Category: Opinion

By Sunbo Onitiri

THE annulled June 12, 1993 Presidential election has been repeatedly referred to as a watershed in Nigeria’s history. The reasons for this assertion are not far-fetched. That election was the freest and fairest election in the electoral history of the country.

The then Federal Electoral Commission, FEDECO, adopted a unique voting system known as Option A4 which made rigging and other electoral malpractices practically impossible. It made accreditation, voting and declaration of results happen simultaneously in different voting units across the country, with the active participation of electoral officials, party agents and security agents in the presence of the voters.

There was no room for bribing of voters, hijacking of ballot boxes or falsification of results. Option A4, though regarded then as a unique voting system with several limitations turned out to be very effective in checkmating the excesses of the desperate Nigerian politicians.

The end result was that the result of the election was publicly known even before FEDECO started announcing it in Abuja based on returns from the states. Fourteen states had been announced and a clear winner already emerged before the General Ibrahim Babangida-led Military Administration stopped the process and eventually annulled the freest and fairest election in Nigeria’s history.

In examining the direct impact of Option A4 in Nigeria’s electoral process, certain fundamental issues were very clear. Chief Moshood Kashinmawo Osuolale Abiola, the leading candidate in the election, who would have been declared as the President-elect, if the process had not been truncated was a Moslem.

The fact that he picked a Moslem running mate, Ambassador Babagana Kingibe didn’t matter to the voters. They massively voted for Moslem-Moslem ticket. Religion therefore wasn’t a consideration in that election. The analysis of the result showed that the mandate was pan-Nigerian.

The fact that MKO’s opponent, Alhaji Bashir Tofa was a Northerner with a running mate from the South East had no impact on the voting pattern. So Tribal and Ethnic sentiments were also pushed aside by Nigerians. The Euphoria across the country was so positive that it became apparent that a new Nigeria was emerging through June 12 electoral process. June 12 therefore could have been a foundation for a new Nigeria.

The annulment of June 12 election and the subsequent crisis it generated was what led Nigeria to its present quagmire. Another process, initiated by the late maximum ruler, General Sanni Abacha was a direct opposite of the process that led to June 12. Abacha was helibent on transmuting from a military dictator to a civilian president that every step of that process was rigged to produce him as a sole presidential candidate of the five political parties that emerged from the process.

That was why he supervised the writing of a constitution specifically designed for him to use as civilian dictator. In doing this, he had the backing of the Northern political establishment made up of individuals who were unhappy about June 12 and who were fundamentally opposed to transfer of power to the south.

Abacha’s sudden death in office was a divine intervention that saved Nigeria from perhaps the worst dictatorship that could have emerged in the country’s history. It is unfortunate however that it was the same Abacha’s Constitution that Nigeria retained till today which is causing division amongst the three major tribes today.

It must be noted that Chief Adesunbo Onitiri along with Late Barr. Richard Babatunde Adejumo played a significant role in the June 12 election to hold. They obtained the historic judgement that enabled Nigerians to vote at the election of June 12. Onitiri also played an important role at the swearing in of Late MKO Abiola as the President of Nigeria otherwise known as EPETEDO DECLARATION.

General Abdulsalam Abubakar, Abacha’s successor dusted the document and presented it to Nigerians as the 1999 Constitution.

Another fall-out of the annulment of June 12 was that the Late General Abacha was not working alone in his quest to transmute into civilian dictator. He had a lot of foot soldiers across the country. What made it easy for him to go that far was money. Abacha opened the Central Bank of Nigeria for anyone willing to work for the actualization of his ambition.

So, all the politicians who participated in the Abacha transition programme did so for the money. His sudden death was not anticipated. That threw spanners into the deal. The next option was for Abiola, then in Abacha’s detention to be released to claim his mandate. Abacha’s people especially in the military and their civilian collaborators would not want that.

Too much investment had gone into their plot to grab power in Nigeria. So, Chief Moshood Kashimawo Osuolale Abiola, the Nigerian president-elect, through the freest and fairest election in Nigeria’s history must die for them to achieve their ambition despite Abacha’s death.

It is therefore clear that General Abdusalam Abubakar’s transition programme was a continuation of Abacha’s programme. The registration of new political parties was just a strategy to allow Abacha’s politicians , who were loaded with loot from Abacha’s self succession plot to regroup.

