The Nation Newspaper

Category: Comments

  • Buratai! Quietly repositioning the army

    Justin Amuna

    Lt General Tukur Yusuf Buratai! Some call him the soldier’s soldier others call him the gentleman soldier. One thing that is endearing to all about him is the gentle smile he beams every time he appears and the mien of confidence and competence.

    He caught my attention when he served as commander Joint Task Force, Operation Pulo shield in Port-Harcourt, Rivers State. The mandate then was to restore peace in the restive Niger Delta area and the General demonstrated his capacity to deliver as he efficiently mobilized the task force under his control to achieve peace in the area, and in record time. I watched a few interviews he granted subsequently after the “victory” and I was impressed by the humility in the tone of his words, which is a trait not too common in this part of the world; especially when you bear a gun.

    By the time he was done with the task, security had improved tremendously in Rivers and Bayelsa state. Oil theft, kidnapping, armed robbery and other violent crimes had been contained tremendously. Soldiers that served under him then could testify to how seriously he took the issue of welfare of men and women under him. Several renovations and rehabilitations were carried out in their barracks to ensure an ideal level of comfort for the officers within the task force.

    When I heard he has been announced as the force commander of the multi-national joint task force(MNJTF) to tackle the Boko Haram menace , I was very elated, those who know this Soldier will attest that he is a complete no nonsense soldier who discharges his duties with the highest form of professionalism and discipline.

    I am certain that President Muhammadu Buhari expressed a sign of full confidence in his competence by appointing Tukur Yusuf Buratai as the new Chief of Army Staff (COAS) and Just like I had thought, he got down to business immediately and backed by a new commander in chief, the stage was now set for the full onslaught thereafter unleashed on Boko Haram.

    At this point the stage was set for a revolution in the fight against Boko Haram; Buratai was now fully in charge of the army and he was not going to be the type of chief that will be commanding operations from a cozy office in Abuja. Within days of his appointment as COAS he was back in Maiduguri, he also travelled within different formations in the north east to boost the morale of the troops at the fore front of the fight.

    He did not only assure them of improvements on their welfare but backed it up with action, within a few weeks the same army that fled from Boko Haram terrorists a few month ago were now doing the chase, taking back territories that had hitherto been possessed by Boko Haram for years.

    Within months of being appointed as chief of army staff things, the entire outlook on the terrorism war changed, with the Nigerian troops leading the onslaught and rescuing several hostages, the success achieved within a short period was like a miracle even to an individual like me who has always been aware of Gen Buratai’s antecedent.

    Suddenly Nigerians started to believe in the Nigerian army again with several commendations from Individual and places that had earlier criticized them for not doing enough against the insurgents.

    Some people say Nigeria needs strong institutions and not strong men, true! However, in some cases strong men are required to help rebuild our institutions and then restore the confidence required in running such institutions going forward; after all, weak people are not likely going to possess the competence to build strong institutions.

    In the short while he has been COAS, just like every other human he has had his dark moment. One of such is the clash with the Shiite group in Zaria and as much as I sympathize with the families of those that lost loved ones, I will also say that it is foolhardy for any group of people to attack soldiers violently and also threaten to kill them without expecting self -defense from the soldiers, more so in a convoy conveying the COAS.

    I am sure they were not expecting to get a pat on the back for that especially when the nation was still battling with an extremist group Boko Haram that almost succeeded in running over the whole country. The army, given that scenario was definitely not going to be taking any chances with the open and violent Shiite group.

    That said, I think the military can measure its reaction next time to reduce the number of collateral damage. The military though has submitted itself for investigation by the panel set up by the Kaduna state government; let us hope that the truth behind this incident is unraveled quickly.

    Despite the Kaduna case, I think COAS has performed way above average to put it in modes terms of human right and civil-military relations. I have also observed that the allegations of abuse of human right against the Nigeria army which hitherto was a regular occurrence has lately disappeared despite the significant victories recorded against the Boko Haram sect in recent times. I cannot recall a word of complain from Amnesty International or our own National Human Rights Commission and this is largely because Lt Gen Buratai from the onset made it clear that he will not support any of such abuse by the army under him.

    This leadership trait is what has trickled down to the rank and file of the army as the COAS continues to emphasize the need for the army to stick to their rules of engagement at all time irrespective of the level of provocation.

    The General who hails from Buratai town in Biu local government area of Borno state has had his fair share of the Boko Haram dose , his house was attacked by Boko Haram terrorist whilst he was commander of the joint task force in the Niger Delta, such was the situation then in Borno, Yobe and in fact Adamawa states. No one and nowhere was safe Including a General’s house, but today all of that is almost history.

    The residents of places like Maiduguri, Gamborou, Dalori and other such places are best positioned to tell the difference in the last one year, if anyone is happy about the progress made by the army, no one can be happier than the residents of these areas, some of which were under Boko Haram controls for several months.

    The army has achieved a lot in just about a year of Lt Gen Buratai’s appointment as COAS, we certainly look forward to more progress and exploits as he settles in to transform the Nigerian army into the strongest and most formidable army in Africa at first and subsequently one of the strongest armies in the world.

    Amuna is an environmental activist based in Port Harcourt.

     

  • This weird and laughable distraction

    By Dr Khalifa Dikwa

    Distraction is the ultimate aim of Nigeria’s attackers of President Muhammadu Buhari’s government and military commanders who have achieved the first phase in dismantling Boko Haram to restore peace within one year while preparing to confront the other emerging phases in other parts of Nigeria. We are no longer stupid to play the game of the bad losers.

    The ranting is linked to the corrupt and pitiless establishment otherwise known as cabal or political Boko Haram who had earlier bailed out the arrowhead of BH, Imam Muhammad Yusuf in the past until he was caught and extra judicially killed to bury their secret agreement.

    These detractors are equally connected to those who have cornered funds meant for arms procurement for our troops, thereby unable to defend us from the insurgency they sponsored till they were replaced by President Buhari. We all knew that service chiefs like Ihejirikas and other field commanders were selected to prolong the war for a complete genocide.

    The rant is connected to the enemies of Nigeria who hid public funds now on trial or afraid of getting caught by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) or other security outfits since there is no obvious guarantee that they can conceal the proceeds of their crimes for long. So far, their millions of naira in stolen public funds have been trailed to suspicious bank withdrawals, on their farms, water tanks, toilets, and wells after they stole from the states and federal treasuries or diverted funds meant for the fixing of basic infrastructure needed for the development of Nigeria. When they realized that hiring senior advocates to delay or truncate their trials as usual was not working they became desperate.

    They are connected to those that collected blood money in foreign funds to dismantle Nigeria for its global influence in peace missions in Africa and the world. They are connected to those who don’t want PMB government to at least implement 70% of the budget so that all 36 states can bring something to the table. This would allow them free themselves from relying on a single source of income, from the sale of crude oil through economic diversification particularly in the spheres of agriculture and mineral resources. The guts of insurgency in the oil producing states would be broken if this were to happen.

    Militants in that part are asking for complete control of resources as if they are theirs and that no other regions contributed to its exploration.

