The Nation Newspaper

Category: Commentaries

  • Lagos BRT fast losing its allure

    SIR: Just like the now rested Lagos Municipal Transport Service (LMTS), pioneered by Lagos Town Council in 1958, the much admired Lagos Bus Rapid Transit system, initiated by former Lagos State governor, Senator Bola Ahmed Tinubu and launched by the current governor, Babatunde Fashola (SAN) some five years ago is heading towards an open brand pit. A brand, which has been applauded by all and sundry, for bringing some resemblance of respect for orderliness and bringing us close to what is obtainable in other metro city is being threatened by neglect and decadence.

    The BRT system established with the intention of easing time and money spent commuting in yellow buses popularly known as danfos, has betrayed all indications of being a salvaging point to Lagos’s traffic gridlock, the time wasting of conventional commercial buses and their astronomical increases in transport-fare at the slightest excuse. The inability of the management to strategically make sure there is timed and chained flow of buses at their respective terminals have made commuter lose valuable and unquantifiable human time queuing for never arriving buses! An average pilot time to wait at BRT terminals today stands between 30minutes to one hour. It is even a disaster during rush hours.

    Since Lagos BRT is taunted to be “the first of its kind in sub-Saharan Africa, and the first example of a comprehensive and an integrated approach to improving public transportation”, one would have expected some standard in service delivery. Despite monetary review in the area of ticketing from N50 to N70 and N100 to 120, the quality of service has spiralled downwards and persistently moving below acceptable level. One thing the handler of the scheme must realize fast is that service delivery is what determines brand optimization. And brand failures are by-products of daunted service, breach of trust and capacity to deliver in record time.

    If a service fails, it’s the brand which produces such service that is having perception problem. Human dynamics have contributed largely to the fragility of perception, and as Nigerians, we have a value placed on service, and are always willing to pay even if we would complain about charges later. We value our time and money, thus, get easily dissuaded when there is no corresponding benefit for time, money and services we pay for. Unlike its usual self, the Lagos BRT brand is fast deteriorating beyond comprehension. And when a brand gets tarnished via public perception and exposes same to media decimation, it quickens such brand’s burial.

    Lagos BRT handlers needs to see this handwriting on the wall, no brand disregard the satisfaction of its clients/customers and remain in business, not even a brand trusted with the responsibilities of promoting other brands. With over 300 high capacity buses worth over 300 million in advert placement per annum, it would be insensitive on the part of Lagos State government not to salvage this enterprise before a post-mortem is required.

    LAMATA, LAG Bus, NURTW, EcoBank and all other partners need to understand that strong service delivery, in this case, time management, help to protect a brand. The slightest decrease in quality of service, hint of mismanagement or customer dissatisfaction portends a great danger to the survival of the brand.

    Can’t we just get things right for once? What could be the hindrance to Lagos BRT? Is it the participation of the refined “Agberos” – National Union of Road Transport Workers (NURTW)? One cogent point that needs to be noted is the disparity of service delivery between the conventional Blue-Line BRT and the Red Lag bus. The red buses seem neater and a little bit coordinated though their frequency of breakdown is at par!

    It is not yet uhuru for the visionary masterpiece called Lagos BRT… This brand must not wither!

    • Sulaimon Mojeed-Sanni

    Lagos

  • Adekunle deserves better treatment

    SIR: After reading about the pathetic condition of the former commander, Third Marine Commando of the Nigerian Army during the civil war, Brigadier-General Benjamin Adekunle in The Nation of June 13, I asked myself is it a mistake to serve one’s country selflessly? The question becomes imperative because there are many people who gave selfless service to Nigeria but ended up in penury and neglect by Nigerian government. Conversely, there are many who did not even serve the country in the real sense of the word but just were civil servants, politicians, et al, who have looted the country and got the pat on the back when caught and thereafter enjoy their loots.

    His contributions to the corporate existence of this nation, particularly his exploits during the civil war are so well documented that he does not deserve to be treated shabbily by the successive administration in Nigeria. As General Alabi Isama (retired) correctly noted, what sense does it make to set aside a day to remember soldiers who fell during the war while those who were fortunate to survive are neglected and living in abject poverty?

    This is food for thought for our decision makers. The above make me to think that our compatriots who see service as a mean of enriching one’s pocket might not deserve blame in view of the plights of those who gave selfless services to the country. My submission should not be misconstrued to mean that people should corner Nigerian resources for their selfish interests. Far from it, my position is that Nigerian government at all tiers should reward selfless service as means to encourage people to be more patriotic to the cause of the nation.

    The Nigerian Army alone does not deserve blame for not taking proper care of Gen. Adekunle; this is because he did not serve the Nigerian army alone but Nigeria as a country. Nevertheless, this is not to exonerate the army of its neglect of a duty to a selfless leader.

    Coming home to Oyo State and Ogbomoso his state and hometown respectively; are they waiting for his funeral to send condolence messages to his family and eulogize him? Leaf should be borrowed from Asiwaju Tinubu, Governor Babatunde Fashola and Otunba Gbenga Daniel who at various times in Lagos and Ogun states took care of people who are not even fit to untie Adekunle’s shoes.

    • Adewuyi Adegbite

    Apake, Ogbomoso.

  • The judiciary on trial

    Obviously, the last has not been heard about the can of worms opened by retired Justice of the Federal High Court, Okechukwu Okeke on the judiciary. The more intriguing aspect of Justice Okeke’s revelation relates to his lamentation that he was ‘a victim of injustice in the Nigerian judiciary’, by virtue of the ‘warning letter’ he received from the National Judicial council (NJC).