So, money politics and other bizarre behaviour of the Present Nigerian Politicians were direct consequences of Abacha’s ambition designed to bury June 12 permanently. That process has now thrown up the worst political system, which caters only for the politicians and their appointees while ignoring the welfare and well- being of ordinary Nigerian.

The Chicken has finally come home to roost with the current APC Government and its nepotic and ethno-focused behaviours, forcing different ethnic nationalities in Nigeria to start clamouring for self determination.

To repair the damage, Nigeria must immediately initiate a process of allowing Nigerians to write their own constitution. Further attempts to force Abacha’s Constitution down their throats will lead to doom. Nigerians, in writing their constitution, will renegotiate the terms of their union in a federation. The issue of restructuring will be laid to rest permanently. It is yet not too late to start this process.

Secondly, a process of political reforms must begin in earnest. The present political system has shut out ordinary Nigerians from actively participating. The present money politics, where only rich individuals can afford to indicate interest in aspiring for public office is undemocratic. The leading political parties in Nigeria have used money, not patriotism, knowledge, intellect, positive values., community development spirit and care for the common people as criteria for selecting aspirants to public offices. Where ordinary forms to express interest, fight for nomination and participate in primaries cost millions, only money bags can participate. Shutting the door against honest, hardworking and highly intelligent Nigerians by focussing only on money can never lead to good governance.

Elections must be free and fair. That was the credibility of June 12. Nigerian must be given a free hand to elect their leaders. Manipulation of elections to foist underserved politicians on the people will only compound the woes facing Nigeria. MOK Abiola won the June 12 Presidential election in a free and fair contest. That is why his electoral victory has remained a watershed till date.

It is good and appreciated that the Buhari administration has post humorously recognized Abiola as the winner of the June 12 election and restored full Presidential Privileges to him. Recognition of June 12 as Nigeria’s democracy day is also the right thing to do. These actions will however remain just mere gestures unless political reforms in Nigeria are built on the foundation of June 12, when Option A4 was adopted.

Mass participation is electoral process and free and fair elections. Anything else is building on a bad foundation and will only lead to the collapse of the country.

The electoral reform bill should be signed into law before 2023. Option A4 clause should be incorporated into the electoral law to check mate lawlessness and fraud. Aftermath of June 12 and unity of the country is essential.

The good legacy President Buhari can leave behind come 2023, is to leave Nigeria more united than he met it in 2015 by banning open grazing in the country, lift the ban on twitter now causing serious agitations in the country, arrest the unknown gun men and prosecute the killer Fulani herdsmen. Buhari should put an end to insecurity and banditry in Nigeria. Above all dialogue with IPOB (Indigenous People of Biafia) . As President Buhari is on his last lap to 2023 he should as a father figure address the Nation and itemize his numerous achievements since 2015. Lastly, he should also declare a state of emergency on insecurity as well as tag the Fulani armed herders as terrorists immediately.

• Chief Adesunbo Onitiri is a socio-political activist and critic from Lagos.

By Bisi Olawunmi

Chief Ayo  Adebanjo formally assumed the leadership of  Afenifere, the pan-Yoruba socio-cultural cum political organization,  when he presided over its first meeting at his Isanya-Ogbo hometown, near Ijebu-Ode, Ogun state on Friday, May 14, 2021.  The former leader of the organization, Chief Reuben Fasoranti, from Ondo state, had willingly stepped down, on account of old age – he is 95 years old- and announced Chief Adebanjo as successor to the leadership of the Yoruba. Although Chief Adebanjo, a lawyer, is 93 years old, there is a general acknowledgement of his relentless, vibrant and energetic engagement with the Nigerian state apparatus over the years, that his emergence got consensus endorsement. He is a combat veteran of political struggles  in the old Western region under the leadership of Chief Obafemi Awolowo and a tested loyalist who stood by  Awo in the years of political tribulations when federal might was deployed to  jail the legend in the early sixties. He had to go into exile to sustain the struggle.  Chief  Adebanjo is the last man standing  among Awo’s disciples, and he exhibits the same  intellectual discipline, rigour and consistency, which stood out Chief Awolowo among his contemporaries.