    The noise makers are connected to the hitherto untouchable sacred cows who are now on trial for subverting our security, stealing public funds and other atrocities. They are connected to those who were not happy with the wonders of INEC’s Card Reader that defeated their rigging machines, stemming them from using moles who were spread all over including the leading parties, APC and PDP. They are good at mischievously quarrelling in public or the media in the morning when they actually dine and wine at night at their meeting points in Nigeria and abroad.

    These media hands are of the same root as those who took issues with Aisha Buhari’s wrist watch and now Buratai’s wives. They omitted the fact they were self-reliant prior to the election of Buhari to be president of Nigeria who swiftly elevated and appointed Gen Buratai and other great military heads to annihilate Boko Haram to the satisfaction of the terribly frightened Nigerians. These paid media contractors are not likely to stop their mischief, deceits out of endless shamelessness in going after the remaining service chiefs and their family members, EFCC, DSS, ICPC, the president and his cabinet, just as they doctored a fight between the Chief of Staff Abba Kyari and EFCC’s Ibrahim Magu and ministers who refuse to play double agents.

    They run from one court to another to blackmail decent judges who refuse to play game with them in order to delay their trials.

    As far as defense and security agents are concerned, PMB can only listen to frank advice from friends within and outside, to choose only from among officers with little or no dent due to their previous ex-officio positions according to the zombie ‘obey before complain rule’ phrase of the force even if such directives were against the rules of engagement as subverted by some of the previous corrupt top military brass since absolute loyalty to superior officers and playing along was the only way to survive the treacherous weeding out of the few remaining skilled professionals and their replacement by mediocre officers to permanently kill the defense and security systems of our potentially great Nigeria.

    President Buhari was bound to appoint only trustworthy field commanders who whose background checks showed their sense of professionalism and patriotism even if they came from one family to defeat Boko Haram regardless of political correctness because Nigeria was about to disintegrate. They recall  Gen Buratai from the International Joint Task Force based in Ndjaména, the Chadian capital, to come home and head the Army and search among the younger Air Force officers’ rank for Marshal Sadik Abubakar to effectively coordinate with the army to deal with Boko Haram from the air, and for the famous intelligence officer Gen BG Monguno as the National Security Adviser (NSA). President Buhari’s background and sharp thinking paid off by appointing service chiefs from the most directly affected areas by Boko Haram insurgency coupled with their knowledge of the terrain. The same background research on incorruptibility and professionalism was conducted to get  the new Police Inspector General (IGP) by jumping the DIGs rank and pick an AIG, Ibrahim IDRIS from Central Nigerian State of Niger following the retirement of Solomon ARASE after the maximum 35 years of service while retiring his DIG seniors for obvious reasons.

    Nigerians must not be fooled to toe the line of uncertainty from the already visible certainty of peace and prosperity that proved to be a gargantuan task for many decades by the arrogant establishment cronies who hate to see Nigeria develop or to prevent others who may dump them in favour of Nigeria and perform without fear or favour. These rogues sit on the tail of the tiny 1% who thinks that they could continue to buy everybody and own Nigeria despite their bad record in order to perpetuate in power at all times with the desire to influence things. Even their ego and arrogance frustrate Nigerians.

    Therefore, Nigeria will never be controlled by the greedy establishment concocting stories to ridicule our hard earned CHANGE under President Buhari. But the Buhari we know is ready for them with his patience, impeccable character and intelligence. Nigerians should continue to pray for Nigeria as well as laugh at the antics and ranting of the tiny establishment who pay the media and intelligence with stolen commonwealth. It is over In sha Allah.

    Dikwa, a public affairs commentator contributed this from Yola.

     

  • Nigeria: the smouldering ground

    Nigeria: the smouldering ground

    “Peoples and governments never have learned anything from history, or acted on the principles deduced from it.” – G.F.W. Hegel, Philosophy of History (1832).

    Nigeria, as in the period between 1964-70, appears to have entered another convulsive period in its history. A potential existential threat, greater than that posed to the country by the Civil War of 1967-70, appears to be emerging as a deep chasm opens up between the South, on the one hand, and the North-west and North-east, on the other hand, over the question of the future direction of the country’s constitutional development. There is a very definite undercurrent of dissatisfaction and frustration among most in the South, including the South-west which voted for President Buhari, at the nature of our federalism and the way the country has been governed since independence. The general cry across the South – particularly in the South-east and South-south, where the people, stirred by ethnic pride, are very bitter that an overbearing federal government has ridden roughshod over their legitimate aspirations – is for devolution of a greater share of governmental powers and authority to the component units of the federation in order to end the encroachments of a marauding federal government that neither shares their values nor recognises their aspirations, and, thereby, once again, take control of their own destinies.

    This struggle for the devolution of power and authority is unlikely to abate; it can only escalate, as it is simply in the natural order of things for man to aspire to ever greater freedoms. Hegel (1770-1831), the great 19th century German philosopher, affirmed this in his major work, Philosophy of History, in the following terms: “The history of the world is none other than the progress of the consciousness of freedom”. Of particular relevance to Nigeria is the history of Canada, were the same struggle occurred in the early days of their federation. Then, eminent political leaders such as John A. MacDonald (the chief architect of the creation, in 1867, of the Federation of Canada from Britain’s North American colonies, and its first prime minister), George Brown, Charles Tupper, George-Etienne Cartier, etc., championed the cause of a strong central government – because it was their view that “states’ rights” contributed much to sparking the American Civil War – while strong provincial leaders such as Premier Oliver Mowat in Ontario, and Premier Honoré Mercier in Quebec, made it indelibly clear that, no matter how the constitution was worded, they were going to exercise their provincial strength. Neither is the struggle for a greater devolution of the powers and authority of government new in Nigeria: Northern Nigeria, amidst unprecedented violence, demanded an end to the centralizing policies of the Ironsi administration in May 1966.

    The constitutional questions that need to be resolved are of a political character, and for that a political vision is needed to give direction. Continued visceral opposition to the legitimate aspirations of large, important sections of the country will prove, not just ultimately futile, but it may, in fact, provoke the very same fissiparous tendencies long feared by many.

    It was unto this smouldering ground that President Buhari, a disciplined, professional soldier with a distinguished war record, ascetic lifestyle, and a reputation for integrity, stepped when he assumed office in 2015. Unfortunately he entered into the presidency with his mind made up and a scheme in his pocket for addressing the increasingly strident calls in the South for a renegotiation of the terms of association of the Nigerian union, the defining issue of the times on which the future of the country turns. The President’s response is to ignore all such calls; place the report of the last National Conference in the icebox; offer a series of ineffective palliatives – including cleaning up the environmental pollution in the Niger Delta; and, as the ultimate sanction, crush by the application of military force the restive communities who are fighting for nothing more than the adherence to the letter and spirit of the constitutional arrangements that were the basis upon which Nigeria was granted independence as one united country, but which, tragically, was unilaterally abrogated.

