widows and orphans.

    In March, the Christian Association of Nigerian-Americans (CANAN)—CAN’s American counterpart—announced a $50,000 donation to the victims of Boko Haram. Oritsejafor said financial help is critical because “CAN has no money” (he is unpaid and financed his own trip to the U.S.) and is unable to help victims and churches with medical bills and rebuilding efforts. He said the Nigerian government has promised but not delivered assistance to victims—and the U.S. has not offered any humanitarian assistance.

    Oritsejafor said about 70 percent of Christian deaths in 2012 were in Northern Nigeria and the church is suffering because of it: “Church attendance in the north is down drastically, [and] it’s beginning to creep into the south.” He said some churches that once had 500 members now may have 30 on a good day, and some pastors will leave their wives and children at home to risk their lives and sit at a church site alone. Some churches have started using metal detectors at entrances, but seeing them scares some people away.

    Oritsejafor criticised President Barack Obama for slighting the country by not visiting on his trip to Africa earlier this month. Nigeria is the largest U.S. trade partner in the region, but Obama instead went to Tanzania, South Africa, and Senegal, where he unsuccessfully advocated for the legalisation of homosexuality. “America’s ambivalence on Nigeria is a stunning betrayal,” Oritsejafor said.

    Source: World Magazine

  • Sit tight syndrome and mandatory retirement age

    From the days of missionary public servants, who served Nigeria in  words and deeds, before independence and about three decades after, the civil service has witnessed its high and low periods.

    The worst era in the history of the service was the military years, when professionalism, integrity and accountability, was depleted to zero level. In fact, it was under the military that the seed of flagrant disregard for rules and regulations which created the room for manipulation and wanton corruption that is commonplace in the civil service today was sown.

    Even when efforts have been made to professionalise the service since the return of civil rule in 1999, such moves have not recorded appreciable success due to entrenched perverted value system that was inherited from the military command structure and jackboot mentality.

    However, it is necessary to mention a government institution that has recorded a huge success in its operation having benefited from the professionalism drive of government since the return to civil rule. The Federal Inland Revenue Service, the revenue generation organ of the Federal Government, has improved tremendously in the discharge of its mandate of tax collection in the country.

    Also, at the level of ministries, departments and agencies, there has been a deliberate effort aimed at ensuring that career officers and top leaders in the service are kept abreast of current developments through local and international trainings in their area of core competence, so as to function optimally in line with best global practices. This intervention, no doubt, has contributed in no small measure to the noticeable improvement in service delivery.

    Meanwhile, these moves by President Goodluck Jonathan geared toward transforming the civil service into a functional engine that will drive the growth and development of the country in line with our national aspiration of being one of the leading economies in the world by the year 2020 may not yield desired results. No thanks to the sit tight syndrome, being encouraged by political heads of the ministries and the boards appointed to run the parastatals and agencies, which has become the norm now.

    An online news medium recently, to the utter shock and disbelief of many Nigerians, broke a story on the refusal of an acting director general of a federal parastatal, to proceed on retirement, even after he had attained the mandatory retirement age of 60.

      The extant rule of career progression in the Federal Civil Service on retirement of public officers clearly stipulates that all officers in the public service of the federal government must compulsorily proceed on retirement consequent upon the attainment of 60 years or after putting in 35 years of service. The exception to this rule, are academic staff of universities and judicial officers, whose retirement age has been fixed at 70 and 65 years respectively.

    As self-explanatory as this rule is, some career officers in the civil service with the active collaboration of their minister and board members, plot tenure elongation schemes by deliberately looking the other side in flagrant disregard of the rules to keep their cronies in office.

    This disregard for laid down rules and regulations by top civil servants in collusion with political heads of the ministries is at variance with the Jonathan administration’s transformation agenda in the civil service which seeks to promote professionalism by using the criteria of career progression, seniority and national spread in the appointment of top cadre officers in the civil service.

     For the civil service to discharge its duty as the engine room of growth and development, the political heads of ministries must run away from interference on matters of rules and regulations of the civil service. Also, career officers who have reached the peak of their careers should refrain from stunting the growth of their colleagues by scheming to stay beyond the statutory retirement age.

    •Fafore, a retired civil servant, wrote from Mowe, Ogun State.

