The Nation Newspaper

Category: Dele Agekameh

  • DIG Lakanu: Farewell to a super cop

    Angels fly because they take themselves lightly. They do not think too much of themselves, so does Federick Taiwo Lakanu, Deputy Inspector General of Police, DIG. Like a guardian angel, he puts the citizenry and his work first, in the true spirit of police creed: To serve and to protect. But whatever has an entry must certainly have an exit. And for the well-celebrated DIG, all things being equal, he would retire from service this coming Saturday, October 12.

    There is no gainsaying that DIG Lakanu belongs to the pantheon Nigeria’s most patriotic public servants. He assumes temperance and humility in the shape of a cloak and badge of honour, thus affirming his character as a law enforcer with commitment to the peace and continuity of the Nigerian project.

    My first encounter with Lakanu was in early 2000, when he was PSO, Principal Staff Officer, to Tafa Balogun, the ebullient former Inspector General of Police widely known for his “fire for fire” policing doctrine. Lakanu was then manning the IG’s annex at Obalende. That day, I had an appointment to see Balogun, who was on a whistle-stop visit to Lagos. It was Lakanu that attended to me.

    He was calm, cool and smart. His well-tailored uniform and shining shoes to match, gave him away as a powerful dresser that will always catch people’s attention. He made sure that we were comfortable where all visitors were asked to sit as he sauntered in now and then to check on us. He assured us that the IG was just clearing some files on his table and would soon attend to us. That was my first encounter with him. Thereafter, as I was leaving the complex, we exchanged numbers and became friends from then on.

    Many months later, we met again at the IG’s lodge in Ikoyi. In fact, Lakanu was so close to the IG then that he was always with him whenever he, the IG, visited Lagos. When the IG was abruptly removed by former President Olusegun Obasanjo, I called him to sound him out on what had happened. His only response was, “eh, soldier go, soldier come”, and that ended the conversation. What it meant was that he had moved on. All through the years, we never lost contact.

    From the time he enlisted as a Cadet Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP) in 1986, Lakanu endeavoured to serve at his best, holding nothing back in his bid to restore the lost glory of the Nigeria Police. In so doing, his rise was meteoric as he served diligently across the investigations, operations, and administrative departments of the police.

    Lakanu was a prominent member of the Special Anti-Robbery Squad (SARS) that cut short the reign of terror of the dreaded armed robber, Shina Rambo, in the 1980s. In Imo, he supervised the neutralisation of the notorious kidnapper, “Vampire” (and members of his gang), during the latter’s reign of terror across Nigeria’s south-east and neighbouring regions.

    His unprecedented success as a crime fighter in Imo earned him the sobriquet, “messiah”, and two chieftaincy titles: the “Onwa natili oha of Igboland” (the moon that shines) and “Agu-na-echemba” (the lion that guides the town) of Imo State. As an illustrious law enforcer, Lakanu, is also the Akogun of Lagos State. He was also recently celebrated at an award ceremony organised by Security Watch Africa in Houston, Texas, United States of America, USA. He was decorated as the Most Outstanding Crime Fighter in West and Sub-Saharan Africa.

    In all his posts, Lakanu distinguished himself as an efficient, no-nonsense crime fighter.  As Deputy Commissioner of Police, DCP, Operations in Ibadan, he regularly led his squad out all night in the cold, covering all the nooks and crannies of the city which was then notorious for high-profile crimes, including violent robberies. He helped to stem the tide of these violent robberies.

    Before his promotion from the rank of an Assistant Inspector General of Police (AIG) to DIG, Lakanu was the Force Secretary and a member of the Nigeria Police Force Management Team. He took over from AIG Abdul Bube, who retired from the force on December 31, 2018, after 35 years in service.

    Prior to his elevation as DIG, Lakanu served in various capacities as AIG Federal Operations, Force Headquarters, Abuja; Commissioner of Police in Imo and Ekiti States; Commissioner of Police Airport Command, Lagos; Principal Staff Officer to the IG (Force Headquarters Annex, Lagos), among others. He was also the Assistant Inspector General of Police in charge of Zone 7 Headquarters, Abuja, comprising the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Niger and Kaduna states.

    As AIG, he was in charge of operations in the Northeast; he has worked in all the troubled spots in the country and has also led a team of policemen to curb the activities of IPOB in the Southeast. Through his illustrious career, Lakanu established himself as a super cop. He seemed to relish perilous situations in which he could distinguish himself and demonstrate ingenuity and bravery. Associates and underlings say that he seems hard-wired to attack danger and resolve it, even in circumstances that many would cringe and seek the safest way out. However, he is neither reckless nor impulsive. He simply sought, from the beginning of his career, to fulfil the demands and obligations of his calling, like a true patriot.

    Aside his sterling contributions in police operations, Lakanu commits to spiritual well-being and development of the NPF. For instance, his contributions at the Police Headquarters in Owerri, Imo State capital, won’t be forgotten in a hurry; there, he initiated the construction and completion of a Catholic Church called “St. Michael the Archangel Catholic Police Chaplaincy,” to the excitement and appreciation of the police.

    Lakanu certainly understands that, aside the rigorous physical and mental grooming characteristic of police work, there is need for spiritual rejuvenation of the force. Thus he built a befitting chaplaincy for his division in Owerri while simultaneously encouraging a far-reaching re-orientation and sensitisation of the force to humane precepts of crime-fighting and public service. Lakanu, no doubt, contributed in no small measure, in redeeming the battered image of the Nigerian Police within and outside his divisions of service. It is hardly astonishing thus that a dual carriage way, directly behind the police headquarters, was named after him, while he served in Owerri, Imo State.

    Born on October 12, 1959, in Lagos Island, Lagos State, Lakanu holds a B.A. (Hons) Philosophy and LL.B. (Hons) respectively from the University of Lagos (UNILAG), Akoka, Lagos State. He also holds a Master’s degree in Law from Leeds Metropolitan University, Leeds, United Kingdom. He attended several courses within and outside the country, including the Crime Investigation Course at the Police Staff College, Jos, and Developmental Course at Kofi Annan Centre for Peace Keeping, Accra, Ghana. He is also a fellow of National Defence College, Abuja.

    Lakanu’s exploits in the police established him as a man of principles, whose life is governed, not by a sense of entitlement, but of duty. In service, he was distinctly apolitical and driven by uncommon values: honour, integrity, humility, service; thus presenting an inverse image of the random police officer’s ugly repute.

    Taking heat, daily, on the job, Lakanu neither flinched nor resorted to illegitimate measures. He simply did his job. By many quantitative metrics, Lakanu has proved himself the quintessential crime fighter. By qualitative metrics, he is no less impressive. Arguably one of Nigeria’s most efficient and celebrated police bosses, he flaunts the track record of an impressive leader.

    DIG Lakanu is soft-spoken yet charismatic, logical yet passionate. He never set limit to possibilities of success throughout his career as a police boss. He challenged his men to reinvent themselves and serve as great ambassadors of the law enforcement agency. He is also a master of innovation. His ingenious approach to fighting crime and restoring peace and stability in Nigeria’s troubled regions is a proof his depth, high professionalism and ethics at work.

    I am sure that the Nigeria Police that he served so meritoriously for 35 years will miss him.

  • Our kindness deficit

    Sometime last week, I was amazed by an interview I saw on CNN. It was about a new, well-funded institute that has been created to further research and study into one simple facet of human behaviour – kindness. The Bedari Kindness Institute, housed in the prestigious University of California, Los Angeles, UCLA, is funded by a $20 million donation by the Bedari Foundation, a private family foundation co-founded by Mathew and Jennifer Harris. The significance of research of this type in today’s world is monumental.

