The Nation Newspaper

Category: Dele Agekameh

  • The VP debate

    Last week, Channels Television hosted a debate featuring five candidates running for the office of vice-president in the coming elections in 2019. Although the debate did not involve the frontrunners of the five parties that participated, it showcased the important, but slow, shift in our political space towards more issue-centric electioneering. After that debate, doubts about 2019 were further diminished; it might be another two-horse race after all.

    Prof. Yemi Osinbajo of the All Progressives Congress, APC, and former governor Peter Obi of the People’s Democratic Party, PDP, out-performed the other three candidates. Although one cannot tell how much their experience in governance or the stature of their political parties influenced their performance, it was clear that they handled the questions posed to them better. The contribution of the others seemed to lack the depth that a more thorough preparation could have yielded or the soundness that experience may have provided.

    So as not to seem unduly critical of the other candidates, it is necessary to state that the general quality of the debate seemed below par, in comparison with political debates that one has had the opportunity to see in other, more advanced, democracies. It was obvious that it was untested ground in presidential campaigning in Nigeria. However, it is a welcome development, significant in so many ways and deserving of applause nonetheless.

    The real debate appeared to be between the PDP and APC candidates who sparked loud reactions from the live audience, much to the chagrin of the moderator. For all the talk about the PDP and APC being two sides of the same coin, Obi and Osinbajo nearly made one forget the deep (and largely unhealthy) interconnection between the two parties. Obi, being a numbers guy, and former banker, launched into a barrage of figures and statistics every time he was prompted to make a contribution, to show what, in his estimation, was evidence of a failed government. In contrast, Osinbajo, the incumbent VP and legal practitioner, constantly reeled out a list of current projects and programmes with his trademark eloquence, to defend the administration and the direction it was headed.

    Umma Getso, VP candidate for the Young Progressives Party, YPP, gave a mildly coherent performance, with the highest points of her contribution being a proposed N1 trillion venture capital fund for young Nigerians and small scale businesses and the promise of unprecedented female representation in a potential Moghalu/Getso government. Khadijah Abdullahi Iya of the Alliance for New Nigeria, ANN, made a remarkable suggestion about giving local governments far larger power than they currently have through allocating 20% of proceeds from resources within their domain to local government authorities. Ganiyu Galadima of the Allied Congress Party of Nigeria, ACPN, was especially vocal in his criticism of the current fuel subsidy regime and the problem of unemployment in the country.

    Gathering the views of the various candidates, it is safe to say that there was agreement on the fact that more and more Nigerians today are in search of jobs or financial intervention for businesses. The argument hovered around what policies can adequately address the development of the economy from what Obi called a “shallow economy”, keeping in mind the problem of infrastructure deficit and widespread unemployment. While Osinbajo expressed confidence in the impact of current programmes, others were unsurprisingly of a different mind. Opinions also differed as to the cause of our current situation.

    Now that we have heard the VP hopefuls say their piece, one hopes that people can draw informed conclusions from the display of the candidates. The choice of a running mate is perhaps the first test of a presidential candidate’s judgement. The frontrunner must begin to show leadership through the way he/she navigates the pressure or influences involved in picking a well grounded running mate. As such, the candidates that stood for the debate last Friday are directly or indirectly representative of the decision making of the frontrunner and the kind of government he/she wishes to run.

    With the above in mind, the impression that the PDP and APC candidates came out on top in the debate should not lead one to a hasty conclusion. However, whatever failures or successes of the VP candidates in the debate, it will undoubtedly affect perceptions about the party candidates as a unit, at least in the mind of discerning Nigerians that pay close attention to detail. There were attempts to play on emotion in that debate, mostly by the weaker performers on the night. In a country where emotions are stirred easily because of our attachment to things other than national unity, there is fear that the implication of the outcome of the debate may be lost on the greater majority in society.

    In pushing for issue-based campaigns, there is need to prepare the electorates for objective consideration of issues, which one imagines will be no mean feat in Nigeria. For instance, one of the more sensitive topics was about fuel subsidies. Prof. Osinbajo rightly said that the question every Nigerian needs to consider is whether they are ready to accept at least a N40 increase in the pump price today. It suggests that to remove subsidy will be to endure higher petrol prices in the short term at least. Many Nigerians want fuel subsidy removed and yet want lower petrol prices today. This desire is based on the impression that “subsidy is a scam”, which was repeated by one candidate on the night. That view is bound to resonate with more people in a country like ours.