Since assumption of the Yoruba leadership position, he has remained consistent with Afenifere’s core demand for true federalism – anchored on restructuring the federation along the line of enhanced regional autonomy as contained in the constitution at  Nigeria’s independence in 1960. Chief Adebanjo, while addressing the Afenifere meeting, also reiterated the organisation’s position against the agitation for secession of Yorubaland from the Nigerian federation.  Chief Adebanjo had consistently stressed that many of them in the twilights of their lives have remained in the struggle for a better, but one Nigeria, simply because they did not want the edifice they labored to build come to ruin in their life time.  On the issue of gerontocracy in the leadership of Afenifere, his position is that there is a process of ascension to Afenifere leadership which places emphasis on consistent loyalty and self-less service over the years, as against gate-crashing into leadership principally to parley the position for material acquisition. In spite of the current craze where money, however dubious its source,  is celebrated above character which had been the core value of the Yoruba, Afenifere had remained a bulwark in the defence and propagation of the ‘Omoluabi’ culture in its leadership selection process. It is significant that over the decades, the organization has achieved a smooth leadership transition process, devoid of acrimony since Awo’s initial leadership, after which the mantle fell on Chief Adekunle Ajasin. From Chief Adekunle Ajasin, a former school Principal and governor of old Ondo state to Chief Abraham Adesanya, a lawyer and former Senator of the Federal Republic, to Chief Rueben Fasoranti, a former school Principal and now to Chief Ayo Adebanjo, a lawyer, Afenifere is one major organization that has not been hijacked by charlatans  and hustlers. In fact, successive leaders of Afenifere come closest to  actualization of Plato’s  Doctrine of Philosopher Kings – the RULE OF EDUCATED WISE MEN –  who  can control “the impulses of their hearts and the greed of their stomach” , meaning people who are NOT skirt chasers (womanizers) and who are NOT materialistic.  From Awo to Chief Adebanjo, Afenifere leaders belong to the educated elite, with stable families and have not been associated with obscene acquisition of wealth or moral scandals.  They are a rare breed. Given these antecedents, it is therefore no surprise that Afenifere has acquired a moral authority, based on integrity, that has ensured its survival and relevance till date.

In the current heightened separatist agitation, even among the Yoruba, seeking a divorce from Nigeria, it is pertinent to consider the counsel of the elders in Afenifere before a blind rush into an inferno, in the name of  Oduduwa Republic. Given the current inarticulate agitation and emerging discord even among the many disparate groups rooting for Oduduwa Republic,  the agitation for a Yoruba nation is shaping out as more of  EMOTIONAL ROMANTICISM, lacking in sober calculations of the cost.  No doubt, Nigerians across board today face daunting challenges, most especially with insecurity, that is becoming a choke-hold on the nation. But what we need to apply is brain power, not brown or muscle power, with its tempting recourse to a strategy of violent agitation. This is still a democracy, despite its imperfections, that allows for contestation of ideas and mobilization of strategic groups for goal attainment, without hasty adoption of violence. The issue at stake is purely for a BETTER NIGERIA  and the anger of the citizens should NOT be just against one target, as it were –  President Muhammadu Buhari – but other targets, including governors and National Assembly legislators, who have conveniently chosen not to apply the leverage of their positions to put pressure on the president, thereby making them complicit, in varying degrees, in the nation’s rot.  They artfully present themselves as helpless, like us ordinary folks !!  On the contrary, they like projecting the president as the all powerful, SUPREME MONARCH , the only stumbling block, thereby setting him up to take the bullet for all that is wrong with Nigeria.

Thankfully, the rush of events is forcing the governors, particularly governors of southern states, to come together to confront the demon of insecurity, given that some of them now face existential threat from domestic violent agitators in their states.  The Asaba declaration by the 17 southern governors banning open cattle grazing in their states is the first salvo.  Apparently, the  ‘North ‘ was caught off guard by that unanimous decision which must have  informed the precipitate, inarticulate and laughable statement credited to Abubakar  Malami, the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice that banning open cattle grazing in the south is like banning motor spare parts selling by Igbos in the ‘ North ‘ !!  Such illogic, and  that from a SAN !!!

With the National Assembly now seemingly inclined to accelerate the process of constitutional review, going by the nationwide public hearings on the subject,  even if this is seen as mere palliative in some quarters, a significant good may eventually emerge from the process. But Chief Ayo Adebanjo, doubts such a good outcome, insisting on Afenifere’s position of comprehensive restructuring of the governance structure of the country as the only viable option for a one Nigeria.  In  an interview published in the Daily Independent of Sunday, May 23, 2021, the Afenifere leader had stressed that the 2023 election may not be feasible under the current constitution and that any delay to restructure the country can only spur secessionist agitators like Sunday Igboho and Nnamdi Kanu. “ I don’t want violence or separation, nobody wants secession “,  Chief Adebanjo had declared, but noted that by the continued intransigence of the Buhari administration to embrace restructuring, they seem bent “ to provoke people for the country to break up “ .