    If the idea seems unbelievable, or the funding, mind boggling, one only has to turn on the TV at any point in time to be reminded of the magnitude of strife and violence, poverty and disease, that burdens our world today. For the older generation, a trip down memory lane would also do the trick. That is, remembering a time when the world was a safer place to interact with others and form lasting friendships that endure for decades. Today, there is too much distrust and enmity, between countries, individuals and groups, across several dividing lines.

    One of the first things that came to mind after seeing the CNN interview, titled Spreading Contagious Kindness, is how Nigerians in particular can benefit from this kind of research. Our society is deeply divided, and our divisions are being emphasised every second of everyday, through our individual and group actions and that of people in leadership positions. The African continent is no different, despite the best efforts (which is not much) of associations like the African Union, AU, and the Economic Community of West African States, ECOWAS.

    If it were possible to measure the instinct for self-preservation in the mind of an average Nigerian, most Nigerians would score above 90%. This is not necessarily a bad thing. The negative part of this ‘selfish virtue’ is the cost, to inter-personal relationships and simple human kindness. Nigerians have been exposed to war, high level of crime and corruption and the stinging bite of extreme poverty, for years. The emotional trauma of fighting these evils has turned Nigerians into battle-hardened humans, with reduced emotional connections and a deficit of simple kindness.

    I also discovered, from further reading, that scientific research has been conducted for decades, into the subject of kindness and its effects on populations. Kindness, as research shows, is truly contagious. Witnessing an act of kindness or charity immediately ignites an emotional response that some have termed ‘elevation’, that triggers a desire to replicate that act or a similar act. Findings around this topic were published by researchers from the University of California, San Diego and Harvard University in the online edition of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in 2010. Similar studies have also been carried out by researchers in Cambridge University and University of Plymouth in the United Kingdom, with similar results.

    In a country where it is considered a poor decision to offer a ride to a stranger stranded in the rain or scorching sun, mostly for security reasons, Nigeria may be a particularly interesting case study for the scholars in the new kindness institute at UCLA. As a dean of social sciences in the university puts it, the new institute seeks to be an antidote to the politics, violence and strife in the world today. In Nigeria, it was the politics, violence and strife that killed the historical kindness of Nigerians, and turned Nigerian society into an angry and impatient place that is unforgiving of the perceived weakness of even the slightest act of kindness and consideration.

    In Nigeria, researchers will be confounded by a society that steals supplies from Internally Displaced Persons, IDPs, condemned to a life of neglect and toil in their disease-infested camps; public officials that divert public funds and leave tens of millions in poverty and ignorance while their relatives enjoy opulence likened to some of history’s most powerful monarchs; religious bodies with multi-billion dollar ‘empires’ accepting money from people on involuntary fasting. The list goes on and on.

    Also, how does one encourage more kindness in a society that has been crippled by fear? For every act of kindness imaginable, Nigeria has a reason why it should not be done. For example, giving alms to beggars opens you to the danger of ritualists, as some will tell you. Here, turning the other cheek is not only a faux pas; it is a socially abhorrent behaviour that will be met with considerable disdain. The fear is always that, when you give an inch, the Nigerian society will likely take a mile, and continue taking until you go bust or join the band wagon of ‘“sharp” (selfish) Nigerians. The worst thing is, it is the truth.

    In the midst of all that chaos, Nigerians have not completely lost their humanity. Kindness still resides in our hearts, even if stifled by fear and misery. One at least agrees with the researchers that only more kindness can create a mass reaction that can multiply and bring the human factor back into our daily lives. It is not inconceivable that the late Dr. Stella Adadevoh could have chosen to be ‘sharp’ by protecting herself and warning her friends and relatives about a possible epidemic. She, and others, put their lives on the line and stemmed the spread of Ebola, which ended with her paying the ultimate price. That is humanity in action.

    Several tales of taxi drivers and airport attendants returning large sums of money, indigenous Non-Governmental Organisations, NGOs, stepping up to fill the void left by government, and even national leaders shelving ambition in the interest of Nigerians. This all means that there is hope. While progress may be slow in spreading community spirit and basic human consideration in a country of 200 million people, the research also shows that the kindness contagion, once started, spreads organically. As such, we need our political and community leaders, school children and students of all ages to benefit from these new research and studies, so that we can kick-start our own deliberate kindness experiment that may heal our communities.

    Billionaire Allen Onyema’s recent largesse, through Air Peace, where he provided free rides to help Nigerians escape violence in South Africa’s xenophobic attacks, is a case in point for spreading kindness. The man himself is a known philanthropist and a natural partner for the kindness institute in Nigeria, should the institute ever turn its focus on the country.  He founded the Foundation for Ethnic Harmony in Nigeria, FEHN, which has achieved the seemingly impossible by intervening in many conflict resolutions in Nigeria, including the de-escalation of Niger Delta militancy and subsequent training of ex-militants as part of the Amnesty programme of the Yar’Adua administration.

    Perhaps, if the Almajiri could be confident that northern elites are truly interested and invested in the Almajiri’s place in modern society, with the benefits and privileges that come with it, they will not be so easily cajoled into criminality and destructive causes that have become a nightmare for the entire country. Same goes for “area boys” and political thugs all over the country. Being neglected and consigned to the fringes of society, these outcasts have, overtime, embodied the manifestation of our lack of empathy and ultra-selfishness as a nation.

    Like the Allen Onyemas of Nigeria, Aliko Dangotes of Africa and Bill Gates’ of this world, if ordinary people can commit to promoting peaceful co-existence through random acts of kindness and material or emotional generosity, the world can truly be a better, more tolerable, place for billions of people. Where the kind gestures of billionaires can get lost in the maze of inter-personal suspicion and enmity at ‘ground level’, the missing piece of the puzzle may be our own emotional contributions and small material offerings as ordinary people, towards making a better life for ourselves. God knows that Nigerians need this, perhaps, more than any other group of people that I know.

     

  • Adoke’s counter-narrative

    When people aspire to high office, perhaps, they think about the opportunity to make a difference, for good or for bad. For those that get the opportunity, the experience lasts for a lifetime. For Mohammed Bello Adoke, SAN, former Attorney General of the Federation, AGF, his experience as a public servant brought him career fulfillment and status as a reformer during his time in office. That experience has now left him with a seemingly endless fight for survival and vindication.

    In his new book, Burden of Service: Reminiscences of Nigeria’s Former Attorney-General, which hit book stalls in Nigeria on September 16, Adoke bares it all. He lets us into his world, chronicling the events and emotions that preceded his appointment into the number one legal office in the country. He offers insight into his thought process as AGF and renders an insider perspective on many events that took place during the tenure of former President Goodluck Jonathan. Most interestingly, Adoke poured his heart out about his involvement in the OPL 245/Malabu Oil saga that is now drawing critical international attention.

    Although Adoke states that his book is not just about OPL 245, it is that subject that will be the highlight of the book for many of his readers. The intricacies of the deal reached between oil giants Royal Dutch Shell and ENI of Italy on the one hand, and the Federal Government of Nigeria and Malabu Oil and Gas Limited on the other hand, are now being unravelled by multiple authorities across international borders. The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, has also launched its own investigation into the deal.

    A brief history of the deal, from all accounts, begins with late Sani Abacha’s “Indigenous Exploration Programme”, which sought the allocation of oil blocks to indigenous companies. This included the potentially very lucrative OPL 245, which was allocated to Malabu Oil and Gas Limited in 1998 for a concessionary fee of $20 million.

    Enter Olusegun Obasanjo’s civilian government in 1999. Former President Obasanjo issued Malabu Oil and its technical partner, Shell, an Oil Prospecting Licence, OPL, for the oil block, based on a Joint Operating Agreement between the two. Obasanjo, who was Minister for Petroleum in his government, revoked the license five weeks later, despite assurances given to Malabu Oil and its partner.