    John Dryden, the 17th century English poet, dramatist, and critic, wrote in prologue to All for Love (1678) that “Errors, like straws, upon the surface flow. He who would search for pearls must dive below”. The threat posed to the country by this dangerous divergence of opinion on the question of constitutional reform does not readily lend itself to any facile solutions. Yet, much could have been achieved had the President only tried first to ascertain what was wrong by enquiry from those who are qualified to enlighten him; co-opted those who truly represent the wishes of their peoples as partners in working out a reform scheme; diligently prepare himself for constitutional reform by studying the great principles on which other successful multi-ethnic entities and federations had been founded; familiarise himself with the works of previous Nigerian constitutional reform proposals.

    Such an approach, of course, demands a statesmanship that recognises the multiplicity of interests, and respects the diversity of perspectives, inherent in a multi-ethnic country such as Nigeria is. It calls for a profundity of thought, objectivity, and sincerity. Anthonio Machado (1875-1939), the Spanish poet, put it rather well in his book, Juan de Mairena (1943): “There is no way of seeing things without first taking leave of them”. One can only hope that President Buhari too, like President Lyndon Johnson (who, in spite of being a Southerner, achieved truly revolutionary breakthroughs with the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which have improved the lives of African-Americans), will take leave of the old, settled complex of predilections, prejudices, instincts, emotions, habits, and convictions, many of which have never served Nigeria well, and, instead, “learn from history and act on the principles deduced from it.”

    One of the great “principles to be deduced from history,” which is particularly relevant to the emerging crisis in Nigeria, is that the constitutional arrangements of a country must continue to evolve to keep abreast of the felt necessities of the time, as the past contains no permanent wisdom. The sociological jurisprudence of legal pragmatists have long recognised this principle: John Marshall (1755-1835), the great American jurist who was the Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court between 1801 and 1835, stated the principle in legal terms in the celebrated case of McCullough v. Maryland (1819) 4 Wheat, 316 at 415: “…This provision is made in a Constitution, intended to endure for ages to come, and consequently, to be adapted to the various crises of human affairs”. Countries, like Canada, that have acted on this principle have been able to safely traverse difficult periods in their history. The Canadian provinces were chafing under a constitution – the British North American Act, 1867 – that imposed an unduly strong central government. The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council – Canada’s final appeal court until 1949 – in a critical series of Canadian constitutional appeals (from Liquidators of the Maritime Bank of Canada v. Receiver-General of New Brunswick (1892) A. C.437, to Toronto Electric Commissioners v. Snider (1925) A.C. 396) reshaped the Canadian Constitution into a workable federal constitution where the aspirations of the provinces would be recognised better than they were by the Founding Fathers of the Constitution of 1867. On the other hand, countries such as Yugoslavia, etc., that have been unable to adapt their constitutional arrangements to the pressing exigencies of the times have often foundered.

    According to Hegel: “To him who looks upon the world rationally, the world in turn presents a rational aspect”. I believe that if the Buhari administration learns the lessons of history, and acts on the principles to be deduced from them, the “smouldering ground” in Nigeria today will not become a raging bushfire tomorrow.

    Ajose-Adeogun, a legal practitioner, writes from Lagos.

     

  • Hijabs, robes and challenge of secularity

    In 2000, the then Zamfara State governor, Ahmad SaniYerima, precipitated a constitutional crisis in Nigeria when he instituted the implementation of the Islamic Sharia law in the state. Since then, the Sharia law has become significant proportion of legal framework in Sokoto, Katsina, Jigawa, Kano, Bauchi, Borno, Yobe, and Kebbi. The Sharia issue provoked a serious constitutional crisis, especially over the secular status of the Nigerian state. In 2013, Osun State also came into the news over the legal and constitutional issue of religious dressing in public schools. The Osun hijab crisis got to a head when a court case, instituted three years ago, was finally resolved a few weeks ago in favour of the Osun State Muslim Community. The court ruled in favour of putting on the hijab as part of the Muslim female dress code to public school. In an outrageous reaction to the ruling, Christian student at Baptist High School, Iwo also appeared in school in their various choir robes and garments.

    When the hijab controversy reared its head in Europe, it was no less volatile as it is in Osun state. In France, for instance, what went under the name of the “scarf affair” (l’affaire du voile islamique) is similar in all respects to the Osun situation. In September 1989, three female Muslim students of Gabriel Havez Middle School, Crell were suspended for refusing to remove their scarves. The issue then subsequently spread to Picardy where three other girls were equally suspended for putting on the scarf, in Nantua where teachers held a strike action to protest the use of the religious scarf in public schools, and in Mantes-la-Jolie where students also organised a demonstration in support of the right to put on the religious veil in school.

    The issue, especially in France, Spain, Switzerland, Denmark, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, etc., borders on the nature of religion in the public sphere, the idea of assimilation and integration, multiculturalism, minority status, and even Islamophobia. Political integration has equally remained Nigeria’s albatross since independence. The amalgamation of the Nigerian state placed a very heavy plural burden on the Nigerian leadership to craft a governance dynamics that will ensure that the various constituent parts of postcolonial Nigeria successfully merge together. However, with crises like the hijab controversy, it is obvious that Nigeria is far from integration. Benjamin Franklin, the US statesman and scientist, puts the matter bluntly but straightforwardly: “We must indeed all hang together, or most assuredly, we shall all hang separately.” In spite of the pithy beauty of Nigeria’s national motto—Unity and Faith, Peace and Progress—we have really not found the formula for hanging together beyond the coercive necessity of the Nigerian state.

    What underlies all these issues is the meaning and nature of secularity and secularism. From its Latin origin (i.e. saeculum), the “secular” has turned into a conceptual means for differentiating the divine from the earthly. The secular is therefore meant to refer to human temporal affairs. By the time of the Enlightenment, the secular became a firm policy of separating Church from State, or of disentangling democratic governance and economic issues from religious interference. Thus, secularity in this sense refers to the extent by which a society’s institutions, constitutional processes, cultural ethos, bureaucratic norms and economic reality have been dissociated from religious influence. Secularism simply refers to the philosophical justification for pushing the boundaries of secularity within any society.

    Religion is the most potent force against the spread and form establishment of secularity anywhere. Fundamentalism, for instance, is a raging religious view about the ultimate control of the affairs of society. One of the critical arguments of the Boko Haram insurgents, in fact an argument shared by most Islamic fundamentalists, is that the strict interpretation of Sharia religious law must be the foundation of legal-political business in Nigeria. The violent desire to establish a caliphate in the North, for sure, is just a short term one for the eventual Islamization of the whole of Nigeria and the eradication of all forms of secular modernity.

    Religion has since independence remained a critical crack in Nigeria’s national configuration. The appearance of “Faith” in Nigeria’s national motto seems to signal the recognition of the role of religion in Nigeria’s affair. Even the second stanza of the anthem is a clear religious invocation to the “God of creation” to direct the “noble course” of nation building. The word “religion” appeared 12 times in the Nigerian 1999 Constitution and ‘religious” 10 times. Section 10 of the Constitution state clearly: “The Government of the Federation or of a State shall not adopt any religion as State Religion.”This seems straightforward enough. This is Nigeria’s nod to secularity even without any mention of that concept in the entire constitution. The next significant provision of the Constitution is section 38, subsection 1: “Every person shall be entitled to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, including freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom (either alone or in community with others, and in public or in private) to manifest and propagate his religion or belief in worship, teaching, practice and observance.”