    The Council, the apex body for the country’s judiciary is a creation of the 1999 Constitution as amended, and is vested with powers to exercise disciplinary control over judges and other judicial officers nationwide. Justice Okeke had accused the council of issuing him a warning unjustly over a petition against him and apparently without giving due consideration to his response. His observation pitted him directly against the NJC, which had considered it necessary to publicly issue a statement it titled ‘setting the records straight’, and in which the council counter-accused the retired judge of allegedly misleading members of the public. An offshoot of this episode has equally become messy for the judiciary’s image. And that is Okeke’s charge, while speaking at a valedictory held in his honour last month that a serving justice of the Supreme Court allegedly tried to influence a case involving a Managing Director of a bank. According to him, the Supreme Court Justice sent his daughter to him (Justice Okeke) with a directive that he should vacate the order granting Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON) the takeover of a property of the bank, one of which the daughter and son-in-law to the Supreme Court Justice lived in. Justice Okeke claimed that the daughter again visited him in his chambers on March 8, 2012 with the same instructions from the judge. The retired judge, overall, accused the Supreme Court Justice of being behind his travails with the NJC.

    If anything is clear from this trading of blame, it is that all is not well within the judiciary. And that the head of that institution, Justice Mukhtar, still has a lot to do, in fulfilment of her promise to stamp out corruption. Said Justice Mukhtar to the Senate Committee that screened her appointment at the time: “Corruption is in every system of our society and I can’t pretend that it is not in the judiciary. What I intend to do to curb this is to lead by example and hope that others will follow. As chairman of NJC, I will encourage internal cleansing based on petitions…”

    The justice Okeke’s can of worms is a veritable excuse for the CJN not just to abide by her promise to lead by example, but to also go beyond hoping for others to follow. She needs to put in place strict measures to ensure that others follow. The first of this of course is to fully investigate and make public findings in all petitions made against judges. It is true that the country’s current democracy is permissible of many expressions, including petty and frivolous ones aimed, often, at scoring cheap political points. Yes, the CJN must sift these, but she must not throw away the substance with the flimsy. In its advertorial, the council admitted that newspapers’ publication of Justice Okeke’s speech (How I became a victim of judiciary’s injustice) “cast aspersions’ on the council in particular and the judiciary at large”. But according to it, the NJC received five petitions written against Justice Okeke while he was serving as a judge. After obtaining his responses to the allegations contained in the first three petitions, the NJC considered them at its meeting of April 24 and 25.

    “In the course of deliberation, Council noted that Hon. Justice Okechukwu Okeke would be retiring from service on 19th May, 2013. At the end of deliberation, Council noted the three petitions and the reactions by Hon. Justice O. Okeke and decided to warn him to desist from such acts that are prejudicial to the integrity of the judiciary and administration of justice. It is to be stressed that Hon. Justice Okeke’s responses to the remaining 4th and 5th separate petitions did not form part of the decision of the Council at its meeting which was held on 24th and 25th April, 2013.”

    The NJC went on to observe that the 5th petition against Justice Okeke relates to the AMCON case where the judge gave an exparte order in favour of AMCON. “By the provision of Rule 2(2) of the Code of Conduct for judicial officers of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, ‘a judicial officer must avoid the abuse of the power of issuing interim injunctions, ex-parte. A meticulous examination of the 5th petition and the response by Hon. Justice Okeke has shown that the exparte order granted by His Lordship in favour of AMCON established a case of misconduct contrary to Code of conduct for Judicial Officers of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. However, the said petition and reaction were not considered by Council because of time constraint. Council is therefore constrained to state that Hon. Justice Okechukwu Okeke misled members of the Nigerian public into believing that the National Judicial Council issued him a warning letter based on the exparte order he gave in the AMCON’s case: the fifth petition.”

    The council concluded that from the totality of the facts as stated, Justice Okeke’s speech was not correct, and it was “nothing but a figment of his imagination, as the warning letter issued to him by Council was not as a result of the exparte order he granted in respect of the AMCON’s case.”

    There is a vacuum begging for filling in the NJC’s action to set the records straight. Why and how did it arrive at the conclusion that the AMCON’s case established a case of misconduct, contrary to the code of Conduct, against Justice Okeke; when it declared, in just the next breadth that “the said petition and reaction by Hon. Justice Okeke were not considered by council because of time constraint.” The only avenue where a prima facie case can be said to be established against an accused person is in court; and then after the court has duly considered a relevant application and response against it by the parties. The NJC not being a court (never mind that its head is actually the Chief Justice), cannot in good conscience give a publicized ‘ruling’ as it did in its advertorial. Nevertheless, Justice Okeke will be free to counter the NJC, except that by their professional culture, judges, whether in or out of service, do not normally join issues publicly.

    A judge’s character should not be smeared on mere suspicion or on allegations that are less then substantial. But the brickbats being thrown raise public curiosity, and call for a thorough inquiry. As it is, the NJC has been drawn into the arena, not as an umpire, but an interested party. Tongues definitely will wag, and the CJN is tasked as to how to handle it. She cannot be seen to be protecting the personal interest of her fellow judge at the apex bench; nor can she afford to conduct a secret investigation that will further raise more eyebrows. She needs tact, courage and wisdom to handle this can, and she cannot pretend that all is well and therefore keep quiet, hoping that Nigerians will soon forget.

    The entire episode is an unhealthy development for the judiciary, which has been in the limelight for the wrong reasons of corruption, slow pace of justice delivery, a dearth of basic infrastructure and tools; and a need for a cleansing. Critically, the development portends some effects on the court system, and ultimately, the judiciary institution suffers, along with the country’s credibility to the outside world. This is one case that should not be allowed to adorn the toga of the justices Salami – Katsina –Alu crisis. Again, the ball is in the court of Chief Justice Mariam Aloma Mukhtar.