    In 2002, Obasanjo’s administration awarded a Production Sharing Contract to Shell for the same oil block for a signature bonus of $210 million. Malabu Oil kicked, dragged the House of Representatives into the matter and went to the courts. Obasanjo’s administration was forced to settle and recognise its claim by re-allocating the oil block back to Malabu Oil, despite having signed a new agreement and received $1 million from Shell. That settlement was reduced to a consent judgement of the Federal High Court in 2006. It was then Shell’s turn to raise hell, and it opened investor-state arbitral proceedings against Nigeria in 2009.

    While shopping for technical partners, Malabu Oil approached ENI. ENI was interested in partnering with Shell on the project. Malabu’s refusal to work with Shell, and Shell’s proceedings against the government over its own claim to the oil block created complications that necessitated the government stepping in, according to Adoke, to facilitate some kind of arrangement. In the end, Malabu agreed to be paid off with about $1.1 billion for the oil block and the federal government agreed to receive the funds on behalf of Malabu Oil in an escrow account controlled by the government. The government also received the full signature bonus of $210 million. According to Adoke, the Federal Government, and his, involvement was limited to facilitating this deal in 2011. The deal apparently saved the country from a possible multi-billion dollar award in Shell’s investor-state arbitration, as well as solved the complication that had been inherited from the previous administrations.

    The story of OPL 245 is a tricky, winding tale, made more complicated by the emergence, from the woodwork, after the deal was concluded, of two ‘brokers’ that facilitated the deal and representatives of the Abacha family claiming a stake in the deal. Emeka Obi and Ednan Agaev, the ‘brokers’ who claimed a combined sum of $290 million from Malabu, have now been convicted in absentia by English courts.

    Dan Etete, former Petroleum Minister in Abacha’s regime and alter-ego of Malabu Oil, is the central character in the whole affair. He is also on trial in Italian courts, and is thought to have been the major beneficiary of Shell’s payment, along with many Nigerian government officials. There are simultaneous investigative proceedings and prosecutions concerning the deal in Italy and Switzerland, in addition to the earlier convictions in England and possible suits in the United States and Netherlands.

    Adoke finds himself caught in the middle of the Malabu storm because he was AGF at the time funds were disbursed to Malabu, or at least, that is what it looks like. His predecessors in that office, post 1999, were involved in one way or another in the eventual deal that legalised, on the face of it, the disbursement of $1.1 billion to Etete’s Malabu Oil. Surprisingly, only Adoke has now somehow been paired with Dan Etete by the EFCC in its investigations and prosecution in Nigeria. An arrest warrant has been issued for the pair.

    If Nuhu Ribadu, the pioneer chairman of the EFCC was described as the attack dog of the Obasanjo regime, Ibrahim Magu, the current acting chairman of the commission, is a raging bull that is difficult to control, even by his employer. He fixates on a target and embarks on a crude and ruthless campaign of what more easily appears to be persecution, rather than prosecution, in most cases. That style, of media persecution and image bastardization of persons yet to be adjudged guilty, is an EFCC trademark that has been escalated under Magu.

    Buoyed by a public scarred by corruption and therefore easily taken in by the slightest whiff of a financial scandal, the EFCC milks the mills of public opinion with a professional touch, on the way to delivering shoddy prosecutions that rarely lead to any satisfactory results. The agency’s specialty is indiscriminate raids and confiscation of property even while cases are pending in court. Nigeria truly needs a determined anti-graft agency, but not at the cost of reason, procedure and individual rights.

    Adoke makes many assertions in his book, including some that pointedly accuse Magu of persecution. However, his principal claim on the question of OPL 245 is that he had no interest in the deal outside his duty, in his official capacity as AGF. Charges drawn against Adoke have been found lacking in substance by Abubakar Malami, the current AGF, and same has been transmitted to the EFCC. One would not attempt to interfere in a lawful investigation and prosecution, but the seeming focus on the former AGF in a sea of possible suspects with a greater involvement is a quite telling.

    There is of course the question of why the ex-AGF has not come to defend himself at the courts. It is an important question. In the light of his account and many other circumstances related to this case, his reluctance may be understandable. All the things wrong with the OPL 245 deal happened behind the scenes, and one can argue that Adoke’s role was not behind the scenes. However, the government appears to need a scapegoat and Adoke is in mortal fear that it might be him. Quite unfair.

    There is undoubtedly something fishy about the deal, with the convictions and sustained trial on-going in the case in other jurisdictions. The possible implication of very powerful Nigerians in the scandal puts a dangerous twist to it. With the alleged related assassination of at least one person, a Corporate Affairs Commission official, which was implied in one foreign media report, the case is no ordinary case. Without speaking to Adoke’s guilt or otherwise, his cautious and continued exile seems to make some kind of sense. If for nothing else, his book portrays someone desperate to reclaim his good name, rather than melt into the background, in guilt.

  • The farce of a presidential tribunal

    Last Wednesday, the result of the February 23 Presidential election was upheld by the Presidential Elections Tribunal. The tribunal had been sitting on a petition filed by Atiku Abubakar and the People’s Democratic Party, PDP. The supporters of Atiku Abubakar, former vice-president and lead petitioner, had been confident of a decision in Atiku’s favour. In preparation for the anticipated tribunal victory, they had coined the refrain “Atiku is coming”. After a relatively long wait, since the petition was filed in March, the judgment came with no vindication, no victory and no celebrations for Atiku. Now, as anyone could have predicted, the tussle is set to move to the Supreme Court.

    The flurry of election petitions that came after elections were conducted earlier in the year were expected. As at April 16th, when most of the elections had been concluded, the Court of Appeal revealed that a total of 766 petitions had been filed by politicians and their political parties. The Presidential Election Tribunal had received one ‘major’ petition from Atiku and a number of interlocutory applications, including preliminary objections.

    As the petition began to flesh out at the tribunal, it became apparent that there were two main issues on which Atiku and PDP’s action relied. They are the issue of President Muhammadu Buhari’s educational qualification and the issue of existence (or non-existence) of a central server at the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC. These two issues were subject to pre-judgement analysis and conclusions by legal practitioners and non-lawyers outside the tribunal for months. Despite the lay and expert opinions on the issues, it was the tribunal’s decision that was vital. And last Wednesday, it went in favour of the president.

    Read Also: Tackling the presidential tribunal’s legal technicalities

    More comments have poured in after the tribunal’s judgement, with clearly differing reactions as is wont to happen in a case such as this. For those that are consciously or unconsciously in Atiku’s camp, the judgement is seen as a travesty and a miscarriage of justice that has reduced proof of educational qualification to a mere sworn affidavit that can be obtained in a court for 500 naira. For others, the tribunal has finally put to bed the absurd petition against the results of the 2019 presidential election.

    Whichever way one swings on the issue, it is doubtful that the petition has been a constructive judicial exercise. The benefits to Nigerian law from the petition and its result is minute, to say the least. The lawyers on both sides, especially those on the side of the petitioner, had reduced an issue of national significance to an incongruous debate and a comedy of errors through their spurious allegations and absurd defence put up against them. The election petition was a case of lawyers earning their fees by all means necessary, to the exclusion of logic and national duty to the law and the flag of Nigeria.

    To begin with, section 131 and 137 of the constitution is clear about qualifications for a person standing for election as president. Specifically, and most relevant to the first issue of qualification, section 131 (d) of the constitution states that a person shall be qualified for election to the office of President, amongst other things, if “he has been educated up to at least the School Certificate level or its equivalent”. Section 318 (1) of the constitution further defines “school certificate or its equivalent” in sub section (b) and (c) as “(b) education up to secondary school certificate level; or (c) primary six school leaving certificate or its equivalent”; and (i) service in the public or private sector in the federation in any capacity acceptable to INEC for a minimum of ten years and (ii) attendance of courses and training in such institutions as may be acceptable to INEC totalling up to a minimum of one year.