    There are several deductions to be made from this provision. One of them borders on the relationship between religion and identity. Islam happens to be a religion that transforms the identity of its adherent, not least in terms of dressing. Thus, if hijab is a significant part of my identity as a female Muslim, why must I be prevented from that expression? After all, the Constitution permits a public or private expression. It is in this sense that the Court is justified in protecting the interest of the Muslim community which insisted that its freedom of religious expression is potentially under breach. But this is hardly the end of the matter about religion and secularity.

    It seems that Nigeria’s nod to secularity is half-hearted. And the reason is not far-fetched. In spite of the provision of Section 10, religion plays a critical role in our political language and culture. When former President Jonathan visited Israel to pray, it was not really an individual act of faith. It was a state act of religious invocation to God. In 2012, the Jonathan administration adopted the second stanza of the national anthem as official prayer. The Nigerian state regularly sponsors pilgrimage to the Holy Lands.Thus, the state in itself precipitates religious crisis rather than strengthening its secularity. When the idea of secularity was formulated during the Enlightenment, it was premised on the belief that humans possess the capacities to transform their own lives and institute a social governance framework that makes society heaven on earth. A secular state is therefore supposed to be a state that is sufficiently democratic and institutionally viable enough to ground religious tolerance on a material prosperity that generates an ecumenical spirit of unity.

    This requires not only a constitutional nod to secularity, but a gradual deepening of the separation of religion from state matters that translates into institutional dynamics that delivers democratic dividends to Nigerians. It seems to me that this constitutes a worthy challenge for secularity in Nigeria than allowing religion take the center stage of our charged political predicament. One can only wonder, for instance, what could have happened if Nigeria’s secularity solidifies sufficiently to capture the impressionable hearts of the almajiris in the North rather than surrendering those hearts to the dangerous indoctrination of religious demagogues.

  • The Senate adrift

    What is the vision and elemental content of the 8th Senate of the Federal Republic? It is difficult to say, considering the issues that not infrequently preoccupy the legislative chamber and seem of urgent importance to its business of law-making. You would wonder if the ‘distinguished’ members have concluded that they are in-chamber primarily to look out for themselves and fight turf wars, more than they are there to legislate on issues of primary concern to their constituents. Proceedings of committee as well as plenary sessions of the Senate in recent weeks highlight such inclination, and portray the chamber as being adrift on murky waters of political survival.

    Being electees from constituencies closer to the grassroots than officials in the Executive arm of government, members of the National Assembly ideally should pursue principled causes deriving from popular sentiments or matters of general concern to the polity. Some past sessions of the Senate managed to make the cut, like the Ken Nnamani-led session of the 5th Senate, which aborted bullish moves for a third term bid by former President Olusegun Obasanjo in 2007. The David Mark-led 6th Senate also count here, having restored stability and composure to the Legislative arm following an era of leadership musical chairs widely known to be instigated by the Executive arm during the Obasanjo years. That Senate session as well contrived the ‘Doctrine of Necessity’ that saved this country from a constitutional gridlock foisted by the failure of ailing President Umaru Yar’Adua to cede power to his Deputy while incapacitated from performing urgent tasks of the office. Sadly, he didn’t get back to fully assume the office.

    The Bukola Saraki-led 8th Senate is barely one year into its four-year term, but it really isn’t too early for the vision and elemental content of the chamber to crystallise. Actually, a character seems to have emerged. Owing obviously to the controversial nature of its emergence, the chamber’s leadership is weighted down in a survival battle, which is not helped by alleged ethical failings that the Senate President and Deputy Senate President Ike Ekweremadu are being called to answer for. This inclement circumstance, apparently, has largely shaped the general outlook of the Red Chamber. At the last count, the 8th Senate cuts the figure of a reactionary institution utterly disconnected from the mood of its electors. And it just doesn’t seem close yet to readjusting.

    A few weeks ago, the legislative chamber passed amendments to the Public Procurement Act 2007 that, among other things, compel institutions of government at all levels to buy made-in-Nigeria goods. There can be no question for any right thinking person that the Bill is laudable because it promotes local content and long-overdue patronage of domestic producers, amidst a global slump in oil prices that has critically short-fed the Nigerian economy with the foreign exchange required to fund imports. In other words, non-essential imports have now become a life-threatening luxury. And for an economy whose local content has been so undermined that junks, including toothpicks, were freely imported at a drain on the country’s foreign exchange stock, the amendment bill, which passed third reading in the Senate, could not be more warranted for a time like this.

    But that initiative of the Senate came against the backdrop of a controversial resolve by the very chamber to procure 120 luxury vehicles for its operations in defiance of protestations by Nigerians high and low. The last time I checked, the four-wheelers being ordered by the chamber were exotic import items projected to take a sizeable chunk of the country’s lean forex stock, to the tune of N4billion when converted to local currency. Not a few had wondered why, if it were a matter of survival for the Senate to procure those vehicles, it would not patronise locally-assembled brands and save this country a run on her depleted foreign exchange balance. The point here is that the local content advocacy by the Senate is doubtless on the right track, but the chamber might just well be the first convert to its own message.

    Another slide: the Constitution Review committee of the Senate lately adopted amendments to the 1999 Federal Law that raise critical questions about the value quotient and legislative priority of the chamber. At its retreat penultimate weekend in Lagos, the committee passed a proposal to place the Senate President, Deputy Senate President, House of Representatives Speaker and Deputy Speaker on life pension, among other perks. Yet another proposal that scaled through prescribes immunity from prosecution for the National Assembly’s principal officers – just as obtains for the President, Deputy President, Governors and Deputy Governors currently in Section 308 of the Constitution.

    Deputy Senate President Ekweremadu, who chairs the Constitution Review committee, argued vigorously for the proposals mainly on the ground of institutional entitlement. It didn’t seem to matter that the proposals were so narrow in relevance and blatantly self-serving. Reports indicated, though, that some members of the committee across party lines spoke up against the proposals. Senators Ali Ndume (Senate Leader), Godswill Akpabio (Senate Minority Leader), Oluremi Tinubu and Eyinaya Abaribe were said to have marshalled countervailing arguments against the recommendations, but to no avail. On the other hand, Senators Stella Oduah, Ahmed Yerima Sani and Bala Na’Allah, among others, rooted for the proposals. Eventually, in the collective, the proposals flew – with 22 members voting in support while 13 members voted against.

    Not that the idea of life pension is alien to Nigerian law, after all the privilege already applies to principals in the Executive and Judicial arms. But to stretch that entitlement to the Legislature at a time when more than half of the country’s active workforce contends with deprivations arising from many months of unpaid salaries is, speaking minimally, insensitive. Besides, the Senate is an institution populated by persons that are already life pensioners of the Executive arm. The current Senate President, a former State Governor, is one such person. Throwing in another life pension for the legislative office is simply double jeopardy on the common treasury. And that is not counting the existing remuneration for members of the National Assembly, which most Nigerians perceive, as it were, to be excessive. In any event, the tenure in the Executive arm is restricted by law, while officers of the Judicial arm efflux from office on attainment of the statutory age cap. There is no such limitation to Legislative tenure other than the decision of the electorate not to return a candidate to his/her constituency seat.