    • Atobatele, a consultant in legal affairs, wrote from Abuja

  • Introducing: Jangian lexicon

    Introducing: Jangian lexicon

    My people had an ancient but tricky saying which when interpreted, has two meanings: the one literal and the other metaphorical. Wise, doughty, old people, they say that when a matter becomes too troublous and defies all antidotes, we must go ahead and point at it. But this is the literal part of it; those sages didn’t mouth banalities like this did they? They were actually saying that when a spirit (a malevolent spirit, of course) starts acting up, the community would ‘elect to point at it’. Hardball has elected to point one grubby, little, finger at the ongoing Jangian comedy.

    There you go; bet you missed that. Governor Jonah Jang (JJ) as we all know has undergone a rather cataclysmic unraveling since May 24, 2013 when 35 governors in Nigeria held an election which he and 15 of his colleagues insist they won. If they had left it at that and gone home quietly to their tricky tasks of running small portions of this ‘animal’ kingdom, we would have ignored that episode as a minor brain-box blip of an overheated tokunbo car. But Jang and the gang are dressed for a dirty fight. They are dead to their cause or dead serious if you like. It was as if Jang was looking for an opportunity to run away from his blighted Plateau State (do you blame him?). He has become the governor of the Nigerian Governor’s Forum (NGF) more or less; having relocated to Abuja where he hurriedly set up a secretariat of the renegade NGF, convened several meetings, led his presidential posse to the seat of the President perhaps for presidential blessing for a job well done.

    Why retired General Jang would elect to be the gossamer in another man’s rubber device is not the concern of Hardball here. He is rather keen on establishing some new entries into Nigeria’s complex political lexicography. Thus if a man elects to make himself a foot mat in the corridors of power, we can caution him for being jangian. Then if a politician begins to exhibit some way out weird behaviour like going to court to contest an election we all know he clearly lost, we can say he has become jangrened (that is gangrene has set into his folly!). If your friend or associate goes off the hook and you cannot put a handle on him anymore, you can describe him as having gone jangoid. Lastly, you could call someone a bloody jango when he acts like a political bingo, a popinjay or a stringed marionette.

    But why is Hardball particularly provoked to elect to point to this jang gremlin besetting the polity? Here: recently, the 36 states’ commissioners of finance had worked out on Yerima Ngama, the Minister of State, Finance, who oversees the Federation Accounts Allocation Committee (FAAC). An outstanding of N160 billion had been hanging since February and the Federal Government would play pranks and hee-haw thus the revolt by the commissioners and subsequent stalemate. Major constitutional and fiscal crises loomed. Danger was clear and present thus the Federal Government rushed to clear its mess. It released the fund which belongs to the common purse in the first place and shared it. Everybody was happy and every thing was normal once again.

    But not for Jang who seems to have developed fervour for relentless peregrinations. He swiftly claimed credit for the release of the outstanding allocations. According to a national newspaper, “Jang said he was able to achieve this by using diplomatic means to convince President Goodluck Jonathan on the need to release the funds when his faction of the forum (NGF) met with the president a few days ago.”

    Even illiterates know well enough that the federation revenues are not the property of the president’s to keep, withhold or release. Hardball can therefore, find no word anywhere to describe Governor Jang’s statement than to call it jangoid. And Hardball drops a tear for the good people of Plateau State if this is what they’ve had to put up with for so long

  • Campbell and Nigeria’s democracy

    John Campbell’s piece in The Nation on Friday, May 17, titled “Escaping a Cycle of Violence” was an attempt by a foreigner to shed more light on Nigeria’s dreaded terrorist organization known as “Boko Haram” with the hope, I suppose, that Nigerians in general and her government in particular may know what formidable religious insurgents they’re up against. Campbell is no ordinary foreigner, he probably knows Nigeria inside out, which is primarily due to his position as a high ranking US diplomat. He was a former US ambassador to Nigeria, to be specific. Therefore, it can be said that Campbell is an authority especially when events occurring in Nigeria has significant bearing on international politics, global security or more specifically US interests.

    While there is no doubt that his piece in the op-ed page of The Nation was illuminating and instructive, a careful analysis of his commentary in relation to Nigeria’s presidential election in 2015 and the effects of the Boko Haram insurgency on Nigeria’s domestic politics vis-à-vis the country’s military, reveals a disturbing undercurrent. While some readers of this article may not see anything to it, one can only appreciate the weight and importance that ought to be attached to the piece as a former diplomat who attained the highest position of US foreign mission in Nigeria. He is one of those that the US government will likely listen to in formulating its policy on Nigeria. And this is why.

    Campbell is currently the Ralph Bunche Senior Fellow for Africa Policy Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) in New York. He served twice in Nigeria, first as political counselor from 1988 to 1990, and as ambassador from 2004 to 2007, with a stint in South Africa. Of another particular importance is a book titled “Nigeria Dancing on the Brink” whose author is none other than Campbell. This book, I should say, is a must read for Nigerians interested in how they are being governed, who the major players that shapes their lives are, and why the country may never aspire to much, if anything, because of the entrenched “patron-client networks” in attaining political power, a relationship that has very little, if not completely devoid of the needs and aspirations of the vast majority of Nigerians.

    This is just one of the startling revelations from the book about the Nigerian state.

    From the aforesaid, Campbell is an extremely important person to pay attention to when the subject is Nigeria, nay Africa as well as the institutions his likes are attached to practice their crafts after retirement. By virtue of his position before or even after retirement, one may also say without any fear of contradiction that he will tend to know more than even the Nigerian authorities about the country because of his implicit affiliation with, if not an integral part of the US intelligence community. Therefore, failure or the unwillingness by the political class and/or those with interests in Nigeria to pay attention to his opinions on such a pathetic weakling like the Nigerian state may be regrettable later.