  • Ewherido: A friend’s tribute

    Our paths crossed. We were friends but our bond was brotherly. He was a senior and ever counselling brother. He was always ready to make the age argument.  Hence, it was his entitlement at some point when we shared a room in Fajuyi Hall, OAU, Ife, to sleep below while I slept atop our double bunk bed. We entered the University of Ife together, did all our 101s, 102s and all 100 level courses together. We attended all the great Jingo (Dipo Fasina) lectures, the Dr. Geoff Tangwa lectures, etc. in philosophy. Pius left the university earlier than me, graduating in B.A. Philosophy; I followed shortly with LL.B.   We graduated from Obafemi Awolowo University, even though we were admitted into the University of Ife by JAMB.  Our times together, which continued after Ife, were great and memorable. We were Catholics and did share many other bonds beyond books, politics and academics.  He was highly cerebral; articulate, focused, organized. A role model, a great strategist and a futurist.  A philosopher indeed and in truth. We did “practice” and certainly had some stint in Campus journalism as freelancers. We “anchored” at The Bee (a campus newspaper), did our pranks, stung, bugged and buzzed in accordance with the best ethics of campus journalism. This was during the anti-intellectual Buhari-Idiagbon military dictatorship when our teachers were hounded as those who were “teaching what they were not paid to teach”. At that time, even our rival and perhaps more known publication, “The Cobra”, was catapulted into national limelight by the military junta which described it as “a subversive publication” in a nationwide broadcast.

    Pius went ahead and won election into the Students Representative Council (SRC) where he distinguished himself as a great debater.  He cut his political teeth in the Great Ife tradition. Activism was in his blood; responsible and purposeful activism, that is.  He took time to equip himself for service. He obtained a law degree at University of Benin after graduating from Ife while cutting his teeth as an entrepreneur.  He made his entrepreneurial debut modestly in the entertainment, catering rental and hospitality services. Plying his trade in business and services his contacts spread quickly, fuelled by his public spirited disposition to clients and patrons. He lived with his peoples in the Warri axis and got to know them extremely well while serving them. Whenever he visited me in Little Road, Yaba, Lagos for weekends, he was the same big brother, humble, full of vision and passion for service.  We reminisced over our days in Ife. We were most pained and challenged by the injustice of June 12. He admired my occasional newspaper commentaries on the raging subject of June 12. We said “never again” together.

    It was hardly surprising that when the opportunity beckoned for him to run for the Delta House of Assembly to represent his native Effurun, no one else stood a better chance. He had warmed himself to his peoples’ hearts. He knew them, they knew him. He was genuine and generous, caring from the heart of service and not out of opportunism. A politician with non-severable bond with his constituents was born. It is rare in Nigeria, but Senator Ewherido demonstrated that such a genuine connection was possible.  That was the very secret of his strength as a legendary politician.  That was why; he was able to “kill” giants and became a cat with nine lives. But it is a lesson that those who kept courting and who are presently mourning him would not learn.

    His infectious personality, charm and charisma had no hiding place in Delta State House of Assembly. Rather, they came to public affirmation from that Chamber, where he served for eight years, and spread across the state. While officially the Deputy Speaker, he was the Acting Speaker for most of his tenure, owing to the ill-health of the substantive speaker and to all the impeachment dramas that marked his tenure.  As a speaker, he steered the Delta State House of Assembly into a forum for constructive debate. He did not miss the opportunity to draw from the wisdom of Nigeria’s genuine patriots (even our own Wole Soyinka) whom he occasionally invited to address the House. I had opportunities of personal visits to him in Asaba at the height of his provincial legislative career. As a strategist, pragmatist and confident, he already had a clear vision of his political career after the House of Assembly.   I was struck through one of the nights we spent together on how he talked with genuine concern and sympathy about the ill-health of his boss, the then speaker. After the speaker’s death, he ably survived all the intrigues and banana pills of his office and did not hesitate to play the game of survival whenever that was inevitable.  This was the time when James Ibori called the shots in Delta State. Ewherido was truly a Deltan, a true Urhobo son and lover of Urhobo language, an Isoko grandson, and a worthy Ijaw in-law; at home with the Itsekiri and a good friend of the Anioma peoples.  He was always conscious of his broad support base.