    It is almost certain that the immunity proposal was inspired by ongoing trial of the Senate President by the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT), and his impending arraignment along with the Deputy Senate President and others before a Federal Capital Territory High Court on forgery charge. Now, the CCT trial is fairly straightforward in calling the Senate President to account for alleged breach of ethics in the course of his political past. I am not too sure that the forgery case, being prosecuted by the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), is that straightforward in light of the constitutional doctrine of separation of powers. But the Senate’s response shouldn’t be to resort to self-help, as it has done with its wild-cat summon on the AGF, or to seek constitutional immunity from prosecution. Since they are already cited for trial, the Senate principals should go argue the constitutional doctrine in court. Truth is: most Nigerians want the existing immunity clause for the President and others in the Executive arm expunged, and not in the least compounded with additions to the list.

  • Is Niger Delta fair to Nigeria?

    Of all the socio-economic vices that have plagued the nation so far, the current one inflicted on Nigeria by the so-called Niger Delta Avengers (DNA) to me is unparalleled. This is more so when the vicious action of the avengers is aimed at total destruction of the economic base of the nation, thereby reducing Nigeria to penury where the centre can no longer hold.

    How can a man in his right senses sets ablaze his own community in the name of self-centredness? The DNA emerged from the blues and before the shout of Jack Robinson, set the nation on fire, destroying the economic base of the country.

    According to the Guardian report of June 17, 2016, “The militants have destroyed 23 gas pipelines across the Niger Delta states since they renewed attacks on national assets from February 14 to date”.

    The Transmission Company of Nigeria (TCN) power generation statistics obtained by the Guardian revealed that the nation is now generating about 2.903MW, a far cry from about 140, 000MW generation requirements estimated by the distribution companies (DISCOS). The action of the DNA has threatened the expected supply of 2000MW to the national grid next month. The nation is already heading for total darkness.

     The worried situation is unrelenting as different groups daily emerge, threatening fire and brimstone. Nigeria has come to roast in the hands of some unscrupulous and mindless Niger Deltans. Yesterday, today and possibly tomorrow, the grievances for this destruction of the nation’s assets centre on the allegation that the oil companies in the area have destroyed their farmlands and homes without paying compensation which is commensurate with the damage done. They, therefore, want the oil companies to leave or pay the affected communities adequate compensation. In addition, the people want the environmental degradation of the area to stop.

     Let me at this juncture say I am from the Niger Delta region and had part of my education at Warri. I, therefore, share the pains of my fellow people. But I fail to associate with the extreme position taken or threats of secession, if things do not go the ways we want them. The position of the agitators or militants become ludicrous, reckless and inconsiderate, bearing in mind that for some years now,   sustained efforts are being made to address the problems.

    On coming to power as the civilian President, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo, made the issue of Niger Delta his priority when his administration gave to Niger Delta 13% derivation policy. In addition, the same administration of Obasanjo created the Ministry of Niger Delta Affairs (MNDA) purposely to take care of the region. Also  the Niger Delta Development Commission (NNDC) was there to take care of the egion. Included were also other agencies like OMPADEC and DESOPADEC and others created and funded mostly by the federal government to assuage the sufferings of the people.

    Not satisfied with these steps, President Obasanjo’s administration in 2006 put in place the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) sponsored by the Federal Government for the cleaning up of the Ogoni land.

    When President Musa Yar’adua assumed office, he set up an amnesty programme for the rehabilitation and resettlement of thousands of militants in the Niger Delta region who surrendered arms for peace. The programme has gulped billions of naira and the programme is on-going.

    About a fortnight ago, President Muhammadu Buhari’s administration flagged off a multi-billion naira clean-up and restoration programme of the Ogoni land in the Gokana Local Government Area of Rivers state. The launching of the Ogoni Remediation Programme marked a significant and historic move towards improving the situation of the Ogoni who have for decades suffered effects of oil pollution.

    With all these efforts, can there be justification for the DNA or the militants in whatever title or tag take up arms against the Nigerian nation or the federal government?

    Commenting on the activities of the NDA in his Daily SUN column, “Frank Talk” of Wednesday, July 15, Steve Nwosu says: “Now, I am one of the few people who do not believe that the masked guys (wielding all manner of sophisticated weapons), who appeared on national television a few days ago, claiming to be members of the dreaded Niger Delta Avengers (NDA) have anything to do with the group, blowing up oil pipelines and holding our economy by the balls. They did not sound convincing enough. Everything looked like the usual Nigerian arrange thing. But who arranged them? But if indeed they were the Avengers, then they definitely have no idea of what they are ‘avenging’. Put differently, they might well be mercenaries fighting a proxy war. Another person’s personal war! They are not avenging anything they believe in”.

    Recently, a Warri Study Group, a pressure group in Itsekiri land of the Niger Delta, has called on the federal government to jettison its resolve to open dialogue with Niger Delta Avengers as a way to ending acts of sabotage on oil facilities and restoring peace to the region.

    The group, which made the call in an open letter to President Muhammadu Buhari, accused the Niger Delta politicians calling for dialogue with the militants of frustrating various interventionist efforts put in place by previous administrations to improve the lives of the people in the region, alleging that such politicians pursue common agenda with the Niger Delta Avengers. Politicians, especially some governors (both serving and former) and their cronies from the Niger Delta are hands in glove with the militants and are openly and secretly advocating dialogue with them so as to have criminal charges against them dropped, the letter reads in part.

    The group maintained that dialogue with the militants would be akin to having an open discussion with the corrupt politicians and they alleged to be responsible for the underdevelopment of the region, saying that such politicians and their cronies among the militants ought to be investigated and prosecuted.

    My brothers in Niger Delta should know right now that oil is being discovered in various places in Nigeria, including Lagos and Borno states. As a matter of fact, it is being speculated that the Chad Basin trough where lies Borno might produce a large quantity of oil compared to that currently obtained in the Niger Delta. It is indeed sad that while others are prospecting for oil, the Niger Deltans are destroying oil installations in their areas and distorting the operations. Who do you blame for our fate if at the end of the day we have destroyed our oil infrastructure for unjustifiable cause and new states emerging flowing in oil? The handwriting on the wall is clear as if a road closes, another will open. Besides, there are so many roads to the market.

     Above all, what must be made clear to the people of Niger Delta, especially the vandals and agents of destruction as well their sponsors, is that today it is oil, tomorrow it might be gold from Zamfara and Kaduna states or iron from Yobe State as studies have revealed  large quantities of these in the areas. What we must remember is that our God is not a partial one as He provides for all in different ways, even in the desert where there is oasis as well as other minerals for the survival of the people.

    The argument is that rather to be unfair to the Nigeria nation that has been fair to us in this struggle, we should hold our Niger Delta leaders who have been entrusted with the custody of the resources by the federal government for the uplift of the region accountable. Recently, Governor Adam Oshimole of Edo State made it clear in the public that the resources allocated by the federal government for the development of the Niger Delta did not reflect what is currently on ground in the region.

    • Victor Izekor, a public affairs commentator, writes from Maiduguri at victorizekor@gmail.com.