    The piece, just as in his book, was illuminating and instructive because of the glaring contradictions that Campbell pointed out about the country’s political and economic conditions that continue to set the nation on reverse rather than advance it. Calling into question the effectiveness of the emergency declaration when “the security services are already doing what the state of emergency would permit them to do” and where Jonathan will find “more troops for the three states as the military is already overstretched” as confirmed by the country’s Chief of Army Staff Gen. Ihejirika was on point. Campbell’s assertion, based on the Centre for Foreign Relations’ Nigeria Security Tracker (NST) that “the insurgents’ tactics are evolving toward the style of internationalist jihadism” should seriously worry the Nigerian president.

    But it’s extremely doubtful whether President Jonathan has the leadership quality or intellectual acuity required to appreciate the enormity of the national security powder keg sitting on his lap. He would rather pay attention to petty state politics and hunt down perceived political enemies wherever they are. Campbell’s advice that “the federal government should reform the security services, including better pay and training, and end their impunity from legal prosecution” as well as the “decentralization of government authority, outlined in the country’s constitution but never really implemented would be a step in the right direction” is likely to fall on the deaf ears. It won’t happen anytime soon, if it ever happens in the future.

    But Campbell’s tripod opinions about another possible Jonathan presidency come 2015, his insinuation that the military may not have been permanently excommunicated from the country’s chaotic struggle for power and what he believes the US should do about the current Nigerian situation are quite disturbing. His assertion that formal politics in Nigeria is almost detached from reality may be an indictment of the political class. But his postulation that even though “Goodluck Jonathan is widely regarded as feckless…but is still favoured to win in the national elections scheduled for late next year” should no doubt leave the discerning to wonder if this is not a subtle and indirect endorsement of Jonathan for 2015 and, by extension, a tacit support of the US government despite the recent declaration by the current US ambassador to Nigeria that the United States is not interested in who becomes Nigeria’s president in 2015. Although it’s what is expected of the ambassador to say, but reality and history has always pointed to a different direction.

    The second leg of Campbell’s tripartite argument is that “there is some sentiment in favour of a military takeover” while he says almost in the same breathe that “…but there is little evidence that the upper reaches of the military have the stomach for a return to power.” This is a diplomatic double-speak. It is disturbing that Campbell still sees the military as an option in solving Nigeria’s seemingly perennial political quagmire. The military must never be encouraged under any guise in any national discourse especially from an expert like Campbell as an alternative to solving Africa, let alone Nigerian political problem in light of the devastations in material and psychological terms that this institution wrought on the continent and its people. It is said and there is a truism to it that the worst civilian administration is better than the best military government. One hopes that this is not a coded signal for junior military officers to think about a takeover since the upper echelon does not seem to have the stomach for a return to power.

    United States and other advanced democracies have the responsibility to nurture and encourage the democratic experiments of fragile countries like Nigeria. The US government must continue to engage the Nigerian government to do the right thing by way of free, fair and transparent elections, and upholding the rule of law.

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

  • Number portability: NCC’s silver bullet

    SIR: History was made in the telecommunication industry on Monday, April 22, when the new number portability policy was launched in Lagos by the Nigerian Communication Commission. With the introduction of this laudable policy, the Eugene Juwah-led NCC has not only succeeded in restoring back the power of choice to Nigerian subscribers, but has gone a long way in setting the transformational ball rolling in the industry which will ignite a positive revolution in the telecommunication sector.

    Before the conceptualization of this policy by NCC, Nigerian subscribers have been subjected to economic slavery by the service providers whose sole aim is to keep on maximizing profits by exploiting Nigerians at the expense of good service delivery. The service providers have not only beaten Nigerians like the proverbial child through fraudulent and unwarranted excessive charges, but made sure that the child did not complain or even cry!

    Imagine a situation whereby the service providers makes a mind-boggling and whopping sum of N1.5 billion on daily basis from poor Nigerians subscribers struggling to survive on less than two dollars a day without providing quality service that were being paid for; is nothing to write home about!

    I am not blinded to the challenges being faced by network service providers in Nigeria on daily basis; like power crisis, insecurity, environmental issues, etc, which are not witnessed in other countries, but Nigerian subscribers should not be over-burdened by making them to be paying exorbitant tariffs in other to cover up for the inefficiencies and deficiencies of Nigerian system which they are also victims of; rather they should be made to enjoy quality telecommunication services as obtained in other climes of the globe, especially when compared tariffs charged in Nigeria with what is being offered by the same service providers in other countries.

    Since the firing of this proverbial silver bullet by the NCC, network service providers have been running helter-skelter in order to retain their subscribers.

    Network service providers are now strategising on how to expand their network coverage; improve on the quality of their services; reduce their tariffs, re-brand their networks in other to attract new subscribers that are ready to port.

    The NCC has, by the portability initiative, proved beyond reasonable doubt that it does not take a rocket science or miracle to create a positive change, but with the power of a tested and trusted idea; because ideas they say rules the world!

    • Comrade Nwobodo Chidiebere

    Abuja.

  • Bakassi: A Critical Response to Jonathan’s Speech

     

    President Goodluck Jonathan has said during the interactive session with the Nigerian community in Yaounde, Cameroon, Sunday night, 23rd June 2013, that Nigeria “deliberately” refused to appeal the verdict of the International Court of Justice which ceded the oil-rich Bakassi territory to Cameroun on the 10th of October, 2002. That the major reason is just to protect Nigerians residing in Cameroun and he also said that Nigeria had no new evidence within the period of 10 years given by the ICJ in Article 61 (1).