Afenifere has provided intellectual vanguard for agitation to restructure the country and Chief Adebanjo has been a most vocal advocate of restructuring.  Perhaps, with the on-going push and shove about constitution review, the Buhari presidency, compelled to take cognizance of the emergent coalition of forces, may  even if reluctantly,  yield to the now strident people’s clamour for a new, restructured Nigeria where more power is granted to the federating states.  If a broadly acceptable constitution from the current review exercise by the National Assembly is ratified at a Peoples Assembly before the 2023 general elections, Afenifere and its leader, Chief Ayo Adebanjo, should feel fulfilled that they fought a good battle.  Democracy is about give and take – reaching a compromise. No constitution is perfect, which is why there are provisions for amendment.

• Dr. Olawunmi, a Public Affairs Analyst and Mass Communication scholar, is former Washington Correspondent of the News Agency of Nigeria. Phone, SMS only : 0803 364 7571

Email : olawunmibisi@yahoo.com.

 

 

Africa is poised to finally deliver on its industrialisation ambitions, thanks to the African Continental Free Trade Agreement and African industrialists who are upending the status quo, writes Adam Molai, an African industrialist and founder of TRT Investments which manages a diversified sector portfolio and operations in Nigeria, South Africa, Zimbabwe, Zambia, Mozambique and Botswana, and whose latest interests have seen a foray into the US and European markets

Those of us still deep in the Covid-19 trenches have observed over the last few months – with dismay or in sheer amazement – how China has roared back.

From shuttered factories and ghost industrial towns just over a year ago, the world’s second biggest economy and largest global supplier is projected to grow 8.1 percent this year on the back of strong exports and a gradual recovery in household consumption.

And GDP growth next year is projected to be 5.5 percent, according to the Asian Development Bank.

China is clearly back with more than just a bang … and with its re-emergence goes, or so you would imagine, the aspirations of anyone who thought to use the pandemic as a  launchpad to supplant the Asian nation as the world’s main source of production.

Yet despite China’s stunning turnabout, I still believe the pandemic provides Africa with the perfect opportunity to become the alternate supply chain of the world.

While China has been quick to shake off the impact of Covid-19, the rest of the world has not – and the global pandemic (just the first of many, according to experts) has reinforced the dangers of the world’s over-reliance on one source of production.

So, China’s recovery has not negated the desire by the world for an alternate source or sources of production but has highlighted the need for it.

And Africa, with its young population, abundant raw materials, low cost of labour and an ability to scale quickly, is in pole position to take up the mantle.

But how can Africa – which almost consistently fails to live up to its promise – do it?

On the back of industrialisation.

China went from a third-world country to a global powerhouse in 30 years, leveraging its low cost base of employees to manufacture low-value items.

It has now moved up that curve, leaving a gap for the lower-value items which Africa – with its abundance of low-cost but well-skilled labour – can easily fill.

Apart from its growing population, abundant raw materials and the low cost of labour, there have been several recent developments which have greatly improved Africa’s ability to realise its industrialisation ambitions.

The most significant is the African Continental Free Trade Agreement (AfCTA) which came into force this past January.

While change will not be felt overnight, AfCFTA is a game-changer for Africa as it will assist in driving down economies of scale for production on the Continent. While not being able to generate the economies of scale China was able to produce, AfCFTA will allow Africa to come very close.

Then there is, of course, technology.

Better technology will help Africa achieve the lower end of the cost curve that it previously had difficulty in doing, strengthening its credentials to be the next source of production for the world.

Finally, there are the local industrialists, entrepreneurs and businesses who are not just committed to, but in a position to drive the industrialisation of the Continent.

Industrialists like Aliko Dangote and others who are already taking steps to upend the status quo.

In his quest to reverse the decades-old system of exporting crude oil and importing refined petroleum products such as gasoline, diesel and lubricating oil, Dangote, Africa’s richest man, is building a 650 000 barrels a day refinery in Nigeria. The refinery – set to be the second biggest in the world – is scheduled to start operating at the end of this year.