  • The sexual harassment bill

    Apart from the Constitution Amendment Bill, the yearly Appropriation Bill and Petroleum Industry Bill, I do not immediately recall any other bill that is fundamental to the future of this country as the Sexual Harassment Bill, sponsored by Sen. OvieOmo-Agege and 46 others.

    The Bill prohibits any form of sexual relationship between lecturers and their students and prescribes jail term of up to five years but not less than two years with no option of fine for lecturers who engage in sexual relationship with students.

    According to Senator Omo-Agege, the bill, among others,”makes it a criminal offence for any educator in a university, polytechnic or any other tertiary educational institution to violate or exploit the student-lecturer fiduciary relationship for sexual pleasures;  vice chancellors of universities, rectors of polytechnics and other chief executives of institutions of higher learning will go to jail for two years if they fail to act within a week on complaints of sexual harassment made by students; the Bill expressly allows sexually harassed students, their parents or guardians to seek civil remedies in damages against sexual predator lecturers before or after their successful criminal prosecution by the state.”

    A respected colleague of mine told me of an experience in 2014 when he went to visit a friendat one of the federal universities. As he walked along the corridor, a young female student emerged from a lecturer’s office and he reportedly overheard her complaining (in Yoruba) to her female colleagues waiting by the door of the don: “This lecturer is fond of pressing /fondling one’s breasts!” It is that bad. Nigerians should therefore not be stunned by the ‘confrontation’ between the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) and National Female Students Association of Nigeria during the Senate Public Hearing on Monday, June 20, and the dire picture in the submission of the female union.

    The National President of the female student association, Comrade Idongesit Micah, said: “Let me be very clear on our position on this bill. This is a bill that must be passed into law. It is either we enact this law to send sexual predator lecturers to prison for correction according to law under the fine democratic tenets of the rule of law or we provoke helpless parents, husbands, or guardians to, some day, pick a loaded gun and deal with this problem in a barbaric manner. Therefore, we passionately urge the Senate to ensure that it does not by inaction impose the Hobbesian state of nature of a banana republic on victims of sexual harassment in our tertiary institutions and their relatives by provoking them to fight for themselves by all means possible, including outside the law!”

    No warning could be more foreboding; a stitch in time saves nine!

    In every chance discussion since the current bill became public knowledge, almost everyone has one sorry story to tell, either about themselves, their friends, family members or acquaintances across the nation’s campuses. We are here not talking about some bad eggs, the usual escapist argument. All the eggs are bad except a few! And it is our responsibility to encourage those few dons that are nurturing a great future for Nigeria. This bill, in a way, should boost the morale of such conscientious teachers.

    Although things degenerate everyday, the situation in our higher institutions of learning today is not substantially different from what it was in 2009:

    Lecturers in Nigeria have turned our campuses into individual fiefdoms where they reign and rule; they have become gods that must be appeased by our youths. Lecturers enjoy near absolute freedom which you don’t find in other workplaces.

    I have a friend at the University of Ibadan. She’s chaste, hardworking and cerebrally endowed. She’s been on her Master’s programme for over three years now. The supervisor is always on the road or in the air and always too busy.

    “What does the professor supervisor want? Money, gift or what?” I asked.

    “Friendship!”

    “But she knows you’re married?”

    “Marriage! If you’re a spinster, they say that’s good, if you’re married, they say that’s better, and if you’re pregnant, then you are in the best condition!”

    “So the situation has sunk such deep?”

    “Some of them even tell female students to meet them in hotels, which the students must pay for… but it happens on all campuses.”

    “But why don’t you report or get another supervisor?”

    “You can’t be sure my brother; these people have a clique… And if you report, who are the people to sit in judgement? Their colleagues! So, I’m not bothered again because my hands are engaged anyway…”

    I have heard ASUU members argue, again and again, that no good student can be successfully victimized. It’s the most infantile argument I’ve even heard(in the same mould as the current argument by ASUU that the Sexual Harassment Bill violates university autonomy – as if the police require any sanction of a varsity to investigate a crime or arrest a criminalwithin that university system!); in fact, scandalous because this is coming from university dons. Students are not equally endowed. There are A students as well as B, C and Ds. While it may, theoretically, be difficult to successfully victimize an A or B candidate, it is pretty easier to victimize a C or D student. Are the average students therefore not at the mercy of prurient lecturers? And what percentage of our varsity’s students are in A or B category? Certainly, a tiny percentage. But the reality on our campuses is that no student is immune from victimization. We’ve had cases where sadistic lecturers removed some pages of answer booklets and later blamed the candidates for the offence. Even an A student may be weak in a particular course and hence could only get a D. Can such a student not be victimized easily in the said course? The dissolute teachers have however become wiser; they fail you through their proxies so you may not lay any blame at their doorsteps. The conditions on campuses are clearly weighed against the (female) students.

    The argument by ASUU that the bill is discriminatory because sexual harassment is not peculiar to tertiary institutions is equally not sustainable. In those other instances or places where you have this crime committed, they are generally among adults and fiduciary relationship is virtually non-existent. But on our campuses, our children are ranged against marauding fathers who hold the power to determine who or who does not graduate and when. The government puts these students in your care and pays you to teach them to become great asset to the country but you abuse them and turn them into liabilities to the society.

    Of course, I am very much aware of provocative dressing by some students. But if students lose their common sense, must their lecturers also lose their sense of value? Indecent dressing or not, once these randy dons set their eyes on certain students, they don’t take ‘No’ for an answer and if you dare them, they or their licentious colleagues fire you with Ds, Es and Fs. That is the cult system higher education has been reduced to in the country. Having hit a stonewall, the students succumb and go in with their fathers’ mates in order to graduate at the right time.

    I recall the authorities of the University of Lagos approved a dress code for their students over a decade ago… I was once told of a disciplinarian lecturer at UI who would not condone indecent dressing.  Students (male and female) dressed well for his classes. Such a code could be revived in all tertiary institutions of learning because we are concerned with “learning” and “character”. Students must dress responsibly. They should conduct themselves as the pride of the nation, the reason for our hope in the future.

    I have no doubt the bill will be passed by the National Assembly and President Muhammadu Buhari, the change agent, will sign it into law.

     

    • Soyombo, a public affairs commentator, sent this piece via densityshow@yahoo.com

  • Achieving sustainable reform

    It is common for civil society organisations (CSOs) and groups campaigning for reforms to identify challenges with government systems and governance processes then suggest possible solutions. This can only bear fruit with governments willing to listen, and collaborate. Increasingly, such campaigns rarely achieve set goals as at when needed, consuming more time and resources in instances where any result is achieved.

    So do collaboration work? Can organisations and people advocating for change work collaboratively with government to achieve desired changes or reforms in line with the wishes of the larger population? I can say it is difficult when reform campaigners and civil society organisations begin trying to work with government, even though not an impossible undertaking. The difficulty is in part driven by the fear that the organisations’ credibility will be questioned by the very public they serve. There is also a problem if a lack of the capacity required to collaboratively work with government exists, as well as the moot point that governments change, more so with officials in selective posts who are changed at the whims of their principal.