    His desire to rule Delta State was motivated less by ambition than by a sense of duty and a commitment to right wrongs; to empower the weak. But such motivation was a wrong one in the eyes of PDP.  A sense of duty, service, merit, justice and competence proved too ideal to thrive in the party Senator Ewherido then belonged. Those were the reason that the PDP could not trust him with the governorship of Delta State.  Having been denied the opportunity to serve from the State House in Asaba, Ewherido bid his time. He was not manifestly bitter and was hardly malicious. He spoke no ill of his adversaries. At the right time, he mobilized his people and got their consent to serve them in Abuja as Senator. But he kept his eyes on the State House. He believed in the power of the executive to make tremendous and lasting impact on the people.  Only the unknowing was surprised that even upon defecting to a little known DPP he was able to defeat the PDP and secured his place in Nigeria’s Senate. It is instructive that the PDP did not contest his crystal clear victory at the Tribunal.  The record of his short-lived service at the Senate speaks for itself.

    Beyond his silent and under-advertised legislative footprints at the Senate, what appears to have captured much of the public’s attention and speculation is the recent political unfolding ahead of 2015; his relationship with the DPP; even with the emergent APC; and his old party,  the PDP.  There has been no dull moment for this whiz kid of a politician, whose most recent steps, moves and body languages have been a beehive of speculation.  Instructively, not very much has been heard from the horse’s mouth through it all before the very tragic unfolding of Thursday June 27 that climaxed in his eventual death on Sunday June 30.

    Gogorogo: I wish that your death and the tributes and the sense of desolation and heart break it evokes throughout the land will be a lesson for your political colleagues, to reflect on the meaning of genuine service and love for the people. I wish also that it would be a lesson to all other mortals who operate in the tension soaked murky waters of politics to become conscious of their health, to slow down occasionally and to remain constantly conscious of their mortality. I as well wish that your death will provoke a national sober reflection on the rank and file of Nigerian political class, beginning from President Goodluck Jonathan and his junketing wife downward, enabling them to quit their fixation on 2015 because no one knows who will live to that date. I wish they will see the need to render the best services they can while they can.

    • Prof. Oguamanam wrote in from Ottawa, Canada

  • Nebo and the power sector demons

    Nebo and the power sector demons

    Quintus Fabius Maximus Verrucosus, was a Roman General. In 217 BC, he was faced with the huge and intimidating task of defeating Hannibal, the Carthaginian General, who had invaded his country. Weighed against the invading army, Fabius’ troops had no chance at all. But fight he must, lest Rome be overrun.

    Therefore, he had to devise a strategy. He avoided pitched battles and frontal assaults in favour of wearing down his opponent through a war of attrition and indirection. While evading decisive battles, he employed the tactics of harassing the soldiers of Hannibal in small columns by taunting them and causing them to pursue him through the hills until they got tired, without actually fighting.

    It worked. In the end, Hannibal, left with a disorientated, dispirited and totally dishevelled army, in spite of having the numbers, superiority of firepower and experience, lost the war. But before this happened, many Romans were totally disenchanted with this strategy. Not only was it novel in the history of warfare, its workability was highly in doubt. They preferred the open, frontal confrontation they were familiar with, no matter how dangerous and risky.

    To underscore their misgiving, the Roman Senate voted for Fabius’ removal and his replacement with another General, who would do exactly what they expected – confront Hannibal in direct battle. Step in Gaius Terentius Varro, who did just that. The resultant battle of Cannae was disastrous. The Romans not only lost, but continued to lose many other battles that followed, which took a toll on not only on the soldiers but enhanced the danger the country faced.

    Having learnt their lesson in a hard way, they had to return to the Fabian option, which eventually led to the vanquishing of the Carthaginian warlord.

    Today Nigeria seems to face a similar situation in the power sector of the Nigerian economy, where Professor Chinedu Ositadinma Nebo, its helmsman, has been trying to accomplish the mandate handed him in February this year by President Goodluck Jonathan in satisfying the yearnings of Nigerians for uninterrupted power.

    How would the minister vanquish this powerful force without destroying the house like a bull being forced out of a china shop? This has been the abiding question since he appeared on the floor of the Senate during the screening for the job and promised Nigerians that he was going to exorcise the demons and evil spirits in the sector.

    Well a particular view believes that the best way was for him to draw out his bayonet and begin to chase anybody in sight, who he suspects belongs to the cabal he described above. That he has not done this thus far seems to have incensed them extremely, just like in some tendencies in Rome over the strategy of Fabius.