    The lack of preparation of some of the candidates perhaps betrayed the irony of their views on one of the very first questions of the debate, which was whether there is truth to the notion that the vice president is merely a place holder for the president. If some of the presidential candidates of the parties that participated had stood in place of their deputies, the debate may have been richer, with more depth. Although some may argue that the reverse may have been the case with some of the other contestants, one may have to suspend those thoughts until the planned presidential debate on January 19 takes place. For the one we have witnessed, there was too much “confidence in the plan of the presidential candidate” and less of outlining those plans. If one did not know better, it would seem like just what a “place holder” vice president would say.

    The current administration has exposed Nigerians to just how important the office of the vice president is, outside the statutorily assigned functions of the office. To agree to a vote in a ticket with a weak number two is unsound reasoning, no matter how gifted the frontrunner may seem. That is why one must laud the organisers of the debate for giving Nigerians an opportunity to meet some of the candidates who may have been unknown to many before the debate. Some have already said that debates do not win elections, but one hopes that they have enough impact on voter decisions in the drive for issues-based politics in Nigeria.

    Relatively unknown candidates stand to gain more through a thorough performance in political debates, especially when televised nationwide as was done last week. As we saw, the familiar faces of Osinbajo and Obi stole the day and the reaction of the crowd showed as much. What this means for the search for a third force is that we may need to wait longer for that dawn to come upon us. It is believed that the candidates for president now have their work cut out for them come January. One solace is that the debates can only get better from here on out, assuming that they become a regular feature in our political space.

  • This season of strikes

    The months before general elections are always hectic for politicians, their staffers and other associated groups or individuals. However, nobody in this class bears more pressure than current political office holders, especially when there is a plan to re-contest their positions. In this respect, President Muhammadu Buhari’s administration has been in the thick of it over the past few months, coming under pressure from multiple fronts in the scramble to utilize the political leverage of impending elections.

    The unions have been at the forefront of the barrage of demands that have been targeted at Aso Rock in the past few months. On the subject of unions in Nigeria, there are three major groups that periodically dominate headlines, because of their frequent use of strike action as an instrument to force dialogue and negotiation with the government. These groups are the labour and trade unions, under the general guidance of the Nigeria Labour Congress, NLC, and the Trade Union Congress, TUC; the education sector unions, with the most notable being the Academic Staff Union of Universities, ASUU; and the many unions of the oil and gas industry, with their notoriety for painfully timed strikes.

    Without hinting at any political motive or calculation by these different groups, there have been demands made, with accompanying strike action and/or the threat of strike action by all of these groups in the past few weeks. On September 26, the general labour unions embarked on a short-lived strike over their demand for a new minimum wage of N50,000, an improvement on the present N18,000. It took the threat of a second strike for the government to confirm the resolution made for a minimum wage of N30,000, after negotiations with the union. Despite this, the resolution still has more hurdles to scale before it is made effective and there are no guarantees for similar action in the near future. Meanwhile, little has been said about how this will be funded.

    On cue from the relative success of the labour action, ASUU has also made good on its threats and warnings by going on a nationwide strike of its own that began on November 4. ASUU’s demands are related to the implementation of government agreements on educational reform and other measures that had been canvassed since 2009. ASUU also opposes the plans for an education bank, in its belief that it is not feasible in the Nigerian system. Despite several meetings with the government, the strike continues, one month on, and the body language of the union shows that it is prepared to continue with the strike indefinitely.

    Perhaps, most undesirable at this time is the proposed plan by some unions in the downstream petroleum sector to shut down their activities. Nigerians have been the victims of this kind of ill-timed action on many occasions, denting holiday plans of many through the scarcity of premium motor spirit, PMS, or skyrocketing costs of transport that accompanies such scarcity. This time, Depot and Petroleum Products Marketing Association, DAPPMA, is driving the strike plans and mounting pressure on the government to make payment of subsidy arrears that oil marketers have been after for some time. Although other unions in the industry have claimed not to be in support of strike action, the potential impact on Nigerians is still cause for concern, both for the citizenry and for the government.

    In discussing the timing of these actions by the different groups, it is difficult to ignore the political connotations at a time so close to elections. One imagines that the heads of these unions would have contemplated the contribution of their action to public perception of the present administration. In the same vein, the government’s representatives will be constrained to factor in the implications of non-agreement with the unions at this time, especially in respect to potential public lash out against the government. Thus, the intended or unintended shade of impending elections on these different negotiations may lead to agreements on unrealistic terms, which will come back to haunt the country.