As part of his industrialisation drive, Dangote has also established a granulated urea fertiliser plant in Nigeria which will produce fertiliser products.

Meanwhile, our company, TRT Investments, has taken a substantial stake in South Africa’s largest non-food FMCG contract manufacturer, KAS, with a view to expanding it to east and west Africa in the next few years.

But that is not the limit of our vision.

We plan on turning KAS into the largest non-food FMCG contract manufacturer in the world in five to six  years.

How?

By rethinking where we intersect with the production cycle.

Traditional beneficiation models focus on starting at the beginning – at processing raw materials, then moving onto intermediary goods and ending up with finished goods.

Unfortunately, we need to acknowledge that Africa lacks the intellectual property to do that from the outset.

We are able to produce things in Africa, but we haven’t created finished goods or brands out of them – which is where the real value lies.

Take chocolate, which is made from cocoa which is mostly sourced from West Africa. Currently, the region exports the cocoa to the developed world where it is processed and which it then exports around the world, including back to Africa, at a premium.

But the developed world does more than just produce chocolate from cocoa, they create brands and demand for these brands – such as Lindt, Ferrero Rocher, Nestle, Cadbury, Nutella etc – which enable them to sell it  at a premium.

This is where the real value lies, not in the raw materials but in the packaging and branding of it.

So instead of starting at the beginning, we plan to start at the end of  the cycle, move backwards and vertically integrate as we go along. At the same time, we will create intellectual property out of those products which will allow us to generate the most value out of it.

That is how Africa will achieve its industrialisation ambitions and become the alternate producer to the world.

We will take what we have in abundance – manpower and raw materials – throw in technology (existing and emerging) and the vacuum which has opened up as a result of China moving up the value curve, and add AfCFTA and agents of change (like Dangote and similar minded individuals).

The result will be a different ending to previous efforts – it will ensure that Africa becomes the alternate source of production for the world … and will take Africa from the global menu to a seat at the world’s economic table, or maybe even more ambitiously, allow us to create our own table on our own terms.

By Tunji Olaopa

NIGERIA stands critically at the edge of the precipice. This much is obvious even to the average Nigerians who have had to bear the brunt of bad governance occasioned by deepening insecurities and failing structural assurances. On a daily basis now, and ever on an increasing and frightening levels, Nigerians hear news that speak to their innate fear about things unraveling out of control right before their very eyes. Over the years, my many theoretical analyses and public commentary interventions have been attempts to pluck at the developmental possibilities of the Nigerian state from independence till date. But I must admit that I keep getting stumped by the ever-increasing ways by which the Nigerian condition keeps undermining promising resolutions.

And it is not that informed patriots have not been alarmed and motivated to inject their most enlightened prognoses and diagnoses. One resounding analysis across the public spheres calls for state of emergencies to be declared in most of Nigeria’s critical sectors, from security to education and infrastructures, and from healthcare to public service institutions. But then, it would seem to me that asking for state of emergencies assumes a lot about the underlying governance capacities of the Nigerian state than we should. We cannot make the declaration of state of emergencies in critical sectors fundamental if the most fundamental issue of governance itself is critically deficient. Governance, that is, constitutes the most fundamental governmental structure by which an entire territory of people and dynamics are managed according to certain processes and rules. But it would seem that in Nigeria, these governance rules and procedures work only in exceptions.

This, for me, is the crux of the tragedy. The governance disarticulation of the Nigerian state leaves its portended greatness in abeyance. And this is to the disadvantage of the numerous Nigerians who are ever expectant about the ability of Nigeria to fight its own debilitation and foreground their aspirations for a good and quality life. Now, the Giant of Africa wobbles ahead into the twenty-first century without a clue as to its greatness. In recent times, and after my immensely gratifying viewing of that superb film, the Black Panther, my mind has been groping for correlates between the cinematic Wakanda and Nigeria. The aspirational trajectory that moored Wakanda to an Afrofuturist narrative also locates Nigeria within the dynamics of a developmental state in the mold of Singapore and the rest of the Asian Tigers. It is this same governance resilience that transformed a mere desert in the United Arab Emirate into a shining oasis of modernity we now call Dubai. The major difference between Wakanda and Nigeria—indeed between Nigeria and, say, Singapore—is that Nigeria’s governance history is denoted as a trajectory of false starts, perpetual transitions, lingering crisis and arrested development.