    That section continues, to include ability to read, write and communicate in English as part of the criteria to satisfy the requirement for “school certificate or its equivalent”. As the president’s primary school education was never in issue, and as such not contested, the question of educational qualification should have been dropped instantly. The constitution is clear. That alone should have put the matter to rest without reading on to the other provisions which the president clearly fulfills. In other words, as the president’s lawyers clearly stated, the question of his secondary school certificate was immaterial.

    Military training in Nigeria and overseas (taught in English) and public service in different capacities for many years, including as Commander-in-Chief, albeit through extra-judicial means, clearly surpasses any assumed equivalent of “school certificate”. To have launched into a full scale legal argument on that moot point, Atiku’s lawyers not only took their client for a ride, but they took the entire nation for the same frivolous ride. As the courts would say, they seemed to be “on a frolic of their own” in their attempt to justify their exorbitant fees, the figures of which will drop jaws outside legal circles.

    The issue of servers brought to light the dubiousness of INEC’s lawyers. The existence of the server was flatly denied. That strange denial was both a disservice to the country and a disrespect of the courts. If the judiciary and all the lawyers involved were serious, it should have led to a charge of perjury, in the least. Without regard to whether the electoral law provides for the transmission and collation of results to/through a server – which the tribunal judged in the negative – there was a greater obligation on INEC and its lawyers to use that opportunity to furnish the country with details of its operations and the direction it is taking electoral reform.

    But INEC and its lawyers chose to rubbish the testimony of people who took part in the exercise and transmitted data through the card readers. It is one thing to say that the servers were not used for collation or were not a legally required part of the process, it is another to flatly deny the existence. Anyone in the world of technology knows that data must be transmitted to a central point which could be regarded as the “server”. In a case of national importance, it was an egregious move to lie about this.

    The other issues of electoral malpractice are notoriously difficult to prove in a presidential election in Nigeria. The volume of evidence required because of manual processes is almost impossible to acquire, and the time truly needed, prohibitive. This is why lawyers routinely dump documents on the court, as in this case. As it appears from the current position of the law, only self-incrimination and confessions can lead to a successful contest of a presidential election. Much judicial time would be saved if the lawyers are truthful to their clients. It is not an accident that no presidential election contested since 1999 has succeeded. It is unlikely that Atiku and PDP will be the exception, even in the face of the egregious denial by INEC.

    The foundations of the case against President Muhammadu Buhari’s election were shaky. To add to that, truth and logic had been suspended in the case, with personal attacks that defied logic. From the frivolous contest of the president’s certificate by Atiku’s lawyers, to the absurd argument over Atiku’s nationality by the president’s lawyers, the tribunal was an exercise in futility, made worse by INEC’s slap on the face of Nigerians about the server. In all of this, the country and its legal jurisprudence lost woefully.

    In the end, what was really on trial was the integrity of the lawyers that were involved in the case. On all sides, they failed the test and the tribunal failed to rebuke them accordingly. The Supreme Court now has the opportunity to call them out. It will not change the outcome of the election, but it will go a long way in pushing a much needed self-appraisal on the part of the lawyers.

  • The fear of ‘black’ foreigners

    In his Unpopular Essays, first published in 1950, Bertrand Russell says: “Collective fear stimulates herd instinct, and tends to produce ferocity toward those who are not regarded as members of the herd”. The British philosopher’s words come to mind today, 69 years after, as September has come with more ferocious attacks against foreigners in Johannesburg, Pretoria and other parts of South Africa. It is reported that more than 50 shops and businesses belonging to non-natives were burnt down, while several people have been killed in the renewed attacks.

    This should not surprise anyone. Violence of this kind has been going on in South Africa for decades. The Nigerian victims have been comparably high. And it is beginning to look, again, from this side, like a targeted attack against Nigerians. We need to find a solution soon, because the domino effect of the xenophobic attacks on foreigners in South Africa is already being felt in Nigeria. Last week, businesses with ties to South Africa were caught up in retaliatory attacks in Lagos, Akwa Ibom and Oyo states, leading to the closure of South African businesses and two South African Mission buildings in Lagos and Abuja.

    There are many things to be said about these attacks and about the role of South African government officials, the Nigerians and others living in South Africa, as well as other African governments affected. What must never be said, if we can help it, is that other Africans are gradually picking up the hatred and animosity that appears to be growing in black South Africa. For instance, there have been peaceful protests in Zambia and other places, and we must all mirror that reaction instead of descending to the same depths as the perpetrators of hate crimes in South Africa.

    The most telling part of the xenophobic attacks is that the South African government, aided by insufficient pressure from its African counterparts, has been lazy about addressing the root causes of the attacks. This means that the question of “why” has not really been addressed, which foretells more attacks in the future. One Nigerian interviewed after the attacks began last week told reporters that all the South African government has done, through the episodes of xenophobic attacks in recent times, has been to compile data of deaths, and losses. It does not seem like the Nigerian government, or any other African government, has done much else.

    But the need for urgent action cannot be reiterated enough in these times, where even the most subtle coaxing of emotions towards the destructive path is enough to lead to carnage. Although irresponsible public figures and government officials in South Africa are using exactly this technique to the detriment of other Africans in South Africa, it does not justify a crass reaction along that same path from the rest of us. For instance, Naledi Pandor, South Africa’s Minister of International Relations and Co-operation, made insensitive comments about Nigerians and involvement with crime after last week’s carnage.

    Her comment reminds one of Zulu King Goodwill Zwelithini’s unmasked call for xenophobia in 2015. Also, a 2017 video of a South African former Deputy Police Minister, Bongani Mkongi, where he made reckless comments against foreigners, resurfaced online in Nigeria last week. Whether intended or not, the effects of that video and many more posts and comments like it, rehashed in an unproductive manner has generated reactionary animosity against everything South African here and in other places. Mind you, duplicating the hatred will not help any of us.

    The talk in Nigeria now is focused on boycotting brands linked with South Africa – MTN, DSTV, ShopRite, Stanbic IBTC etc. – which will hurt Nigerians more in the short to medium term. These businesses are not only deeply entrenched into the Nigerian system and economy; they also hold significant Nigerian interests that cannot be disregarded. Thousands of working class Nigerians are employed directly or indirectly through these businesses. Foolhardy attacks and looting can only benefit the vandals doing the looting, for a short time. The fall-out of South African intolerance can lead to untold chaos because of the dearth of leadership from African leaders.

    Now, let us do what our governments have failed to do by trying to understand exactly what is triggering xenophobic behaviour in black South Africa. South Africa came out of apartheid less than 30 years ago. While the country has been theoretically freed of the oppression, there are signs that the same oppression persists under the bubble of South African success. Between black and white South Africa, economic polarisation seems to have taken the place of administrative separation.

    Added to that polarity, some say a third section of South African society has been quartered-off by people who are culturally and racially Indian, but have become native to South Africa through a centuries-old history of forced migration. By evidence, this similarly smaller, third section, is said to have knocked black South Africa further down the economic pecking order. Although these are theories, there seems to be a murderous resistance to any build-up of ‘outsiders’ who could supplant black South Africa and push it further down the economic food chain.

    Responses to similar economic fears in other places have not quite followed the murderous pattern. Zimbabwe responded with a brutal and aggressive land reform program; Britain responded through prioritising employment for Britons and, subsequently, the on-going divorce from her continental partners. South Africa, like a certain West European country in dark history, appears to be gunning for a murderous purge.

    Rather than its policy of demonising African immigrants, the South African government can reassure its people through relevant legislation, identifiable progressive policy and by simply doing the job it was elected to do. Police officers standing by while businesses built with several years of toil and sweat are vandalised are not doing their job. Paying lip service while careless statements are being made, even by the president himself, is not a good job either.