    The question really is whether these unions are being responsible in their demands and the timing of the demands. Although many of their claims and premises are reasonable in their merit, there is a need to manage expectations based on the current economic realities on ground. When labour forced the government to make a commitment to increase the minimum wage to N30,000, not a few analysts and commentators pointed out the difficulty the government would have implementing the resolution. Whereas, there is also the subject of state governments whose economic lot differ widely, and many of which are failing to meet their commitments based on the current N18,000 minimum wage.

    In order to forestall a situation where government makes commitments it knows it cannot fulfil, the unions and other pressure groups that are actively working to obtain financial and other commitments from the government have to be more responsible in their negotiations and use of strike action to force the hand of government. Although global oil prices have appreciated in comparison to preceding years, government expenditure is rising just as fast, if not faster. The bloated civil service gulps in large amounts, just as the present form of what many still call oil subsidy.

    Right now, there is a scramble by pressure groups like the different unions to obtain government commitment, even while the government is scrambling to fulfil multiple obligations in time for elections in 2019. The atmosphere is ripe for demands of all kinds and there may be consequences in the long run, either for this administration in its second term or for a successor who would have to deal with the agreements that the government is entering into right now. Even now, the commitments and missteps of past administrations still dog those in power now.

    Unions are pressure groups, and the classic role of pressure groups is to influence government policy and decision-making, in line with current realities, needs and possibilities. They should not adopt a narrow view from the lens of their particular industry or area of focus, but are responsible for a holistic contemplation of circumstances and the development of useful and helpful solutions that helps the government to develop plans that cater for their sectional needs. Pressure groups are expected to contribute to governance, and not just to make endless demands birthed in the microcosm of their sectional needs.

    If the oil marketers, for instance, can appreciate the difficulty the government faces in meeting N800 billion in subsidy debts, while trying to ensure unbroken supply, service foreign debts and meet other recurrent (and rising) expenses, then maybe they may take more measured tones in their demands and work with the government on practical solutions. During negotiations, more emphasis should be placed on sustaining any agreements in the long run. Admittedly, many of the problems that led to these demands, or the demands themselves, are long running. However, this should not lead to hasty decisions taken under the shadow of elections.

    The problem in government has always been how to balance the strain of current pressing issues against the itch of past commitments. Oil prices, which are vital to our economy, crashed to very low levels a few years ago, and the country has only just climbed out of a recession. This created now-pending commitments and fresh problems that require delicate handling in balancing the related issues. Where current realities present a crisis of prioritisation, it is always best to focus on the future.

    This is, therefore, a call to ASUU, NLC, TUC and all the other unions currently engaged in negotiations with the government. Like has been said earlier, many of the claims and demands made appear to be well-intentioned, but significant effort at the dialogue table should be expended on avoiding further problems in the future. We want better salaries, schools and cheaper fuel, but it all begins with helping the government to make better decisions.

  • Metele: Never again!

    The news of the November 18, attack by Boko Haram insurgents on 157 Task Force Battalion of the Nigeria Army, stationed in Metele, Borno State, was hard to swallow by all well-meaning Nigerians. The offensive by the terrorist group was devastating, not only for the frighteningly high number of casualties, but also for the implications of the audacious attack and its demoralising effect on troops who are fighting on that front.  The attack calls to question the entire military campaign against the insurgents and our preparedness for the changing nature of the fight in the Northeast.

    Despite public attitude towards the army in light of recent occurrences outside the Northeast, the death of a single Nigerian soldier in the defence of the country is a national tragedy. Although there is some controversy as to the actual number of troops lost in the bloody sacking of the military base in Metele, reported accounts of survivors  and other media sources suggest that the death toll may be close to a hundred. Military service is one of the highest commitments an individual can make to his/her country. This column salutes our fallen heroes in Metele and elsewhere who have paid the highest price to defend our country.

    At this time, it is clear that the best tribute to the fallen troops and honour for the ones still in the trenches, is for the government to ensure, to the utmost extent of its ability, that this occurrence is never repeated. Although the outrage of Metele in November has attracted international headlines, reports show that more than nine military positions had been attacked by a well-equipped Boko Haram in the preceding four months, with many military and civilian casualties. The bloody Sunday in Metele was followed by more fatalities when troops returned to retrieve the bodies of their slain colleagues. With military bases suffering repeated attacks, there is an urgent need to go back to the drawing board.