And so, one can imagine the type of disappointment at having to descend from the point of aspirational comparison to that of postcolonial reality of Nigeria’s governance failure and bleak future. A consolatory thinking that Nigeria is not alone in this governance bleakness might have served a purpose, except that the connection between leadership and governance has broken down. The unfortunate dimension of that nexus is that the leadership question in Nigeria is getting more contentious, just as the measure of trust between the leaders and the people has widened to a combustible dimension. Unfortunately, the shape that public communication and information management has assumed, especially the over-sensitivity to criticism, makes it look as though the government is losing sight of the alternatives that such critiques throw up for understanding the possible turns Nigeria could take.

Odia Ofeimun’s provocative book, Taking Nigeria Seriously, provides for me a theoretical framework with which to deepen my existing analysis of the relationship of Nigeria’s political elites with the future of the Nigerian state. Without mincing words, the larger mass of the Nigerian political class on whom the destiny of Nigeria rests, do not really take their responsibility of leading seriously. Since the publication of Goldman Sachs’ 2015 book about the possible implosion of the Nigerian state, there has been many more of such negative prognostications. And they are justified because the experiences of so many other states that imploded are not one-third of what the Nigerian state has gone through since independence.

And yet, none of these prognostications seem to make any behavioral impact on a leadership that has been known with unbridled rapacity. On the contrary, the Nigerian political elites prefer to delude themselves with the thought that Nigeria is an ongoing project—a work in progress. In most of my writings, I have fallen under the sway of this rhetoric too. Well, this project seems to be derailing, rather than firming up towards a completion. Nigeria has become a project assailed on all sides by insurgencies, banditry and kidnapping—as well as a leadership pigheadedness that sees all these anomalies and keeps up with a delusional rhetoric about national well-being.

Who believes such rhetoric? Definitely not ordinary Nigerians who daily see the underbelly of the political class revealed in sordid revelations on the pages of newspapers. And this sordid recklessness of the political elite cascades down into the behavioral attitudes of the populace. Impunity is contagious. Leadership greed provides a most powerful incentive for a similar and most wanton act of subversion on the part of Nigerians. In other words, is there any justification for an average Nigerian to be patriotic in the face of leadership failure and an alarming regression of social and political anomie occasioned by wanton rapacity? If the political elite fails to take Nigeria seriously, why should Nigerians? Indeed, why should there be any commitment to any dream or vision of Nigerianness when the political class itself is using that vision for primitive accumulation and ethnic jingoism? Some kind of unassailable logic explains the gratification dynamics that motivate Nigerians. In the incapacity of the tottering institutions of the Nigerian state to provide for the welfare and well-being of Nigerians, it stands to reason that no one ought to take such institutions seriously. Hence, the tax regime of the Nigerian state ought to be evaded since such taxes do not end up doing what they are meant to do. Do even the political elite pay tax? Why then must I as an ordinary Nigerian? In fact, why must I be the sacrificial lamb that always pay the price?

Problem solving in Nigeria has become clearly disconnected from useful intelligence, ideas and knowledge that history throws up for resolving Nigeria’s problems. Let me illustrate. K. C. Wheare provided the theoretical foundation for the utility of federalism for plural states like Nigeria. Smart and theoretically aware nationalists as well as a host of Nigerian scholars, affirmed the historical urgency of the federal option. And even more so, current situations and circumstances keep demanding that Nigeria can only make meaningful progress within the structural ambit of federalism. And yet, the dysfunctional federal system has been tendentiously politicized, like almost everything else that has to do with Nigeria’s political development.

This is really tragic. And the tragedy lies in the fact that we have a political class that is adequately equipped, in terms of strategic and emotional intelligence, to make Nigeria work, but which has been sidetracked into an insane and acrimonious pursuit of political power and unbridled extraction. And to further complicate matters, one cannot but factor Nigeria’s higher education framework and its knowledge production responsibility into the governance failure of the Nigerian state. The universities, for example, are supposed to be humming laboratories for generating enabling ideas and theories at the interstices of history, pragmatism and socioeconomic foresights. Unfortunately, academics and scholars publish many papers that cater to promotional exigencies rather than patriotism. The equation then seems completed: anti-intellectual political elites meet the theoretically-minded ivory tower (in its most dissociated sense). The policy space then becomes emblematic of the research-policy dissonance; a disconnection that fractures good governance and its need for the articulation of strategic policymaking dynamic through policy intelligence.