    Let me say that the statement is fallacy, scandalous, cruel and a grave mistake; it is a known fact today that the Federal Government of Nigeria erroneously and unprofessionally ceded the oil-rich bakassi to Cameroun due to her own laxity.

    It is irresponsible for any Government to admit she intentionally gave out her own territory for any self-centered reasons at the expense of her own National interest, territorial integrity, and the right of her own citizenry. One of the basic foreign policy focuses of any responsible nation is the protection of her sovereignty and territorial integrity. If our Government is claiming that her negligence to appeal the ICJ verdict is to protect Nigerians residing in Cameroun, what about the citizens in the bakassi itself? Do you cut off a man’s head just to curb a headache ailment? The action in return negates the interest of Bakassi people and it is a total denial to their right of self-determination.

    The president’s premise that Nigeria had no new evidence within the 10-years grace as stated in Article 61 of the Statute of the ICJ is a bogus and gigantic fallacy, as several facts emerged during the 10-year period that were sufficient to file an appeal.

    Some Facts that emerged are:

    1. Prof. Walter Ofonagoro, a historian and former Nigerian Information Minister disclosed while speaking to Nigerian public on a topic:- “Nigeria, Cameroun and the Bakassi Question: The Unfulfilled UN Mandate” organized by the Nigerian Institute of International Affairs which was held on Thursday, August 23, 2012 in Lagos said: “fresh facts have emerged to show that the Cameroonian legal team deceived the ICJ into believing that before the Anglo-German treaty of 1913 upon which it rested its case, there were no other treaties that delineated the land and maritime boundary between Nigeria and Cameroon, which is a fraudulent claim”. Prof. Ofonagoro said that he has in his possession, 1822 documents which vested ownership of the Bakassi Peninsula to the Old Calabar Chiefs, by extension to Nigeria, and debunked claims that the 1913 Anglo-German treaty was the first recognised treaty on the land and maritime boundary between Nigeria and Cameroon. Said Prof. Ofonagoro: “This is not true because as far back as 1811, the British had already established a strong sphere of influence over the territories that eventually became Nigeria in 1914.

    The Anglo- German treaty upon which Cameroon built its case was contestable because after the First World war ended in 1919, all the territories controlled by Germany were taken away from them and given to the League of Nations. Cameroon of 1919 was not the Cameroon of 1913, because after the end of the First World War, Germany was forced to give up all its territories in Africa, which came under the mandate of League of Nations. Germany renounced all its claims to territories and all the treaties it entered into which gave it control of territories, became a nullity. The League of Nations consisting of Britain, France and Italy, the territory of Cameroon was carved up by France which took the Northern part.

    2. There were also clear cases of ethnic cleansing in Bakassi peninsula in the past 10 years in violation of the Green Tree Agreement of 2006, increasing violation of rights of Nigerian inhabitants of the Peninsula, the militarization of the place and the obstruction of lawful economic activities of the inhabitants. All these could serve as grounds of appeal which the FG neglected; Reports of intimidation and terrorizing of Nigerians in the Peninsula constitute what is called a material-breach of the Green-Tree Agreement. It is a sufficient ground for Nigeria to terminate the Green-Tree Agreement. That would be in conformity with Article 60, of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaty of 1969.

     

    3. According to international practice, consent of people residing in the territory (by way of plebiscite), is a condition-precedent to any transfer or change in title over the territory that they occupy. Even when the fate of Northern and Southern Cameroun were to be determined, a plebiscite was conducted in 1961, under which Southern Cameroun opted to join Cameroun, while Northern Cameroun opted to join Nigeria. That could be a case, which confirmed what is called Right to Self-Determination. I am of the view that it is still part and parcel of international best practices that inhabitants of the territory are consulted and allowed to make their own choice. I think the interest of the inhabitants ought to have been given greater resonance. This also is enough a critical point to raise before the ICJ for the appeal.

     

    4. Another fact is that the said Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties as contained in Article 46(1) where it states: – “A State may not invoke the fact its consent to be bound by a treaty has been expressed in violation of a provision of its internal law regarding competence to conclude treaties as invalidating its consent unless that violation was manifest and concerned a rule of its internal law of fundamental importance.”

    Article 46 (2) further presented some clarifications to the above provisions:- “A violation is manifest if it would be objectively evident to any State conducting itself in the matter in accordance with normal practice and in good faith.”

     

    These provisions of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties equally present Nigeria with an option to challenge a violation of its internal procedures for legitimising treaties/agreement which the Green Tree Agreement of 2006 did not observed. Under the Nigerian Constitution the Treaty cannot apply, except and unless and only to the extent that such a treaty has been transformed into the Nigerian law. Since the Treaty has not been approved by the (Nigerian) National Assembly for the domestication, Nigeria cannot carry out the provisions of that Agreement. The treaty ought to have been transformed into Nigerian law before the Nigerian government either ratifies it or implements it. That is why the residents of Bakassi feel aggrieved that the necessary measures had not been taken before their territory was transferred to a foreign country.

     

    All the aforementioned premises were enough grounds for our callous one-sided government to utilise but due to some selfish self-centered reasons known to the government, she decided not to appeal the Judgment at the expense of the Bakassi people and Nigerians at large.

     

    Way forward

    Since the legal window has already been closed, what is needed, therefore, is a comprehensive framework and strategy to carry out diplomatic negotiation that represents the interest of bakassi people and the interest of all Nigerians at large.