    For the Nigerian government and other African states caught in the trajectory of the fear-possessed South African masses, collecting data and sending envoys every time there is a major incident is not a good job. In the past three to five years, up to 200 Nigerians may have been killed in South Africa from blatant hate crimes or through other controversial circumstances. Yet, no diplomatic confrontation has ensued between Nigeria and South Africa about this. Ironically, the last time there was a ‘confrontation’, Nigeria picked a quarrel because South Africa was not giving visas to Nigerians.

    The other day, Femi Gbajabiamila, the Speaker of Nigeria’s House of Representatives, appeared to be talking tough when he canvassed for ending all ties with South Africa. That is no solution either. There is a need for circumspection. The two countries are locked at the hip in Africa like Siamese twins, as the two largest economies, feeding off each other. A firmer approach by Nigeria, mixed with fine diplomacy, is required to build a diplomatic relationship of consequences that can push payment of compensation to Nigerian victims. At this stage, also, there needs to be a truth and reconciliation committee of both governments where restitution can be made on Nigerian and South African sides.

    Geoffrey Onyeama, Nigeria’s foreign minister did make one good suggestion. A joint task force of South African and Nigerian law enforcement officers working together to address the question of crimes committed by Nigerians. While we can be patriotic, the country makes no excuses for the bad behaviour of some of its citizens. Thousands of Nigerians live in South Africa. One assumes that majority of that number are legitimately employed, and South Africa only stands to benefit by accepting Onyeama’s proposition of mutual benefit, if the country has nothing to hide.

    As for the fear of economic displacement and whatever scars of apartheid are contributing to the violence against foreigners in South Africa, there is no antidote apart from honest work and an open economy. This can be backed by legislative and policy guarantees. Above all, Africans have to work together if the continent is to ever find its place in the world.

  • Musical Chairs at NDDC

    Early last week, news of the reconstitution of the governing board of the Niger Delta Development Commission, NDDC, was afloat in the news media. The news was received with markedly different reactions from various quarters, as has been the trend with appointments of members of the board of the commission. Dr Pius Odubu and Bernard Okumagba were appointed as chairman and managing director respectively, alongside 14 others. The new board relieves the interim management team under Prof. Nelson Brambaifa, which was installed in January, after dissolution of the previous board.

    Although the modalities for the appointment and dissolution of the board of the commission is a matter of trite law contained in the NDDC Act of 2000 (as amended), there is always uproar and dissatisfaction whenever appointments are made, or dissolutions of the board are effected, by a sitting president. Besides the side comments and raised eyebrows about the new appointments, the NDDC has generally been soaked in controversies of all kinds since its establishment by the administration of former President Olusegun Obasanjo in 2000.

    By law, the tenure of every member of the governing board, save for ex-officio members, is a minimum term of four years and a maximum of eight years, based on the discretion of the president. Appointments to the board are also subject to senate confirmation. Since inception, the commission has had 11 managing directors, which includes at least two persons (Ibim Semenitari in 2016 and Prof. Brambaifa in January this year) who served in an acting capacity for over five months. Considering that anyone of them could have served eight straight years, irrespective of the occupant of Aso Rock, speaks to the instability visited on the commission by politics.

    Most of the scramble for appointments through the years has been centred on four key positions: the chairman’s role and three executive roles – that of the managing director/chief executive officer, executive director for projects, and executive director for finance and administration. While the appointment of the chairman is subject to a rotation formula embedded in section 4 of the NDDC Act (as amended), the appointments of the three executives and the rest of the board is not subject to such requirement.

    The appointments of chairmen of the board have largely followed the rotation stipulated by law, except in the appointment made by President Muhammadu Buhari last week – much to the chagrin of stakeholders, who fear that a bad precedent is being set. Not too much noise is being heard from Delta State, which has produced the all-important office of the managing director, even though its turn in the statutory rotation for the chairman’s role has been taken by Edo State’s Odubu.

    In practice, apart from an expectation in many quarters for a similar rotation formula to apply to the three executive positions, stakeholders from the Niger Delta region expect to make contributions or nominations about who their state reps should be on the board of the commission. Last week, the governors of the Niger Delta expressed their dissatisfaction with the new board constituted, particularly on the issue of the seeming disregard of section 4 of the NDDC Act (as amended) and they have signalled their desire to meet with the president about possible dissolution of the board.

    Even though their fears appear to be valid, based on the provisions of that Act, there is a belief amongst observers that there is a much more selfish element to their individual concerns. Sadly enough, there are much graver problems at the NDDC than the apparently illegal appointment of the board. Whilst the governors are pre-occupied with protecting the precious rotation formula in the NDDC, there are matters that should also occupy their minds in their meetings about the commission.

    It is shocking to note, that more than 60 years after the Willink Minority Commission Report in 1958, the massive underdevelopment of the Niger Delta is still a reality today. That report, amongst other vital recommendations, laid the groundwork for the creation of the predecessors to the NDDC, including the Oil Mineral Producing Areas Commission, OMPADEC, established in 1992 by the Ibrahim Babangida military regime.

    Like its predecessors, the NDDC has struggled under the weight of multiple divergent interests and the politicisation of its leadership structure for many years. Despite being the strongest body to have emerged from the regional experiment that began in 1960, in an attempt to accord the Niger Delta its due, many believe the NDDC has severely underachieved. Between late or incomplete allocations, mismanagement of funds, regulatory capture by opposing interests and the perennial tinkering with the management of the commission, the NDDC has never found sure footing.

    The major problem with the commission, as with most in Nigeria, is the ultra-politicisation of its processes. In a country where politics is a zero sum game that is tempered by stark corruption, the politically flavoured appointments at the NDDC have led to supremacy tussles that have nearly crippled the commission. The installation of governing boards containing many clashing interests that cannot work together is a consequence of appointing politicians into even the most sensitive roles in the commission. Of all the past managing directors of the commission, only one or two, like Timi Alaibe and Chibuzor Ugwoha, were technocrats and core professionals.

    A robust organisation with a commitment to its goals strives to have a stable team on ground to fashion out a blueprint or masterplan which will endure along the way to the promised land. At the NDDC, there is neither a team nor a master plan that has endured for more than three to four years at a time, if ever there was. Even when technically sound hands were brought in, the politicians did what they do best, by raising distractions and crying wolf unjustifiably until the negative energy generated forced the ‘obstacle’ out of office.

    While the bad eggs in the NDDC were fighting to outdo each other through misappropriations and the indiscriminate award of contracts for projects that have mostly been abandoned, fishing communities were losing their livelihood through oil spills, and the common Niger Delta indigene continued to live in poverty. The penury opened common people to influences that landed them into militancy by some vested interests. Even the creation of an entire ministry has not seen any marked difference in the impact of the allocations to the region from multiple sources.

    The problem of the Niger Delta now is not so much lack of allocation as it is the ineptitude of some of those that managed the resources. Although there are shining examples amongst the rotten bunch, it is a struggle to navigate through the treacherous rivers of corrupt egos, fed by creeks of otherwise valid ethnic entitlement. There is a need to get capable hands into sensitive positions at the NDDC, and in the wider Niger Delta Region, and insulate them from the polluting and bothersome influence of politics. There is an equally important need for stable leadership in the core operations of the NDDC. Somewhere in the NDDC, there exists a masterplan that needs to be upgraded and passed on in a steady succession, uninterrupted by outside influence.

    If the NDDC were a business concern, the game of musical chairs in its executive positions would be the symptom of an inherent problem with one or more aspects of its operations. Even though some lobbying is expected for key positions in a commission of NDDC’s nature, Niger Delta governors have to agree with Aso Rock to prioritise competence in appointments into key areas of management in the commission. Although the law seems to have been sidestepped in this case, it is an excellent opportunity to have frank discussions about the things that matter.