    That bitterness was conveyed in the most forceful manner in a recent treatise entitled Of Nebo and his Demons, which appeared in a powerful Nigerian newspaper and authored by an equally powerful Nigerian writer, recently. So infuriated was the writer against the minister, that he was castigated to no ends for lacking the “fighting spirit” and not having the “foggiest clue” of how to do his job that the writer recommended his immediate removal.

    To underscore the obviously manifest danger in this recommendation, the writer even went ahead to identify those Nebo should square up to, to prove his “fighting spirit.” And who were they? They include the chairman of the board of the Transmission Company of Nigeria (TCN), Hamman Tukur, for the twin reasons of allegedly refusing to report to the minister and his refusal to allow Manitoba Hydro International, the Canadian firm employed to manage the transmission architecture of the power sector carry out its mandate, because the managers of the TCN’s hunger to award “inflated contracts;” the Vice President, Namadi Sambo, for not lifting a finger to help because he had never been a “fan” of the Manitoba idea; the Minister of Petroleum resources, Dame Dieziani Allison-Madueke, for her alleged tolerance of perceived incompetence in the her ministry and the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC), captured in the inability of those in the oil and gas sector to supply gas to the thermal power stations; and then the labour unions in the sector, for allegedly shifting the goalpost in reaching an amicable settlement over their entitlements.

    Now, assuming but not conceding that this is the real picture, does Nebo’s option in proving his “fighting spirit” lie in stepping into the gallery for a fighting match with these alleged tendencies? Is that the only way to prove that he has the “foggiest clue?” For those with some “foggy clue,” one of those we are talking about here is the second most powerful Nigerian. How could anybody with the “foggiest clue” of government operation, not only in Nigeria but anywhere in the world recommend such a clearly suicidal duel for the minister and claim to be pointing the way forward? In fact, would the author not be helping the process more by simply pointing these people out to Nigerians as the culprits instead of the strange conclusion of asking for Nebo’s head?

    Again, assuming, but not conceding that this is the picture, would it not be safer for the minister to try persuading this powerful force(s), or at best employ the Fabian option, if he must fight, to nibble at their weapons in the attempt to wear them out to submission? Pray, how would the minister’s immediate sack, which the author recommended otherwise solve these problems and conduce the immediate magic envisaged for Nigerians?

    But the true picture is quite different from what the author tried to paint apart from the fact that there are still a lot of challenges in the power sector. For one, beside the primordial enemies known to all Nigerians, the minister is actually working in agreement with other stakeholders and has by that made clearly manifest inroads to the heart of the problem of power delivery, albeit, quietly and silently. On the contrary, the Manitoba issue has been settled and the group has since been issued with the Schedule of Delegated Authority (SODA), apart from inaugurating the TCN board. Likewise, the labour issues have also been settled and the Power Holding Company of Nigeria (PHCN) workers are currently awaiting their pay cheques. It is no longer news that the new owners of the generating (GENCOs) and distribution (DISCOs) arms of the PHCN have since paid up the 25 per cent of the cost of the companies and are on the verge of paying up for the remaining 75 per cent. It is also true that in spite of the challenges in gas supply, power generation has actually been upped rather than dipped.

    Yes, the transmission component is still a huge challenge, occasioned by the innocuous and the substantial, which is being addressed also. The clearing of the foliage along the transmission lines, one of the hidden but serious problems, has since begun. On the larger scale of expanding the transmission capacity, the minister is getting a lot of assistance from his employers for funding, which is one of the major factors.

    In this regard, the minister has been able to obtain an immediate N5billion relief from the federal government from the N13billion promised for minor purchases and maintenance of the GENCOs and DISCOs, currently gasping for financial breath, because they were not captured in this year’s budget on the assumption that the new owners would have taken over by December last year, one of the problems the minister inherited. Besides, he has almost concluded arrangements to secure a $3.7billion for the expansion of the transmission architecture of the TCN, to be concluded in 2016.

    In all, the destination of the journey is the takeover of the power sector by private owners, which is expected to happen in a few months time, given the extensive work already covered. This is the true picture.

  • Killing Nigeria’s nationalities

    A very spirited campaign has been going on since about 2000 to question the existence of the nationalities that make up Nigeria. From the look of things, this is a very determined push to deconstruct the nationalities of Nigeria, to make each nation deny itself, to break down the spirit of oneness and unity in each nation.