     

    Recommendation

    Total buy-out of bakassi: Negotiation should immediately commence between Nigeria and Cameroun to buy back the peninsula which we in error transferred to them. If we give them an offer that is so juicy that cannot be refused, then the Cameroonians might reconsider and sell off the disputed bakassi. We can settle them, using money. It is to be pointed out clearly to them that there are no way they are going to enjoy those resources without taking Nigeria and Nigerians’ interest into account. Because, if they want to lay claim to the continental shelf under the law of the sea, their claim would have to overlap the claim of Nigeria because looking at the geography, at the map of Cameroun, their shelf locked as it is in international law; they don’t have enough room to utilise or to lay claim to 200 nautical miles, which international law grants to them. This is because Nigeria too has a claim of 200 miles, so there is going to be a conflict. Therefore, Nigeria might propose to them to engage in ‘unitisation or joint development zone’ for the exploitation of the resources. And bring them within the arrangement that we have established with country like Equatorial Guinea and Sao Tome and Principe under which Nigeria and say Equatorial Guinea and Sao Tome and Principe will jointly exploit the resources and the proceeds are shared on 60:40 ratios. In other words, Cameroun should be properly advised to think of the future and think of the larger thing that lies ahead for that country in terms of its relations with Nigeria.

    This is exactly what I think should be the paramount concern of the Federal Government now, rather than making statement that will unleash the already inflicted pains and heartbreak that is being nurtured by the bakassi people and Nigerians at large.

    Adeniyi, is a political/human right activist, philosopher and scholar of International Law and Diplomacy, University of Lagos. He can be reached via debscom1@yahoo.com

     

     

  • From the cell phone

    For Segun Gbadegesin

     

    PDP covers every member no matter what he or she does as long as it is in the interest of the party. PDP members are like vultures that are eating the carcass of a dead animal. Nigerians are the carcass on which PDP eats and whose bone it cracks without minding the consequence. Now PDP is at it again by endorsing the Jonathan for a second term in office, not minding the suffering of the poor Nigerians who have been suffering insecurity, poverty, and power supply since the inception of the party. Take for instance, fortnight ago NGF election was held and the president that we are all looking up to for direction said 16 is bigger than 19 and the governor who scored the least number, Jang started ‘Janging’ according to Oshimhole. From H. Ozi Momoh

    They destroyed their party’s constitution in order to actualise their selfish political objectives, we did not speak out because we were not PDP members. Then, they invaded the NGF and tore it to shred, we did not speak out because we did not belong to that association. When they would set the country on fire by their rampaging desperation and anti-democratic practices, it would have become too late for us to speak out. Those who see nothing wrong in this orchestrated infamy should realise that injustice does not begin and end with one individual; it spreads like wild fire. From Ifeanyi O.Ifeanyichukwu

    Re: Echoes of Babel. Most Politicians in Nigeria today are our societal headaches. Only just a few of them are considerate to the mass populace. The intrigues in NGF, the styled tactical declaration for second term on governorship, senatorial repeat is common to them all in all the political parties. The Echoes of Babel is shared by them all! Even the so-called progressives could not challenge those running House of Reps, Senate, House of Assemblies thrice! No other family party member. As for ex-Governor Akala, let us see his joker for success on his new target. From Lanre Oseni

    Your piece ‘Echoes of Babel’ is a master piece. It aptly captures a true picture of the party that has prided itself as the biggest party in Africa . To me, the party is nothing but a house of commotion, a bad manager of internal crises whose leaders are clueless and bereft of ideas. 2015 is around the corner and with the emergence of APC as a formidable party, we will see what becomes of the PDP and the rest of her leaders. From Ojo A. Ayodele, Emure Ekiti

    Segun, you are just too much. Your piece of advice to the president was at the right time. You are a bridge to the unity of this Nation. Please keep the good work. From J. K. Usman

    For Olatunji Dare

     

    Did Tinubu hear what Tofa said? Asiwaju should be very careful the way he romances with the Northerners. Upon all Awo did for the North; won the civil war for them, the only consolation we have is the anullement of June12 elecetion. Make we shine our eyes oh. Anonymous

    Tofa would have remained in his shell rather than commenting on June 12. If he had won the election, he would have been tagged a regional president. It is only a naive who will say remembering June 12 was a colossal waste of time. The like of Tofa should by now try to emulate Sardauna of Sokoto whose legacies are still very alive to emulate. He should know that, the role he played in that election is still very fresh in the memory of Nigerians. He should talk as elderly stateman not as a novice. From Hamza Ozi Momoh, Apapa Lagos

    If Tofa is still bitter about losing to MKO, I think he is a civilian with soldier’s ideology. A true democrat will not even raise an eye brow to say negative things about June 12. He should know that the politics he played 20 years ago was a politics of ‘only we can rule’, which, if played now will be resisted by all. Take note Tofa, you did not win. Abiola won. From Hamza Ozi Momoh, Apapa Lagos

    Congratulations on your piece on Tofa. You said it all especially when talked about the quality of his mind. I only want to say in addition that the dead are better than some who are still living. From Pastor Ugwa Pius

    It was beter Abiola die than Tofa becoming president. Let him contest election again because when you fail in a exam, you will repeat as my mentor, Buhari is doing now. Anonymous

    I have just read your piece at the back page of The Nation. I enjoyed especially your last paragraph. I always admire courage. From K. I. Oleh, Aba

    In my opinion, Bashir Tofa is not a man of strong character. The evil he had done will continue to haunt him as long as he remains defiant to truth. Anonymous

    Olatunji, thanks for your write-up on Bashir Tofa: What manner of man? In my opinion, Gov Jang of Plateau State has just graduated from “Bashir Tofa’s Political School of Embarrassment”, otherwise, how can Tofa and Jang face Nigerians that they won the Presidential election (1993) and Chairmanship of NGF (2013 ) respectively? A very “big thanks” to IBB and Jonathan for their unquantifiable support in promoting anarchy. Whether they like it or not, we are no fools. Anonymous