  • Beyond Wadume’s capture

    Last week, this column wrote about the urgency of the re-arrest of Hamisu Bala, the suspected kidnap kingpin who vanished into thin air after being freed from police custody by soldiers along the Ibi-Wukari road in Taraba State. Fortuitously, the police announced the capture of the runaway suspect on Tuesday, August 20, even before the piece landed on the streets. The development is commendable, and it is an honour to the memory of the slain members of the elite police crew who were gruesomely killed by soldiers while transporting the arrested suspect to Jalingo in Taraba state.

    The re-arrest of Alhaji Wadume, as the suspect is popularly known, is the first piece in a long line of actions that can restore some dignity to the police in this matter. It will also afford the army the opportunity to redeem itself. In the bigger picture of things, it currently seems like it was best that Wadume was recaptured by the police, rather than the army, who, as we were made to believe, were hot on the chase for Wadume. The next step is to find answers to the multiple questions that arose when this matter came to light on August 6.

    Already, it is being reported that Wadume is making a lot of revelations, including disclosure of details of his escapades with Balarabe Tijani, an army captain. Tijani appears to be central to Wadume’s apparent close relationship with security agents in Taraba and may have been a chief beneficiary of Wadume’s largesse in the state. Other details about Wadume’s involvement in political thuggery and alleged deals with top government functionaries in Taraba and beyond are also gaining media attention. News media report that Wadume is making all kinds of confessions, except to the one thing he was arrested for – kidnapping. In July of this year, the Taraba State House of Assembly passed a minimum of life imprisonment and maximum of death penalty for kidnappers.

    Whatever the truth is about the details of Wadume’s activities, the police have a job to do in investigating and managing the information coming out about his case. Unlike the articulate press release the police issued when its men where killed, the communication from police sources have been haphazard since his re-arrest, especially with an apparent media attack on the army still brewing in the police. This is demonstrated by the carefully prepared video of Wadume confessing to his rescue by soldiers, who allegedly cut through the restraints placed on him by the original police arrest team. It is the only section of his interrogation released by the police.

    While Nigerians sympathise with the police over the death of its men, it is important that the police is not now consumed with vendetta against the army. The police should concentrate on extracting actionable information from Wadume that can be used in combating the bigger issue of kidnapping that the police authorities are supposedly investigating. To maintain credibility in the on-going investigation, the police must also be transparent, or at least consistent, in its release of information concerning the case.

    For many Nigerians, the death of the policemen in Taraba does not wipe away decades of public distrust in the police itself. The apparent manipulative release of information about Wadume’s case already raises suspicion. This suspicion is reinforced by seeming attempts by the police to brush the possible involvement of its own officers under the rug. There have been reports of policemen who were on Wadume’s payroll as well. Then there is that one outstanding issue, about missing police incidence forms, which could prove police involvement at some level, if true.

    On the evidence of past police precedents, there is the possibility of Wadume’s arrest being monetised. Possibly implicated VIPs can be exploited in exchange for keeping the lid on their involvement.  Also, without prejudice to the police’s previously expressed fear of the army snuffing life out of Wadume, the more connections that are discovered between Wadume and powerful Nigerians, the greater danger to his life, even in police custody.

    The police has a long history of deaths in custody or unexplained disappearances. Countless cases of people dying of injuries in detention litter police records. As news reports have stated that Wadume sustained some injury in the hail of soldiers’ bullets on the police vehicle conveying him to Jalingo on August 6, there may be a window for another police abracadabra. Even though he appeared fine in the video released by the police, anything is possible.

    On June 8, 2005, the police opened fire on five traders and a friend of theirs, now known as the “Apo Six” at a checkpoint near Apo, Abuja, under controversial circumstances. In the cover up that followed, which included the subsequent killing of two survivors of the incident in police custody, Chief Superintendent Othman Abdulsalam, the Divisional Police Officer in charge of the area at the time, mysteriously vanished from his detention at police headquarters. That issue remains unresolved till today. Also, the sudden, inexplicable death of the prime suspect in the more recent Offa robbery, just last year, is another case in point. Since there is no telling which way Wadume’s case will go at this stage, there is a need for constant pressure to be applied on police leadership to ensure this case is pursued diligently.

    The fear expressed here comes from Wadume’s confidence before his arrest. He had worked his way into the heart of the people of Ibi in Taraba State through acts of generosity that increased his profile, rather than lowering it, unlike the typical criminal. He was bold enough to seek public office, and mix with leaders of his local community openly. Although his high profile is no proof of any strong connection with powerful Nigerians, it does speak of a person confident of his contacts in powerful places. If one assumes that level of confidence suggests contacts beyond an army captain and some men in the local police division, perhaps, one can be excused.

    Beyond Wadume’s criminality or otherwise, the authorities will also have to contend with the subtle class war that fuels kidnapping in Nigeria. In his local town, it is reported that Wadume is seen as a hero, even after his arrest. By stepping into government’s role to fill the void in rural empowerment in Ibi through provision of boreholes, motorcycles etc. Wadume commanded the loyalty of local boys. These boys may have contributed to the death of the policemen and may have (willingly) formed part of Wadume’s kidnapping network if the allegations against him are true. Working against a Robin Hood complex in the town and environs will make the investigation all the more difficult.

    Beyond the story of heroic criminals and villainous security agents, Wadume’s case exposes, once again, the roots of the plague of criminal activity across the country in recent times. There is a class war raging in Nigeria and the security agents appear to be compromised on both sides. The police, army and other government authorities have a major problem on their hands, especially when the stark social/economic divisions exist within their ranks too.

    Today, the focus should be on breaking the alleged kidnapping network of Wadume and his possible associates through diligent investigation. Reconciling police/army differences in this matter will go a long way, and it will involve openness and mutual respect between the two security agencies. After Wadume, the problem of widespread crime will still remain and it can only be conquered through honest collaboration.

    The greater problem of uneven distribution of economic resources is a problem that can only be solved when the country works for everyone. Although Nigeria has an unenviable reputation internationally, many of our problems come from the uneven distribution of wealth and the wide class divide. The Wadumes of this world and the 77 suspected fraudsters of Nigerian origin arrested by the authorities in the US recently are mere manifestations of that problem. Perhaps, it is time we table these issues and seek lasting solutions.

  • Finding Wadume

    Since the slow decline that began just before the turn of the decade starting in 2010, insecurity in Nigeria has reached alarming levels. With the fear that this decline has generated in the minds of Nigerians, the last thing the country needs is for two of its most important security forces to be at each other’s throats. What the country needs even less are the insinuations of complicity in the insecurity that has smeared the image of our armed forces and other security agencies for the past few years. Therefore, the recent report of the killing of some policemen by soldiers in Taraba State is a  most unwelcome news.

    According to reports, an Intelligence Response Team of the Police, deployed from the force headquarters in Abuja, apprehended a suspected kidnap kingpin, identified as one Hamisu Bala, on Tuesday, August 6. The team was transporting the restrained suspect to police command headquarters in Jalingo when they were gunned down by soldiers at a checkpoint near a village, along the Ibi-Wukari Road in Taraba State. Police sources claim that the police team had adequate means of identification. Army spokesmen, on the other hand, claimed that the policemen were mistaken for kidnappers.

    The picture of mistaken identity that should ordinarily emerge from the accounts of the different security agencies is however shattered by one vital detail. The suspect, Hamisu Bala, known locally in Taraba as Alhaji Wadume, is nowhere to be found. Four people are reported to have been killed in the shooting – three police officers and one civilian – but none of them is the suspected kidnap kingpin. An understandably furious police has released statements with not-so-veiled accusations directed at the army, asking one important question: where is Wadume?

    As at the time of writing, there is no answer to that question. After trading barbs with the police, recent moves by the army have shown, at least, a partial acknowledgement of possible wrongdoing by one or more of its officers. The army has advised its officers in all formations to avoid confrontation with aggrieved policemen in their places of deployment. Then there is the news of the investigation of six soldiers, including one captain, who are supposedly responsible for the death of the policemen. Most importantly, Defence Headquarters has issued a directive to the troops responsible, the 93 Battalion stationed in Taraba, to produce Wadume.