    No mistake should be made about it; the insurgency in the Northeast has since degenerated into full scale war. It is unbelievable to remember how it all began with misguided and over-zealous fundamentalists under the guidance of Mohammed Yusuf in Maiduguri. Today, the territorial integrity of Nigeria is under threat from fundamentalists, backed by fighters from across sub-Saharan Africa and beyond, boasting a mysterious pipeline for funds and supplies that now rival the equipment of our military. The same mistake of mismanaging the evolution of the group that was made in 2009 must not be repeated.  The soft target terrorists have now grown into invaders of military bases and urgent action must be taken at this point.

    The age of massive military casualty from open fighting in warfare has come to an end. Modern warfare is heavy on intelligence and strategy, with the route of least casualty always the most tactical. This requires adequate funding, and more importantly, military spending, in areas that ensure the loss of the least number of men. According to Lieutenant General Tukur Yusuf Buratai, Chief of Army Staff, the $1 billion from the Excess Crude Account that was approved for military spending in the fight against Boko Haram is still tied up in red tape at the Central Bank. One expects quick resolution of this impasse, especially when the news media is littered with reports of troops lamenting the lack of weapons that can match Boko Haram fire-power.

    More investment needs to be made into equipment for aerial warfare. With an enemy like Boko Haram that feels safe in strongholds which are likely not easily accessible, the acquisition and deployment of more drones and fighter jets for reconnaissance and tactical missions will greatly reduce casualties. The strength of the formidable US Army today is in its aerial arsenal, and we have seen this being used with precision in its fight against terror across the world.

    The argument in military circles is that the army should engage the air force to drop bombs on suspected Boko Haram strongholds before the army advances on those places. Mention is still regularly made to the first attempt by the army to enter Sambisa Forest in the early days of the war, when the army had to beat a fast retreat under serious fire from the insurgents. Improved aerial power will also deflate the confidence of the insurgents in openly engaging any targets. It is reported that the insurgents arrived Metele in about 20 trucks. The trucks cannot hide from a military jet or drone, if quickly scrambled sometime after the attack began.

    Besides the issues surrounding the efficient use of funds in ensuring that proper equipment reaches those on the frontline, there are questions concerning the coordination of the war effort against the insurgents.  At least from the outside, it does not seem like there is enough synergy between the efforts of the different armed forces in the fight. There may be gaps in the command structure between the different armed forces of Nigeria and in their relations with regional partners in the fight, like the Chadians who may not be doing any better.

    On Wednesday, March 5, 2014, this column suggested the formation of a war cabinet to direct the efforts of the fight against Boko Haram. The call came after lives were lost in coordinated attacks on soft targets, including schools in Yobe and Adamawa, and a twin bomb explosion that tore through the heart of Maiduguri in Borno State. The call for a war cabinet is all the more necessary now that the soft targets are being exchanged for core military positions by the insurgents in offensive operations that leave the country stunned.

    Four days after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attack on the World Trade Center in the United States, President George W. Bush held a meeting of a war cabinet that had been created in response to the attack. Part of the cabinet included the equivalent of Nigeria’s Minister of Defence, National Security Adviser, Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Minister of Finance, Director of the National Intelligence Agency, Director of the Department of State Services and others. The president himself and his vice president were members of the cabinet.

    A war cabinet is an age-long approach adopted in statecraft during times of national security distress, like we are currently facing, and its goals are usually clear and unambiguous. The government does not have to adopt verbatim the example given above, but some concerted effort through apportioning primary responsibility for the coordination of all efforts in the fight against Boko Haram is urgently needed. For one, it lets us all know where blame should be lodged, and it puts the presiding authority on its toes, be it a dedicated cabinet level minister or a dedicated mini-cabinet for the purpose.

    With such an introduction, the service chiefs can have the rallying point of a dedicated supervisory authority, like a war cabinet, where issues like funding, purchase and distribution of equipment can always be ironed out seamlessly and accountably. It is high time we started getting our strategy right against the Boko Haram insurgents by giving a response commensurate to the threat posed by the group. The political interference that seems to have plagued the efforts against Boko Haram can also be minimized through the creation of this authority, with the understanding of what lies at stake in terms of the lives of valiant troops and the innocent people of the Northeast.