    The captains of this campaign tell us that because some local Igbo groups did not acknowledge themselves as Igbo until recently, therefore there is “nothing like an Igbo nation”. That the Urhobo nation is made up of “a mere congeries of ethnic fragments” and therefore have no right to call themselves a nation. That the Yoruba subgroups like Ekiti, Ijebu, Oyo, Iyagba, Egba, Oworo, Ijesha, Akoko, Owo, Igbomina, Awori, etc, are separate nations, and therefore the Yoruba should stop claiming that they are one nation. That the Ijaw are a series of unconnected little groups and are not a nation. They have similar things to say about other Nigerian nationalities.

    Their foundational ideologue was no less an eminent academic than the late Dr. Yusuf Bala Usman, former Professor of History at Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria. A number of fiery treatises written by Prof. Usman in 2000 and 2001 under the auspices of the Centre for Democratic Research and Training (CEDERT), Abuja, laid out the dogma for this campaign. Its most recent spokesman is Nuhu Ribadu, former presidential candidate.

    What is the purpose, or objective, of this campaign? What are its captains trying to achieve? They say that their objective is to build one Nigeria. In a recent lecture in Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nuhu Ribadu said as follows: “Let us drop any form of identity that introduces us as something other than “citizens” (of Nigeria)”. In his own intellectually more sophisticated language, Prof. Bala Usman had written in 2000-2001 that any attempt to study, analyze, understand or manage the affairs of Nigeria in terms of ethnic categories was a “campaign against the corporate existence of the Federal Republic of Nigeria”, an open assault on Nigeria’s “political stability” and on the “survival and growth of democracy” in Nigeria. In short, to build Nigeria into one united country, and to solve the multifarious problems of Nigeria, we Nigerians must deny and throw away our identities as Igbo, Yoruba, Ijaw, etc; we must suppress our consciousness of being Ijaw, Igbo, Tiv, Edo, Nupe, etc, and replace it with a consciousness of being Nigerian.

    Any sincere effort to contribute to the building of a united and workable Nigeria deserves to be welcomed and commended. However, what we know (both conceptually and factually) about the main army pushing the campaign against Nigeria’s nationalities today does not show at all that their real objective is to contribute sincerely to building a harmonious and workable Nigeria. Conceptually, how is it possible for a nation (even if it is only a small nation like our Birom or Mumuye of the Middle Belt) to consciously forget their ethnic, cultural and national heritage? Where in the world has such a thing ever been done? Even in countries which have for many centuries comprised many different nations large and small (countries like Britain or Spain or India), have any of the nations thrown away, or lost, their identity? Why is it necessary that we must throw out our national identities and cultural heritages in order to be able to make a success of our common country of Nigeria?

    Factually, what we know about earlier postures of the leaders of this campaign does not rhyme with their present posture. In the 1950s, when leaders of Nigeria were trying to form Nigeria into a workable entity, the Northern, Hausa-Fulani, leaders were very strong defenders of the uniqueness, aspirations and sensitivities of ethnic national, and sectional, interests in the making of Nigeria. They fought back everything which seemed to suggest or imply some pressure on the integrity and identity of their part of Nigeria. At some point, in fact, to protect their heritage, they proposed that Nigeria be organized as three separate countries connected only by a customs union; and sometimes, they even considered seceding from Nigeria.

    I am not saying that these actions of theirs, in defence of their part of Nigeria and their heritage, were bad; all I am saying is that these actions are facts of Nigeria’s history. Indeed, I will say today that they were very much on the right line. I say that because, in a country like Nigeria comprising many different peoples, each people in its own homeland, with its own culture, its own culturally determined aspirations and ways of doing things, the only way to build a harmonious and successful country is to proceed cautiously and nurture a culture of respect for the various peoples, large or small. In terms of constitution making and politics, a culture of respect for all nationalities in a large country like Nigeria would produce a rational federation in which the nationalities would be the basis of states, the states would have a fair amount of autonomy over the management of their lives and their socio-economic development, and the federal authority would be reasonably able to defend the country, speak for the country in the world, protect the rights of citizens and of states, impartially see to the relationship among the states, and defend the constitution. Making the nationalities the basis of the states means that each large nationality would be a state, each contiguous group of the small nationalities would be a state, and no nationality would be split between states. A rational federation would also mean that much more funding would go to the states together than to the federal authority, and that each state would also be able to generate funds of its own. Finally, it would mean that the federal authority would not engage in any kind of aggressive integrationist policies.