    Since the shooting, the police has not let off on its accusations and insinuations of a possible cover-up by the army, in light of what it paints as connivance between soldiers and the kidnap kingpin, who is thought to be on the run. Particularly, the police has expressed fear that the suspected kidnap kingpin may be killed by soldiers if they get to him first. This open display of distrust between the two security forces is a new low in the rivalry and often confrontational relationship that exists between security agencies in Nigeria.

    Eye-witness accounts of the incident, in some reports, had it that the policemen were seen trying to evade a group of Wadume loyalists who were on their heels, which caused the team to speed past the checkpoint before the soldiers opened fire on them. Two of the policemen were said to have died in the initial barrage of bullets, while the third, in his panicked fumbling for his Identity Card, was reportedly shot at point black range.

    Under normal circumstances, because the police team was travelling in an unmarked vehicle, and because of apparent misleading reports to soldiers by Wadume supporters about his being kidnapped, maybe one could have forgiven the soldiers their mistake. But the mistake theory was impeached by the evidence in the video that circulated online, where the soldiers showed no remorse about the revelation that the victims could have, in fact, been policemen. That same lack of remorse was displayed by army spokesmen afterwards.

    Evidence of close relationship between the army captain now facing investigation and the suspected kidnapper has also come to light. It may be too early to speculate about the nature of that relationship, but the chips are falling into place and the picture emerging is appalling. The army may be unable to explain this one away. It causes one to wonder what other ‘mistakes’ may have been committed in the past. The fact that Wadume was let go at the scene, even after the apparent discovery that the men killed could have been policemen, also raises eyebrows. The competing theories now are that of army complicity or lack of procedural intelligence and good professional instinct by the soldiers.

    While we are on the subject of complicity and professional integrity, it is important to note that no matter how much the police want to vilify the army for the death of the policemen in this case, the two security agencies are alike in their seeming lack of professional integrity. Confidence in our security forces is low, and when public distrust is compounded by inter-agency suspicion, incidents like this are the results we will get.

    The appropriate authorities must act, and act quickly, in this fast-closing window of opportunity, to salvage whatever vestige of confidence is left in the nation’s security apparatus. Once the window of opportunity for a strong recovery closes, only the window of doubt, in any outcome, will remain. The longer this matter stretches, the more sceptical Nigerians will become, even if Wadume is found later. An issue of this magnitude, that is shaping out to become a scandal for the army, must be handled decisively. For this to happen, there must be a clear line of authority through which instructions must pass unhindered.

    This column has written repeatedly about the lack of a clear line of authority in military operations. The army, for example, has the Chief of Army Staff, COAS, Chief of Defence Staff, CDS, Minister of Defence and National Security Adviser, NSA, to contend with. The line connecting these officials is blurry, and their interests have been known to compete, rather than converge in the hierarchy of authority. This results in divided loyalty, which travels down within the ranks of the military and that makes the job that must be done in a  case like this difficult.

    If there are indeed sections of the army that have been compromised, how can the ranks be cleansed when the public does not even know who, besides the Commander-in Chief of the armed forces, to hold responsible for any such lapse? With discipline in the military generally at an all time low, strict orders need to fly down the ranks. Lately, we have had news of women being plucked out of the street to be raped by soldiers, indiscriminate killings, beatings and many things that occurred under the old military era.

    The impunity with which some Nigerians have claimed they have been treated at the hands of security agents generally has now been visited on members of that class. The death of the officers is a tragedy and the hearts of Nigerians go to their relatives who have to pick up the pieces. But we all hope that the shame of this episode helps security agents to have an awakening about their engagement in the field and how it is seen by the public.

    Perhaps, Wadume will be caught and bigger revelations will be made; perhaps not. What is important is for the facts that have come out not to be ignored or eased out of public consciousness like many things in the past have. If Wadume really is a kidnap kingpin, then his recapture does more than throw a spanner into the wheel of kidnappers in Nigeria. For the army, its integrity in this case hinges on finding, and delivering Wadume. For the police, finding Wadume is a vindication and a win in a tough time in its public relations. For Nigerians, finding Wadume means hope for an end to debilitating insecurity.

  • Sowore: Dousing the tension

    It is no longer news that Omoyele Sowore, presidential candidate of the African Action Congress, AAC, at the 2019 elections, has been ‘taken’ by the Department of State Services, DSS. The publisher of Sahara Reporters (an online publication) was picked up in the early hours of Saturday, August 3, by the state agents. Some would say he had it coming, following his attempts to engineer a nationwide protest, tagged #RevolutionNow, against the ‘status quo’. Unfortunately for Sowore, part of the status quo is a democratically elected government led by President Muhammadu Buhari. The DSS deemed his rhetoric, bordering on regime change, as treasonable.

    The good news for Sowore is that his movement, if one may call it that, is garnering the attention he may have desired. The bad news is that in recent times, arrests of this nature by the DSS have turned out to be protracted detentions, usually fought in the courts, in the media and on the streets. One cannot tell whether Sowore was prepared for this eventuality, even if one can assume so. What he may not have been prepared for, however, is the likelihood of a charge of treason being successfully proven against him in court.

    On that legal matter, Femi Falana, his lawyer, has expressed confidence that a charge of treason cannot rightly be brought against his client in the first instance. Nonetheless, with his freedom now in the balance, Sowore has placed himself in the same corner that Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the Indigenous Peoples of Biafra, IPOB, and the last person publicly accused of treason, once found himself. Kanu went through the motions, with the protracted detention and bitter struggle in court, and in the media, until he was finally granted bail on strict conditions. Ironically, his subsequent jumping of bail in spectacular fashion may bear strongly on Sowore’s case if this goes to court on similar charges.

    While some Nigerians may be caught up on the legality or otherwise of Sowore’s arrest and detention, others have not failed to see a pattern forming. It looks very much like the age-old practice of the state clamping down on dissent. Besides Kanu, who may have paved the way for his own arrest, scores of journalists, protesters and social media influencers have been detained at one time or the other since 2015.

    What looks like a history of arrest of critics, when combined with the seemingly excessive clampdown on Kanu’s IPOB and the handling of the Shiite matter, projects high-handedness as a feature of this administration. This is the more reason why the government ought to have applied caution in handling the issue of Sowore and his #RevolutionNow. Sowore is a journalist and an activist who was a candidate at the last elections. This makes him an established member of the opposition. To handle his case without caution, therefore, would be a grave miscalculation.

    There is a saying that two wrongs do not make a right. The manner of Sowore’s arrest may be deemed by the international community to be an excessive use of power. In the first instance, he does not have the capacity or capability to cripple the government or to unseat the current president from the Villa. As such, it was obvious that the government really went into panic mode over the “threat” of revolution. The journalists-beating frenzy that the police embarked upon after the DSS “captured” Sowore, also made matters worse. The journalists were only doing their jobs, but the police went after them, flogged, kicked and tear-gassed them before publicly dragging some of them on the floor and bundling them into their vans in the full glare of cameras.

    This action by the DSS and the police was what really heightened tension all over the country. The police and DSS should have handled the whole thing differently. For instance, the DSS could have advised the government to invite Sowore for a dialogue. At the dialogue, they could have asked him what the problem really was. As a citizen of Nigeria, Sowore has the right to carry out any civic responsibility, including protest within the limits of the law. If he actually decided to lead a revolution, the government or its agents should have engaged him to find out why he is so embittered and glean what things he wants to change.

    The government, and/or its agents, would have then been in a position to explain things to him. But to keep quiet and hunt him down, while the police go out to beat and disgrace journalists doing their jobs is too bad for the image of the country. The fact is that there has always been tension in the country as a result of things like the alleged herdsmen terrorism and the worrisome killings all over the place. The apparent inability of government to check these incessant killings in the country has really put the government in bad light both within and outside the country.