    The June 12 presidential election has exposed Tofa for what he is. Nigeria was lucky for not having his kind of person as president then. I wonder how he would have ruled Nigeria successfully without grinding the ship of state to a halt. From Ojo A. Ayodele, Emure Ekiti

    What a master piece, you have captured very well, not only the person of Tofa, but more importantly the reasoning of a click of power brokers of our country. June 12 was annuled, but definetely, no one can ignore its significance and consequences. Anonymous

    Re: Bashir Tofa: What manner of a man? Bashir Tofa had learnt nothing and remembers rubbish! It was painful witnessing June 12 election result annulment, it was nevertheless better than seeing Tofa won that, or win any election in Nigeria. Islam thought us not to tell lies, never to be joyous at another’s pain and be honest at all times. Tofa broke all those commandments. May MKO Abiola of blessed memory, continue to have his soul rest in peace and rest well in Al-janah firdauz, ameen. Who knows tomorrow? None except God-Allah. From Lanre Oseni

    Your write-up on Bashir Tofa refers. This man was one of those that put this country in this mess we find ourselves now. I knew he will be unhappy whenever he recalls his role in the annulment of the June 12 1993 eletion even to the grave. Anonymous

    What do you expect from a man whose name was not in register, who cannot win his constituency to say? Allow him to warm his mouth. Thank you. From Kenneth Lagos

    June 12 has been turned into an ethnic or tribal affair, which has lost its meaning. As far as you are concerned, everybody must share your opinion, I think that makes you very little in mind and thought. Bashir Tofa is entitled to his opinion as you are entitled to your opinion. Anonymous

    Sir, your article on Tuesday was well written, kudos! Tofa was indeed part of the mischief to frustrate the electoral process. From Dan, Kaduna

    Indomitable Dare, if June 12 has not become a watershed in the history of Nigeria it is a thorn in the flesh of the establishment and those who murdered sleep will sleep no more and it will continue to dangle on their neck like a sword of damocle. You are a gift to this generation. From Ifreke Okon Edet, Port Harcourt

     

    For Tunji Adegboyega

     

    Re: “Doing it gay or straight” (your column of Sunday, June 23 refers). It’s Nigerians, not the British PM that should respect themselves by stopping to beg for any form of the so-called aids. If the British PM has no leverage over Nigerians, his statements should have been regarded as empty threats. From Kunle O.

    Burundi rejected this nonsensical interference in 2009; though a country slightly bigger than Lagos State and its budget is 70 percent sponsored by donor countries. Cameron should advise the British royal to practise same-sex marriage. Anonymous.

    David Cameron should go to hell with his help to Nigeria. History will not take it kindly with anybody who supports the evil offer that the British government is offering Nigeria. I have never seen, not even in the holy books that man to man, woman to woman should marry. Let him come to Nigeria and stand in the open place and say it; whether he will not be pelted with pure water. Insecurity, poverty, political instability are all threatening the existence of Nigeria and he cannot talk about these ones; he is threatening to stop his help to Nigeria. We don’t need Cameron’s help. He should keep his evil plan within his country. From Hamza Ozi Mommoh, Apapa, Lagos.

    This gay thing has become a national problem, particularly amongst educated youths. Check the profile pictures on the Facebook to see how bad this thing has spread in the nation. Anyway, your article is timely and point blank. Thanks. Anonymous.

    Tunji, may the Almighty God bless you for making my Sunday a fulfilling one. As I read your piece titled “Doing it gay or straight’ in The Nation on Sunday newspaper, I received the assurance that Nigeria, my country, is a nation of high moral values. What will the British derive from legalising homosexuality and gay marriage in Nigeria? Homosexuality is so demeaning and dirty that it is not a practice in the animal kingdom. If leaders of the so-called civilised world are looking for new fields to plant their moral decadence, they try it in Siberia with the Russians. As for Nigeria, we are already bent on implementing our economic and moral transformation. From Benjamin.

    Just finished reading your script on same-sex marriage. You made very useful points. We are Africans, we have social norms and values. Part of the reason why we are where we are today is that we compromised some of these norms. Never again! Nice piece. From Eng. Emeka Ikom, Cross River State.

    Tell me, Tunji, how long have you been struggling with the fact that you are a latent homosexual? Because I’ve never seen anyone spew so much vitriol over something that doesn’t affect him in any way. If you wish to hide your preference for men, please do so. But please, leave openly gay people alone to live their lives. Only God has the right to judge anyone. Anonymous.

    This piece is scintillating. Mr Cameron wants Nigeria to adopt same-sex marriage. The truth is that the ruling class has sold this country to Europe and closed the way to indigenous capitalism. The people must wrest Nigeria from the Camerons. Thanks,. From Amos Ejimonye, Kaduna.

    Cameron should first reverse the gay marriage they introduced before Nigerians would listen to his consultations. We are mature to know the good from the bad and the ugly. So, his consultations would be meaningless if he failed to give us hope on how to solve our problems of insecurity and social vices that are threatening our democracy. From Gordon Chika Nnorom, Umukabia, Abia State.

    Thanks a great deal for giving a clarion call on the need to live ‘straight’. God bless you. From Ade, Lafia, Nasarawa State.

    Re: ‘Uncommon fraternity’ (The Nation, June 16). Glory be to Almighty God. Success shall continue to be yours who took it upon yourself to help him (Faleye) and his family through your column; same to donors and myself with good intention. You mean no senator, House of Reps, state house of assembly members read that request? Na wa o! Presidency via the Minister of Education and state governors too did not read the request? Nigeria! From Lanre Oseni.