When therefore, to parody Ayi Kwei Armah, will the beautiful Nigerians be born? The national project is already going out of joint. Things are falling apart, and the centre, literally, can no longer hold.    And to reaffirm Lee Iacocca’s fundamental question: where have all the leaders gone? This question becomes very significant given that there is a retreat of the genuine and patriotic Nigerians—experts, scholars, intellectuals, politicians, elites, etc.—who have fled from the enfolding grip of spurious politics. And in their critical absence, we are left with the political jobbers and larcenous opportunists who not only trample on our collective intelligence, but also ride roughshod on us to keep plundering the commonweal.

If Nigeria will get good governance right, the political game has to radically change. We need to inject good politics into the governance framework. And good politics simply implies that the political class will start taking Nigeria and Nigerians seriously. It means that Nigeria has what it takes in terms of human and material resources—including its own political class—to make Nigeria work. But then, to realize this, the political class need to find itself first, and then recreate itself into the beautiful ones already born. The alternative is even more brutal. And it lies in the various insights and lessons of the Arab Spring, and this unfortunately lands us right back into the prognostication of national collapse. We really do not want to make those predictions come to pass.

• Prof. Olaopa is a Retired Federal Permanent Secretary & Directing Staff, National Institute For Policy and Strategic Studies  (NIPSS), Kuru, Jos

tolaopa2003@gmail.com

 

By Nnedinnso Ogaziechi

 

There have been new agitations in the Nigerian political space since 1999 by women and the youths. Then progressively the elite, most of whom never care to know what happens around their communities not to talk of bringing their expertise to the political space joined in. Nigerian politics has seemingly been monopolized by the older generations as the younger ones seem uninterested.

The urge to grab power for its own sake has dominated the political landscape giving rise to the political cliché of ‘installing candidates from the cleaner to the Speaker’. That is a political saying that summarizes the veiled greed of most politicians to monopolize the political spaces available through their cronies.

The Attorney General of the Federation recently caused a bit of an uproar when he stated that governors must start restructuring from their states first. He pointed out the fact that most governors wield too much power over the State Houses of Assembly and the local government administration. We might have issues we disagree with the AG on but I guess there are some truths in there.

It has been discovered that the full blooming of our democracy is hampered by the apathy by some demographics and it is a huge problem. The young people and women often complain of exclusion without making efforts to go sit at the table. They easily forget that the people they call old today all started as young people in their 20s and 30s. A Rotimi Amaechi became the River State House Speaker for two terms as a young person then went on to become a governor and now a minister. A Donald Duke became a commissioner in his 20s. A Pat Utomi was Political Adviser to President Shagari as a young person. For women too, all those whose names are in the history books for their political participation locally and internationally did not have the posts presented to them on a platter. While The RoundTable Conversation believes that there are socio-economic factors that affect the full participation of all the different demographics, we still feel that more efforts must be put into their acts to be more fully engaged to provide leadership instead of waiting on the ‘old’ politicians to either resign or die first.

The RoundTable Conversation decided to find out from the All Progressives Congress (APC) Senator Akpan Udoedehe who was once a Minister of State for the Federal Capital Territory, and a former governorship aspirant in Akwa Ibom State under the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). He is today the National Secretary of the party’s Congress Caretaker and Extraordinary Convention Planning Committee (CECPC).

The RoundTable Conversation decided to find out from the All Progressives Congress (APC), Senator Akpan Udoedehe, who was once a Minister of State for the Federal Capital Territory, and a former governorship aspirant in Akwa Ibom State under the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). He is today the National Secretary of the party’s Congress Caretaker and Extraordinary Convention Planning Committee (CECPC).

The RoundTable  Conversation wanted to find out what the party intends to do differently in the process of presenting candidates for future elections in ways that would be inclusive and fair. The RoundTable believes that intra and inter-party democratic processes or lack of same impact on the general elections. Senator Udoedehe said that in terms of leadership evolution processes, the first stage in the APC is to know the members, who are they? The party is updating the data and memberships across all voting demographics.  We want free and democratic processes and that inspired the recent updating of the party registration of old and new members from the smallest units of the party structure, the ward levels. The people must be prepared to choose who they want at elections.