    However, the challenges faced by the citizens leave no room for self-doubt or undue hesitation over these difficulties; we are required not only to speedily identify challenges and articulately suggest solutions, but to roll up our sleeves to put in the manual work towards reforming governments at all levels.

    Collaboration, in my experience, works best when government institutions are led by reform-conscious officials who will be more receptive when solutions are not merely mooted, but implementation frameworks and partnerships are simultaneously offered. It is that tangible leap from saying “this is the problem” to adding: “these are the exact steps we could take together to eradicate it” that puts the action in collaboration.

    For example, in 2015, BudgIT intentionally chose to broaden its adoption of this approach, working with the Kaduna State Government on Nigeria’s first Open Budget platform, with the Nigerian Police Force Intelligence Bureau on intelligence data gathering and analysis, as well as with several government agencies in the security sector (in partnership with Public and Private Development Centre as lead) on guidelines for classifying security information with respect to FOI and the Nigerian Police Headquarters on a mapping of Police Stations in Lagos.

    I am aware of the work that Public and Private Development Centre did with Open Contracting Data Standards using their recently built procurement tool www.budeshi.org which led to the recent announcement of government adoptionof Open Contracting Data Standards; and the collaboration between Right to Know Nigeria (R2K) and Bureau for Public Sector Reformto build an online FOI platformfor the bureau.

    For organisations looking to use these methods, it is critical to: identify a champion, ambassador or “face” within the government institution clearly looking to implement reforms; prove then communicate your clear and unbiased understanding of the solutions being proffered; evaluate your capacity to carry out the work and find the resources required to implement the ideas. Where capacity is lacking, it is important to find similarly-driven partners who can help. Collaboration is an opportunity to invest your resources, and it is advised that the only gain should be seeing tangible change take root.

    Reforming government through collaboration comes with organisational risks and is not — and should never be — an opportunity for financial gain from government. Regarding these risks, care must be taken to ensure that the values of the organisation are not compromised at any stage and the CSO must ensure it remains open about the collaboration at all stages of the project. Carrying the public along will ensure that their questions are answered, doubts cleared and the focus is persistently sharp, giving advocacy and reforms more bite.

    It is pertinent to seek donors; avoid the exchange of money, especially between governments and your organisation. This will ensure operational independence to implement relevant reforms to the best of your ability. Just as important is this: do not overstate what will be achieved. Rather, start with the simplest things to show what is possible, build trust and continue to improve on previous achievements, as project lifespans can be extended.

    Funding collaborations with government institutions can be challenging, so early planning during programme design with donors and funding partners is essential. Donors understandably always have ideas about what they want to fund and have restrictions on what their funds can be used for. Therefore, it must be reiterated that CSOs must carefully design programmes in such a way that it will meet donor conditions and simultaneously assist recipient organisations implement reform.

    This approach, of collaboration and working for the people with the right government champion can lead to positive and lasting reforms that outlive government officials. There is an assurance that is established once initial success is achieved. It wins over any individuals initially opposed to the reforms, opens the gate for more to be done, bags you a seat at the table and earns you a reputation as an organisation that gets things done.

    If there is one thing I must say from my experience of working on institutional engagement programmes it would be this: with collaboration, it is never about the CSO, but about the people they seek to represent.

    Therefore, in the name of democracy there can be no enemies when the goal is reform. If we must name one, then our collective enemy in the struggle for a better life for our fellow citizens should be: institutional opacity.

     

    • Achonucoordinates Open Alliance Nigeria – a group of CSOs working on Open Government Partnership. He writes from Lagos.

  • The weapon of mass obstruction – 1

    It is time to call a spade a spade or, in this instance, name the Nigerian media camera a weapon of mass obstruction. hat used to be mere occasional infraction, soon corrected, is fast becoming a Bill of Rights – for a minuscule sector of the professional community. We are galloping towards an order of social fascism of which – it must also be stressed – that same society is the prime facilitator of its doom. There are times when tolerance becomes acceptance, then tacit and even overt encouragement. Otherwise, why does it take so long to make the media photographer understand that he or she has no fundamental viewing right that overrides those of the lowest member of any gathering, anywhere and under any circumstance? Let us not beat around the bush – mobsters have taken over community, armed with nothing more lethal than the camera and a monstrous will to capture and monopolize space that belongs to the totality. The media camera has become a pest, an aggressive voyeur. Its wielders imagine that they own the world and its contents, that they have a divinely endowed right over the rights of all others, be they paying audience, invited guests, families, participating others, and indeed – most insolent of all – even the event initiators and rightful proprietors.

    They snarl, they hiss, they deliver what they consider looks of withering contempt when they are politely requested to move a little to this or that side, just so that the rest of inferior humanity can share in the event.  When successfully dislodged, they merely turn recurring decimal.  They shove their variegated bottoms right against the faces of others in some warped notion that that this is what the rest of humanity has gathered to see – their backsides – rather than the unfolding event. Never content to melt into the rest of the gathering, they preen themselves at ridiculous angles, stroll up and down sizing up guests like predators looking for their next meal, then – pounce! But do they depart, having obtained their scoop? Do they observe the camera courtesy norm of – Shoot and scoot? Not they! They pause, linger, block audience view while they look inside their lens as if to ensure that whatever prey has been captured within the ‘magic box’ has not escaped, survey the rest of the gathering like zoo keepers presiding over caged mammals, even when those mammals are virtually frothing at the mouth in frustration, then resume the same process with the uttermost condescension. To summarize:  today’s media cameraman or woman, genus Nigerianensis, believes that the sun shines through their buttocks, and that their mission is to shed light on the rest of humanity from that lower orifice.

    On Saturday, June 11, I attended one of the most nauseating of such unsolicited, substitute presentations. The event was the installation of the new Iyalode of Sagamu, successor to the late illustrious Iyalode, Madame DideoluAwolowo. I had re-organized my calendar months ahead to ensure that I could share the occasion. So, I am certain, had hundreds from all walks of life, then converged on that historic city. The day was ruined, the climactic moment stolidly obscured by the ungovernable, egotistical and abusive performance of media cameramen. They desecrated – I repeat – desecrated that event with their thuggish performance, one that saw off one hapless interventionist after another. The sacral moment was degraded. None of the audience was able to share in that solemn heart of the investiture, when the sacred akokoleaves are placed on the head of the celebrant. Not one of the friends, family, relations, colleagues and circle whom Chief Mrs. FolasadeOgunbiyi had invited was able to witness the ceremony for which a sizable number had even travelled across the Atlantic. Is that just? Equitable? Civilized? Or simply plain rude, unfeeling and insensitive? One half of the semi-circle of chiefs and royal retinue seated on the dais itself were totally blocked from sight – what with the backsides of the photographers pressed against their faces! These disrespectful, uncouth cameramen clambered over one another, expanding their opaque zone until any remaining viewing apertures were lost in a general congealment. I counted them – perhaps no more than 15 – but then they were joined by a handful of typical Nigerian copycat delinquents wielding their pathetic little phone cameras – i-pod, i-pad, i-do-as-i-please, and other ego feeding contraptions. After all, they were also armed with a camera, so they had a right to mount the royal dais and contest media thuggery with citizen thuggery.