    The situation will further be accentuated by whatever ill-treatment that is meted out to Sowore at this point. The only way out is for the government to avoid another protracted detention by releasing Sowore and allowing him to breathe the air of freedom. This way, the tension created by his arrest, as well as the high handedness of the police, would be sufficiently doused. Needless to say, the international community is watching. For this reason, the narrative building around the Buhari administration needs to be carefully managed.

    On the flip side, for a loser in an election to embark on a campaign tagged “revolution”, while the main contender who lost out is pursuing legal action in court, may have been asking for trouble. The threat of civil disobedience and rioting in a revolution can be a serious problem for any sitting government around the world. The wave of uprisings in the Arab Spring that coursed through North Africa and the Middle East not too long ago has put governments across the world, especially in Africa, on edge.

    By global standards, the governments of about 15 countries that were caught up in the Arab Spring were deemed as repressive, mostly made up of long-ruling “strong men” like Hosni Mubarak of Egypt. Repression often begins with the muzzling of free speech and curtailing of civil liberties. It does not take much for a regime to fall into this unenviable category, especially when press freedom becomes an issue and opposition is met with brute force. Nigeria is not such a place at this time, but if the high-handed tactics of state agents continue, the government’s image may become difficult to manage.

    It is now left for President Buhari to ensure that the agents of his government manage their response to problems in a manner that conforms with globally accepted rules of engagement in every situation. Sowore is a small issue in the wide outlay of security threats facing the country at this time and nothing will be gained from making him another big problem.

    In proceeding with Sowore’s case, the government should be well minded of what the law allows and balance that with the pulse of the country at the moment. Already, the DSS has obtained an order that allows it to keep Sowore detained for 45 days, based on legal provisions in the Administration of Criminal Justice Act. If there is no real need to keep him, releasing him before the expiration of that order will be a credit to the government.

    Nigerians must also show good faith with the government. There are multiple areas of concern at this time and mounting more pressure on the government’s already strained resources will benefit no one. People are understandably feeling the pains of insecurity and the other ills in society right now. It is our civic responsibility to remain peaceful, even in protest, and not allow emotions propel us all into even more problems.

  • ‘Candies’ for nominees

    Politics in Nigeria is like a game of chess, where the rush and excitement is thick at the beginning of a new game, as experienced players make brisk and familiar moves to open their game. The action soon slows down as the game progresses, and more studied moves may be required. Perhaps, one can liken this to the euphoria of election results and the (re-)inauguration of the winner’s government. In other words, the frenzy that greeted the 2019 elections may have piped down in the minds of Nigerians, but the excitement in government circles is still palpable. ‘Chess moves’ have been made since the elections, and those moves continue even as I write.

    Nigerians are now eagerly waiting for their new ministers. And mind you, the time or ‘season’ of ministerial appointments is like a call for bazaar. Although President Muhammadu Buhari said that he would choose people that he is familiar with, the game remains the same. Based on the president’s word and his seeming eagerness to choose those he can really work with, it is assumed that the 43 names sent out for senate screening recently are names of people he can really vouch for. But this may not be so. Before many (or all) of the names finally made it to the list, a lot of water may have passed under the bridge.

    My eye opener came when a former governor, now an elder statesman, told me last weekend that those close to the president may have ‘grilled’ the nominees to know if they will tow their lines if they make it to the list. At least, he said, that is the way things have always been done. Such grilling, according to him, could include some inducements. In addition, the nominees may be made to pledge to play ball even after getting the nod.

    According to the ex-governor, when the names are finally submitted to the senate, the nominees are exposed to the second part of the racket. This time, some unofficial agents could spring up to ‘advise’ that certain things should be set aside for the screening proper. This, as they would claim, would go to those that would be involved in the final screening. Other committees and principal officers of the senate who will confirm their eligibility or otherwise may not also be left out.

    While all the racketeering is going-on, the president may be made to believe that he has made the right choice of cabinet members without the least suspicion that he has only been made to indirectly support the candidates of other people. This is why the president’s comment about “people familiar to him” may be a leap. Also, with the structure of Nigerian politics, names usually come in from every state, picked by the state governor or some other more favoured power brokers.

    The elder statesman who provided this expose particularly narrated how he was urged to become an ambassador some years back. He said when he considered his age and all that, he declined. However, rather than lose the slot, he requested that he should be allowed to nominate somebody whom he thought was capable and knowledgeable enough to occupy such a post. He finally nominated one brilliant school principal that he knew very well. He said that he was shocked when the man came back to inform him that he was asked to cough out a frightening sum of money for screening.

    The principal, being a conservative man, told his nominator that he sat down to calculate what he would make in the four years that he would be an ambassador and discovered that his emoluments during the period would be a far-cry from what was requested from him for ‘screening’. The man simply decided to continue as principal rather than break his neck running around looking for upfront kickbacks in order to be made an ambassador. That is the trend in the appointment of senior officials in Nigeria.

    Although ministers are chosen from all states, the same system probably applies, either directly to the nominees or to those backing them. Either way, ‘something’ may have changed hands at some point in the process, and the godfather, will only join the growing list of vested interests that sometimes hinder a minister or other appointee from carrying out his/her duty judiciously.

    Besides the possible racket that may have gone on behind the scenes, the evidence before the eyes of the public is not encouraging either. Over half of the 43 ministerial nominees that were recently screened by the senate were asked to “bow and go”. Where exactly are they going to? However, this trend, which has been described as a “tradition”, did not begin with the 9th Senate. One senator claimed that the house had resolved to automatically confirm all ex-lawmakers, ex-governors, women and, apparently, those who have been vouched for by one senator or the other, without any regard to their competence or otherwise.

    I specifically recall seeing a clip recorded during this last senate screening, where a senator from Enugu State laboured so hard to sell a nominee to his colleagues. He suddenly launched into a recanting of the similarity between his family and that of the ministerial nominee. He jokingly reeled out real or made-up traditional titles of the nominee, in a bid to convince his colleagues to pass him without any scrutiny. This, he did, despite the fact that Nigerians still cannot precisely point out what policy the nominee initiated in the past four years as a minister. Other senators openly and shamelessly sought the same treatment for nominees considered to be “party men” or the “president’s man”.

    Even when some lawmakers tried to pose questions to the nominees, others in their rank complained audibly about being tired. They simply said “let him/her bow and go, so we can finish”. These antics do not really portray our lawmakers as those who know what their job is or ones who are ready to take it serious. Only nominees like Babatunde Fashola, and some others, were put to the test with questions that suggest that the senators can find their rhythm if they so choose. Such is the nature of screening in this clime.

    Perhaps the possibility of racketeering behind the scenes and the reality of a rubber stamp senate somehow explain why we have not always gotten it right at that level. Some names, that gladly did not make it back on the list of nominees, especially prove this point. Even some that did make the list makes one wonder if the racketeering is not, indeed, going on right under Mr President’s nose.

    For instance, how can one justify the addition of people who are known to have cases with the anti-graft agencies hanging over their heads? Some of the nominees have had controversies of all kinds trailing them through their political lives. Some are also dogged by allegations of using calculated membership of the ruling party to shield themselves against proper prosecution. In law, it is said that it is not only important for justice to be done, but also for it to be seen to have been done. With what the public can see, it does not seem like justice was done to the recent ministerial appointments and subsequent confirmation.

    The list of ministers, especially the returning ones, shows that not much has changed. And whatever the chess game was in 2015, the same tactics are being employed again in 2019. This means that the results we have had these past four years will most likely be the same. While the screening lasted, it was clear that what the lawmakers did was to give each nominee a piece of candy to lick, instead of really grilling them hard. May God save Nigeria!