    Attacks on military bases may be indicative of a shift in the strategy of the insurgents. Actively engaging the military in offensive attacks, rather than defending a position may suggest an expansionist drive aimed at regaining lost grounds or even widening the fight past the Northeast. When our ordinarily brave troops routinely take to their heels at the sight of the insurgents, the signs are not encouraging, not for our sovereignty nor for our dedication to the efforts against the insurgents. It is time for a shift in our strategy too, one that honours our men on the frontlines.

  • Apathy in Nigeria’s democracy

    Democracy, as a system of government, is rooted in the idea of mass participation of people in the electoral process.  However, mass participation requires mass interest in political outcomes, and the erroneous supposition has always been that this interest is enough to ensure participation. In Nigeria and around the world, we are now learning that whilst people remain interested in political outcomes, this interest does not always lead to participation during elections.

    In Nigeria, the reasons for voter apathy are no mystery. The stress of the process of voter registration and voting in elections, lack of faith in the process or security of the process, and general lack of confidence in government, are amongst the leading reasons people do not participate in the electoral process. In earlier years, there was evidence of outright fabrication of election results, and the credibility of official voter records was highly suspect. That was the era that witnessed the entry of thousands of names like “Michael Jackson”, “Nelson Mandela” and others in the voter register.

    The biggest participants in Nigeria’s elections are the section of society that bear most of the brunt of the failure of government and society. They are the low-income earners, the unemployed, the uneducated, unskilled workers, rural dwellers, and deviants. They form the most oppressed and vulnerable section of society. The paradox is not subtle. Although one expects this ‘voting majority’ to make better decisions because of their social state, they are indeed their own tyrants, through the choices they make during elections. These choices sometimes include active participation in electoral malpractice and, more rampant in recent times, outright selling of votes.

    For context, a look at the electoral data in the United States of America (US) shows that the most comfortable members of US society are the most involved politically. Voters in the US tend to be older, wealthier and more educated, and more women voters have taken part in every presidential election since 1980. One could say that this section of US society understand the need to protect their interests and investments through political participation and active engagement in the electoral process. If this is true, why do the corresponding demographic in Nigeria not participate more in the electoral process?

    As recently as 2009, national attention was drawn to the existence of a section of the Jibu tribe who live up the mountains around Gashaka Local Government Area of Taraba State, away from civilisation. Some missionaries claimed to have ‘discovered’ the people in their remote dwellings, with only fresh leaves covering their genitals, similar to the Koma hill-dwellers of Adamawa.  With no government presence, people like the Jibu are the only ones with a real claim to lack of interest in the electoral process in this country, because of their willful or inadvertent ignorance of modern structures. Yet, the most successful and educated members of our society have chosen to align their political interest with the blissfully ignorant mountain dwellers.

    The problems of the electoral process that deter the more exposed or comfortable members of society are heightened by politicians of questionable morals and character, in league with vulnerable individuals who assist them to pervert the process. Our democratic system is therefore caught in a loop where perversion of the process discourages large participation, and the lower turn-out of voters facilitates the manipulation of the system.

    The reform of the electoral process carried out by Attahiru Jega, former head of the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, has made the manipulation of electoral data in Nigeria more difficult, thereby forcing the manipulators to corruptly engage the electorate directly on poll day, as has been reported in recent elections. There is progress here somehow, as the corrupt money is no longer being offered to INEC officials, adding a bit more credibility to the process from that end.

    In a country with large numbers of the citizenry living below the international poverty threshold, there will be difficulty stopping the unholy transaction at the polling units. Faced with the offer of amounts that exceed their daily income, poorer people will be tempted to sell their votes to the agents of corruption. With a section of society not showing up at the polls at all and another section in serious danger of selling their voting rights for porridge, political outcomes will likely continue to be poor at all levels.

    Voter apathy in Nigeria is not a product of lack of interest in the political process or political outcomes. Rather, it is a product of orchestrated disruption by the political class to make the electoral process inconvenient. This plan spreads into the bureaucratic choke of voter registration, violence at the polls and the volatility of party politics. All these work together to exclude the enlightened voter from participation, while the ropes of religious and ethnic sentiments continue to tug at the gullible, even within the ranks of the intelligentsia.

    The journey to apathy is thus an incredibly short one. One can arrive there after meeting a discouraging process of voter registration or after hearing news of election violence. It could also happen during the surprisingly difficult process of obtaining a membership card for a political party. The odds are stacked against political participation in every angle, so much that only the very determined or desperate can withstand the trying obstacles. In a country where one’s determination is tested in everything, the resulting apathy is hardly surprising.