    Were we witnessing a solemn but joyous occasion, I asked myself, or a rugby scrum in the wilds of Australia?  In vain did the Master of Ceremonies, one chief after another, relations and even frustrated ‘viewers’ approach to plead with them to ‘break it up’. In desperation, I even sent the granddaughter of the celebrant to them, hoping that the sight of a child would shame them, make them understand that they were setting a vile example for children, that they, in their homes would not tolerate such unruly conduct from their own children, wards, or home staff. It made no difference. They nearly trampled my poor emissary beneath their flailing legs. She threw up her hands in despair and I quickly recalled her to safety.

    My rights were violated that Saturday. I swear it will not be repeated, not at any event at which my presence is an undertaking of my own free will! There will be citizen action, and if all fails, the two legs that brought me there know how to find their way out. Unlike what appears to be the condition of today’s average Nigerian public, I am no masochist, cannot tolerate cheats – even of space attribution – and insist on my fundamental viewing rights.

    …To be continued tomorrow

  • They call it regional integration

    A few days before he was killed, the then Premier of Northern Nigeria, Sir Ahmadu Bello, (1909-1966), Sardauna of Sokoto incorporated a company called the New Nigeria Development Company. The company, formed in 1946, was designed to be a conglomerate with spanning interests in agriculture, mining, capital market, telecommunications and education. The last we heard about the company was on August 26, 2013 when the chairman of the Northern Governors Forum at that time, Dr. Babangida Aliyu, of Niger state advised the company to sell 49% of its equity to members of the public.

    Dr. Aliyu explained that the poor performance of the company has necessitated the need for some of its investment such as the Arewa Hotels to be sold to the public. In his words” we should be concerned that after 56 years of operations the NNDC is performing epileptically”.

    It is sad that those who have managed the NNDC have not been fair to the legacy of Sir Ahmadu Bello.

    On May 27 1967,by virtue of states creation and transitional  provision decree 14 of 1967, General Yakubu Dan Yumma Gowon(81) created 12 states in the country—six from the old Northern region, three from the old Eastern region and three from the old Western region. By decree 39 of June 24 1967, he created the Interim Common Services Agency to take over the assets of the old Northern region and the Eastern States Interim Assets and Liabilities Agencies (ESIALA) to take over the assets of the three states of Rivers, East Central State and South Eastern state.

    On assuming power in July 1975, General Murtala Muhammed (1938-1976) disbanded the two agencies.

    What of the assets of the two agencies especially that of ESIALA with financially endowed institutions like the Eastern Region Marketing Board once headed by Sir LoiusOdumegwuOjukwu(1909-1966),Eastern Nigeria Finance Corporation, Eastern Nigeria Development Corporation, African Continental Bank,etc.

    Even till today questions are being asked to what happened to the abandoned properties implementation committee headed by Major David Alachenu Bonaventure Mark(68) set up by decree No 90 of 1978 following the abrogation of several edicts including that of South Eastern state edict No 10 of May 1970.

    There is another story elsewhere.

    On Tuesday January19 this year at Cocoa house, Ibadan, the governors of the owner states of Odua Investment Company met in Ibadan, the Oyo State capital. The current chairman of the Odua Investment Company, Dr. Olusegun Rahman Mimiko (61), of Ondo State announced that the Odua Investment Company has invited Lagos State to join the company as the sixth shareholder of the conglomerate. At present the company is owned by the governments of Oyo,Osun, Ogun,Ekiti and Ondo states. Twenty four hours after the announcement, the governor of Lagos State, AkinwunmiAmbode (53) accepted the invitation and declared his support for the growth of the company.

    The company recorded a revenue growth of N4.2 billion last year as against N4.5 billion in 2013. The spokesman for Dr. Mimiko, KayodeAkinmade disclosed that the company targets N20billion asset base by 2019. He disclosed further that the proposed payment of gross dividend of N167million at its annual general meeting was approved and paid to all the owner states.

    Odua Investment Company was incorporated in 1976 to take over the business interests of the former Western State following the creation of Oyo,Ogun and Ondo states out of the old Western State by General Murtala Ramat Muhammed (1938-1976) on February 3, 1976, who was assassinated 10 days after. The company held its first meeting on March 3, 1976 with Chief Christopher Sunday OlutundeAkande(1924-2005) as pioneer managing director.

    No doubt Odua Investment Company has been a huge success and kudos must be given for those who have kept the flag flying for that company from 1976 till date, including premiers, sole administrators, governors both civilian and military, in spite of their ideological and political differences. It has not been too rosy for the company though, for most of its subsidiaries are no more. A case in point is the National Bank which was acquired by the Western Region on April 1, 1961 and liquidated in 1992 due to mismanagement and corruption. A long time ago, National Bank was the envy of all banks in Nigeria with assets in London and in most parts of Nigeria. Acclaim must be given also to the man who established most of the companies and subsidiaries that are now grouped together as Odua Investment Company including free education, free health services, farm settlements, etc. I am referring to Chief Jeremiah Oyeniyi Obafemi Awolowo (1909-1987) who ruled the Western Region as Premier from October 1, 1954 to December 15 1959.

    Sadly, unlike the era of Chief Awolowo, state governments of the old western region cannot pay salaries of workers now not to talk of establishing industries and factories—a bad legacy of the present generation.

    The invitation to Lagos to join Odua Investment Company is well understood, for Lagos has been part of Western Region until October 1, 1954 when the adoption of the Oliver Lyttelton Constitution detached it from region making it a federal territory. It was the same constitution that detached Southern Cameroons from Eastern Region. Lagos has always been the centre of commerce from the days of T.F. Barker who first administered the city between 1956-1957 to Alhaji Muhammadu Ribadu, (1910-1965) who became Minister for Lagos affairs between 1957-1960 followed by the MutawallinKatsina, Alhaji Musa Yar’Adua who also served as Minister of Lagos between 1960-1966.

    Lagos State now generates N24.5billion monthly as internal revenue although some of us who live in Lagos are over taxed with businesses dying on daily basis and nothing much to show for the over taxation. Lagos State government is getting richer per day through over taxation while the people of the state are getting poorer, an urgent issuewhich must be addressed.  Ogun State is not doing badly too with N6billion every month. On May 25, the Lagos state government signed a memorandum of understanding to start the construction of the 38-kilometre Fourth Mainland Bridge. The bridge, which is expected to cost N844billion will be constructed under the Build, Own and Transfer concession of 40 years under the Public-Private-Partnership initiative of the Lagos State government. At present, Lagos is the sixth largest city in the world and has the smallest land mass in Africa. It is projected to be the third biggest conurbation in the world next year. At present, Lagos is West Africa’s most resourceful single trading market with a population of about 22million vibrant people. What the Odua governors are presently doing is in the words of Governor Rauf Adesoji Aregbesola (59) of Osun State, is, “inter-cooperation, friendship and interdependence”. Regional integration does not offend the spirit of the constitution and the spirit of federalism. If each of the regions should be allowed to develop on its own it will enhance unity, stability and better understanding.

    Regional integration enhances unity even as diverse as we are. And I don’t think it negates the demand for restructuring which has become inevitable. It should be encouraged.

     

    • Teniola, a former director at the Presidency, lives in Lagos.