    By and large, the federation which our founding fathers designed for our country, and which they operated between 1952 and 1960, was organized along the lines stated above. The serious weaknesses were that, in the structure of our federation, we did not respect the rights of the small nationalities to group themselves into states of their own, and our regional boundaries split up some nationalities. But our regions had enough autonomy to generate development and progress and, therefore, our country made considerable progress in most directions. By 1960, our country was, on the whole, a land of hope.

    But as soon as we became independent in 1960, with our Northern brothers in control of the Federal Government, everything began to change. They who had been among the staunchest defenders of the rights of their region (and of regions in general), now found the amount of freedom enjoyed by the regions unacceptable. They now wanted to control everything, and to hold on to federal power forever. In 1962, they started war against one of the regions. Between then and 1999, northerners, mostly as military dictators, more or less destroyed all centres of non-federal power in the country and grabbed virtually all power for the Federal Government which they controlled. The 1999 Constitution sums up the enormity of this distortion of our federation. The states became impotent entities. Poverty, corruption, crimes, inter-ethnic and religious conflicts grew calamitously. The world began to predict that Nigeria would break up.

    In the context of this sad history, the campaign being waged now against our nationalities has only one purpose – and that purpose is not to build a harmonious and happy Nigeria. It is to destroy the nationalities (the last standing entities in our country) and turn Nigeria into some sort of medley, a field of cultural ruins, over which an all-powerful Federal Government would stand like a colossus. It is a peak-point of the battle that the controllers of federal power have waged since independence to subdue all entities that stand in the way of unrestrained federal power. Actually, Bala Usman wrote his fiery treatises of 2000-2001 in answer to one Urhobo citizen who had written that Urhoboland belonged to the Urhobo nation, and to other southerners who were demanding that the Nigerian federation should be restructured so as to give the nationalities more control over their resources.

    Confusing, subduing and deconstructing our nationalities can lead to nothing good.There is a better way to build our federation. We have our nationalities. True, most of them have internal fault-lines and uncertain boundaries; and many have only recently found their unity. But that is the nature of nationalities all over the world. No nationality in the world is completely homogenous; none has boundaries that are completely neat; none can claim to have been one nation since eternity. Let us construct a sustainable federal structure on our nationalities. What has been concocted for us, what we are calling a federation now, is chaotic and unsustainable. Bashing and deconstructing our nationalities can only generate more disaster.

  • PDP’S hypocritical antics in Ekiti

    Apparently anxious to divert attention from the many internal crises ripping the party apart and daily rendering it more and more vulnerable in the forthcoming 2015 elections, the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP) has launched a mischievous and utterly misleading attack on the National Leader of the Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN), Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu. The PDP has seized on the recent fence-mending mission of the party leadership to Ekiti state to describe Tinubu as a despot bent on imposing a choice on the people of Ekiti. Of course, there is neither rhyme nor logic to this baseless accusation. In the first place, what moral right has the PDP to accuse anybody of despotic tendencies? This is a party that wanted to impose a chairman on the Nigerian Governors Forum in the person of Governor Jonah Jang of Plateau State and when this failed, it suspended the winner of the NGF election, Governor RotimiAmaechi from the party for enjoying the support of majority of his colleagues!

    A party that ordered a sitting governor not to seek re-election of a voluntary association like the NGF is now preaching the tenets of democracy to others. How ridiculous! This is a party that has made it so obvious that it is bent on harassing, intimidating and preventing anybody from challenging President Goodluck Jonathan for the PDP presidential ticket in 2015. Towards this end, members of its National Executive Committee (NEC) are removed and replaced at will. Its National Chairman, Alhaji BamangaTukur, remains in office against the will of majority of its NEC members all because of his willingness to manipulate intra-party processes in favour of Jonathan towards 2015. All national chairmen of the party since inception have all been imposed and removed at will by the presidency- Solomon Lar, Barnabas Gemade, Audu Ogbe, Vincent Ogbulafor and now BamangaTukur. The so called national conventions that produced President UmaruYar’Adua and later Goodluck Jonathan were clearly manipulated to arrive at pre-determined outcomes despite the deceptive charade on national television. We can all recall how former Governor Timipre Sylva of Bayelsa State was brazenly prevented from asserting his right to seek re-election as the party’s governorship candidate while the favoured candidate of the presidency, Seriake Dickson was foisted on the party and is today the governor of the state. In Kogi state, aggrieved PDP candidates who were manipulated out of contrived governorship primaries are still in court seeking justice. We can go on and on citing instances why the PDP has no moral right to preach intra-party democracy to anybody.