    Thank God. Thank you. Thank DHL and thank the DHL staff for this beautiful act. From A.T. Mozie, Nsukka.

  • Leap of faith

    Imagine a scenario where you left your family or host to catch a late evening flight. You had indeed boarded the flight and made the last calls to say your safe trips and good nights. Three hours later, you are not at your destination but back where you took off from. You had been on a flight to nowhere; you had roamed the skies like a bird of the night and made what is known as ‘air return’ in aviation register. This was the fate of an Arik Airline flight which emanated from Abuja to Uyo last Friday.

    Hardball could not get a special device to get on that plane with those passengers (and I say just as well) but invoking the power of empathy, one can feel their trauma. Nothing makes a man pray more fervently, reflect deeper or stay sober better than a troubled flight. This flight, as reported, was remarkably troublous. Flight W3 533 had left Abuja at about 7.00 pm for Uyo, Akwa Ibom State, only to make a u-turn and return to Abuja two hours later with the same passengers on board.

    The story really is that this flight was plagued by a peculiarly Nigerian malaise and the life of those hapless 50 passengers and crew was put in jeopardy. As the report goes in one national newspaper, the pilot was on the verge of lowering the bird on the runway of Ibom Airport but had to “swiftly abort landing following a power outage at the airport.” As a result of the time-lag before the plane made it back to Abuja, it is suggested that it must have hovered for sometime perhaps hoping the airport would be relit so that it would eventually land. Apparently, the power outage was not restored for quite a while so it shuttled back to Abuja.

    Power outages at our airports have almost become the norm these days. Not even our international ports are spared. On Saturday, April 21, 2012, a British Airways flight could not land at the Nnamdi Azikiwe International Airport, Abuja. It had to hover for about two hours before it eventually landed; there was blackout at Nigeria’s premier entry point for two hours! What holds a novelty and confounds even Hardball is whether there is a possibility of an outage as the plane approached the landing stretch. What about the control tower? Though Nigeria has become a strange land where strange occurrences happen daily, this one is a new high or low (depending on where you stand or your altitude).

    It was reported that the plane had ‘swiftly aborted landing’, meaning that it took off abruptly in the middle of attempting to land. One will need to interrogate aviation experts as to the dexterity and mental acuity a pilot requires to achieve this seeming feat. Even a bird executing this stunt has to be sure of its state of fitness lest it does injury to its wings. It cannot be a frequent occurrence in the aviation world can it? What was the state of the passengers while this was going on? Imagine what the various announcements would be: they would have to announce the brace up for landing in Uyo; then the sudden aborted landing and swift take-off, the hovering, the return journey and re-landing in Abuja.

    What a merry-go-round, what wasted time, resources and efforts and what trauma. If you are listening to find out when someone would take responsibility for that extreme dereliction of duty, you will listen long. If you think anyone would be publicly upbraided for almost wasting the lives of those passengers; if only to send a strong message to other errant staff, it won’t happen. Flying in Nigeria remains a leap of faith isn’t it?

     

  • Improving transparency in public construction

    SIR: At the third Building and Construction Round Table (BCERT3), a two-day workshop organized by the Quantity Surveyors Registration Board of Nigeria (QSRBON), with the theme “Enforcing Transparency and Accountability in the Nigerian Building and Construction Sector”, held at Musa Shehu Yar’ Adua Centre, Abuja, from May 23-24, the issue of transparency and accountability in the construction industry were discussed.

    The workshop held that lack of accountability is the major challenge to construction sector in Nigeria, which can only contribute a paltry 2.0% to the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in 2012. The communiqué said that Quantity Surveyors are construction cost consultants from the beginning of a project to the end and implored them to always live above board.

    Quantity Surveyors are not only the factors affecting transparency and accountability in Nigeria’s construction industry. Our culture is a big challenge. When a contractor wins a construction contract, his colleagues and associates, family members and friends see it as manna from heaven, celebrate with him and urge him to see it as “once-in-a-lifetime” opportunity and a share of the national cake.

    The anti-graft institutions like Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and Independent Corrupt Practices Commission (ICPC) were established to ensure there is zero tolerance to corruption in all sectors of the economy. The Bureau of Public Procurement (BPP) was also established to instil sanity into public procurement and backed by Public Procurement Act 2007.

    But these institutions have not lived up to expectation because of their challenges major of which is the lack of federal government interest to eradicate corruption in Nigeria. If government is interested in forestalling corruption, at least in the construction industry, it will subscribe to the membership of Construction Sector Transparency Initiative (CoST).

    CoST is a country-centred multi-stakeholder initiative designed to promote transparency and accountability in publicly financed construction across the globe. It has as members, countries like El Salvador, Ethiopia, Guatemala, Malawi, Philippines, Tanzania, United Kingdom, Vietnam and Zambia.

    At CoST’s core is the belief that the processes involved in the construction of public infrastructure must be made more transparent. The public must be armed with the information they need to hold decision makers to account and to ensure better value for money in the construction sector. CoST is making this ideal a reality.

    CoST is a governance initiative that employs a multi-stakeholder approach. It involves government procuring entities and oversight agencies, private sector consultants and contractors, and civil society groups working together to improve transparency. It is a catalyst to driving change. It encourages demand and pressure for transparency by bringing together interested stakeholders from the public, private, and civil society sectors. CoST seeks to complement rather than replace a country’s supervision, audit, regulatory, investigative, and judicial functions. The complexity of the construction sector presents a major challenge to improving transparency. Nigeria’s construction industry will benefit if Nigeria can subscribe to its membership.

    • Olufemi Oyedele,

    Lagos