Given that in Nigeria, campaign funds are not regulated, how is the party going to make sure that money is not an issue? Senator Udoudehe maintains that with money or no money, the people decide who leads them in a democracy and that is what the APC understands so well.  He believes however that the values of the people influence their political processes and so it is not for the APC to dictate for the people. We expect that party members must obey the electoral rules.

The politician emerges from the people and as such, it would be delusional to assume that the politician would behave differently. Whether a politician has money or not should not determine his political future. The people must begin to look at the values an individual possesses. It is time to look at the values that promote human flourishing. Money does not vote at elections, the people do and as a matter of fact, money matters across world politics but we want the character of an individual to earn him any position he seeks because that is the only way he can work for the people.

As a Sociologist I understand human interactions. Again, the clamour by women and young people to enter the political space must be backed by actions. No one gives you power, you must as a young person or woman get up and take your space at the political table. I was a local government chairman at the age of 32. I defeated older people then. If you know you have a calling to serve your people, join politics in your ward.

To Senator Udoedehe, it is a puerile argument to sit back and complain. He believes that once anyone has the heart for service, it is a duty she or he owes the people to step forward and the APC as a party has some waivers for women who do not have the financial muscle to make all the statutory payments for election forms but have the capacity to win and serve.

Women must not fall to the blackmail of being called prostitutes; it makes no sense to fall to such cheap blackmail. All over the world, spouses can decide to support or not to support each other. Be mindful that there are some men whose wives decide not to support too often alleging that political duties keep them out of the homes so it takes a great sense of understanding and support for any spouse to join partisan politics so it is not a gender thing.

Politics like other spheres of life comes with its own nuances but for any woman who has the competences and the heart for service to be scared of being called names is not encouraging. Women have achieved a lot in all other sectors and the APC as a party recognizes this and have been making efforts to amend its constitution to create more chances for women.

I feel what we should be canvassing for is human rights, equity, justice and fairness. Creed should not be an issue; personal choices should not be an issue to build a great democracy. Quality representation is what the APC is always working towards.  In the composition of the caretaker committees we have strict percentages for women, those living with disability and the youth. The APC does not spoon-feed anyone but we try to make it easier for them to have access to finance. The issue is still left for people to join our party to get the privileges we grant women and the young ones.

The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) Publicity Secretary, Kola Ologbondiyan is a veteran journalist who had equally contested for a seat in the House of Representatives before being elected to his present position in the PDP. He believes that the party has always been known to work by the rules in terms of internal party democracy and we have a model of electing people into offices. We strictly follow the party’s constitution from the lowest level to the highest.

We have the processes of electing local officers who run the affairs of the party and conduct the different congresses which bring up candidates for the general elections organized by the Independent National electoral Commission (INEC). The two variants are clear. The process is the delegate system. Structural party officers, members elected to run the affairs of the party all do their duties. From the wards, zones and states, there are clear party democratic party processes. The delegates elect the candidates for all the executive and legislative contests.

As far as the agitations for inclusive politics goes, we believe that there must be an inter-generational complimentary leadership because in our culture, no matter how old your father is, as long as he is alive and well, he will continue to make leadership inputs but recognizes the part youths can play too. The party does not interfere with the choices of the people so we present the candidates chosen by the people responsible for such choices.

The delegates choose the people they want. So in terms of inclusiveness, the women and youths must make the move by participating from the grassroots level and thereby making themselves available to go through the electoral processes. The PDP has always made deliberate efforts to carry women along. The constitution has been amended to give women at least 35% of the party executive where they are available and show interest and we don’t charge women for nomination forms but just the expression of interest forms.

For those who complain about finance, we believe in the PDP that the people have the right to choose their leaders and in most communities the people may decide to choose the not so rich but those they believe would serve them better based on their history. People know those with the values they love and no matter how much others spend, they would insist on those they want. The problem of Nigerian politics does not really lie with any political party even though we believe the political parties have their own roles and missteps sometimes which is human. We believe that the people must sit up too and make decisions about those that would lead them. The moment political parties finish with their internal processes and put candidates up for elective posts, the people would speak at the polls.

We want the elite to be more politically active and step forward to challenge those they criticize. Apathy in politics by those who feel they can do better makes the system uninteresting. Democracy is about the people and we want them to own the processes. It is left for the people to choose the best individuals that have the gravitas. Power is not given out, it is worked for. There should be no excuses at all.

 

The dialogue continues…