    But then, let us come to the substance of the PDP’s baseless allegation. How true is the claim that Tinubu is despotic and disdainful of democracy? In the first place, Tinubu was not in Ekiti state in his personal capacity. He was on a delegation of the national leadership of the ACN, which included the national chairman of the party, Chief Bisi Akande, the leader of the party in Ekiti State, Chief Niyi Adebayo and a prominent member of the party from Ekiti, Dele Alake among others. The position forcefully articulated by Tinubu at the Ekiti parley was, therefore, that of the party. Again, the fact that the party leadership expended time, energy and resources to go to Ekiti to settle internal disputes and put its house in order towards next year’s election is indicative of a party that respects the electorate and refuses to take them for granted.

    It shows that the party, despite Governor Kayode Fayemi’s outstanding performance in office, is approaching the next elections with all seriousness. And the logic of the ACN leadership is impeccable. Why do parties exist and why do candidates seek office? In a healthy democracy, the purpose is to fulfil the party’s manifesto and pursue the greatest welfare of the greatest number of the people. Now, if an incumbent is widely acknowledged as delivering on this mandate, why should a party dissipate energy on intra-party contests?

    Tinubu spoke for close to one and a half hours at the event but the media reported only a minute fraction of what he said and mostly out of context. The ACN national leader’s concern and passion for the cohesion and success of the party in the entire South-west is understandable. It must not be forgotten that in 2003, Tinubu remained the only governor standing in the South-west following the electoral blitzkrieg of the PDP. He not only held on tenaciously to Lagos State but played a pivotal role in the current resurgence of the progressives across the South-west. He can thus lay claim to a greater stake in the survival and strengthening of the party in the region than any other person. In any case, the people have greater trust in the judgement of Tinubu than that of the thoroughly inept PDP leadership. When he was to vacate office in 2007, he expressed his preference for his Chief of Staff, Babatunde Raji Fashola (SAN) to succeed him. The PDP then accused him of imposition and dictatorship. Lagosians however trusted his judgement and today Fashola is rated as easily the best governor in the country.

    The PDP cannot pretend to love Honourable Opeyemi Bamidele more than Tinubu or other ACN leaders. It is unfortunate that Tinubu’s reference to Bamidele’s ambition was completely reported out of context, perhaps not deliberately but because the media could not reproduce his extensive remarks in full. Tinubu had discovered Bamidele’s potentials and had drawn him close ever since the latter was a student union leader. When Tinubu was elected to the Senate in the aborted Third Republic, he engaged Bamidele as one of his legislative aides on legal matters. Both Tinubu and Bamidele were in exile during the pro-democracy struggle against military dictatorship. When he was elected Governor of Lagos State in 1999, Tinubu engaged Bamidele first as a Special Adviser in the office of the Deputy Governor and later Commissioner for Sports and Youth Development. He played a role in the appointment of Bamidele as Commissioner for Information and Strategy by Governor Fashola in 2007. At every point in time Tinubu has played a positive role in the evolving political career of Bamidele.

     If the Jagaban had not recognised Bamidele’s intelligence and competence, he would not have given him those responsibilities over the years. Tinubu has never said that Bamidele is not eminently qualified to be governor. But there are scores of eminently candidates in the party equally qualified to govern Ekiti effectively and there can only be one governor at a time.  If, therefore, Asiwaju this time around asks Bamidele to voluntarily shelve his ambition for now in the interest of the party, he is eminently qualified to do so and no one can accuse him of bad faith. Indeed, Tinubu told the gathering in Ekiti that Bamidele was one of those who brought Fayemi to the party leadership and strongly canvassed for his candidacy in 2007. He urged the governor to draw Bamidele close and cautioned some of those close to Fayemi to desist from creating any bad blood between the two men. The PDP should, therefore, concentrate on resolving its internal contradictions and stop meddling in matters that do not concern it.

    • Dr Akintola is a political scientist and lawyer based in Lagos.