    Whether through determination or desperation, 84.2 million Nigerians have now registered to vote, according to INEC. This figure rises from 69.7 million registered voters in 2015. Average voter turn-out in Nigerian elections since 1999 is 49.7% of registered voters, and this does not take into account the suspected falsification of electoral information and other maladies in previous years. The authorities now need to embark on a sensitization campaign to encourage more registered voters to turn up for elections in 2019.

    To achieve this aim, there will be questions to be answered about security. By and large, this is still one of the biggest deterrents to voter turn-out during elections. In other climes, elections are conducted in the course of a normal day (or number of days), where people do not necessarily have their movement hampered. The Nigerian experience already creates tension, where there is official and unofficial restriction of movement except to and from polling centres.

    Exploring the possibilities of easing the sense of insecurity during elections is important in the short term, especially in the less volatile areas, in so far as corresponding security arrangements and exigencies will allow for this. In the medium term, making voter registration and the process of actual voting easier and faster will go a long way. This will involve efficient logistics in the movement of materials, punctuality of officials, further incorporation of relevant technology, and establishment of more polling units and registration centres. In the long term, however, more transparency in the membership and running of political parties, with regulations that allow for a level playing field will encourage participation and more enthusiasm in the political process.

    To achieve all these, there is need for a re-orientation of citizens on their importance as electorates and their role in the processes of government, not only in elections. Until we find a common purpose that cuts across religion, ethnicity and social class, there is little chance of changing the mindset of electorates. We all need a narrative of common ownership of the country and the processes of government that may perhaps aid in our decision making at the polls.

    One of the greatest dangers of the democratic system is the tyranny of the majority. In Nigeria, whether the tyrants are the ‘voting majority’ who go to the polls to make the decisions that bind the rest of the citizenry or the greater ‘non-voting majority’ that steer clear of the electoral process altogether, one cannot say for certain.  Although some may have a different view of who the ‘tyrant majority’ is, what is for sure is that the country needs a change of course in political and electoral matters to escape the tyranny of the majority.

  • Tales of a capital

    Recently, a foreign aid worker who had been working in the Northeast visited Abuja for the first time. He was taken aback by his experience in the capital city. He expressed how, for him, it was like visiting a different country. Knowing our country so well, one immediately understands what the foreigner meant. The dichotomy between Nigeria’s urban centres and the rural areas is sharp, and the difference cannot be clearer than in the city centre of Abuja, within the Federal Capital Territory, FCT.

    Compared to other metropolitan areas of Nigeria like Lagos, Port Harcourt and Kano, Abuja maintains a kind of serenity at its heart that attracts high net-worth individuals and the assumed middle class Nigerians who can afford to obtain property within the metropolis. Statistics from the United Nations show that the city grew by 139.7% between 2000 and 2010, making it one of the fastest growing cities in the world. With a population currently estimated to be around 2.4 million, available data also shows that more people across all social classes are opting for the relative calm of the city. This influx of people has led to the emergence of satellite towns and shanty communities such as are seen in Lagos.

    In earlier years, Abuja was thought of as a city for civil servants and top government officials that manage the bureaucracy of the federal government. Even today, ‘Abuja money’ is still synonymous with ‘government money’, but there is a growing variation of commercial activities that accompanies the growing population of Abuja. The ‘government money’ in circulation helps sustain a thriving real estate sector and infrastructural development. This in turn enables other associated businesses, like the quarries located in and around the city, to thrive. With thriving commerce, relatively good roads and generally calmer heads, it is not surprising that more people want to relocate to the capital.

    Focusing on the people, there are the government bigwigs and other heavy weights, who can be found in Asokoro and Maitama, and in some parts of Wuse II and Apo. The mansions erected in these areas, especially in Asokoro, rival the homes of the rich anywhere in the world. Curiously, and maybe unsurprising, many of the seizures of property that have been effected by the anti-graft agencies in their fight against corrupt government officials have been made in these areas. The display of wealth is stupendous, and these regularly empty mansions require a large number of support staff who are a significant part of the growing population of the city. Sadly, security agents of the state must be counted as part of these “support staff”.

    In many places in the highbrow areas, like Aso Drive, in Asokoro, one cannot just idle around on the street for more than a minute. Before you know it, an assortment of secret service agents and mobile policemen stationed or patrolling the streets will promptly appear to interrogate, with readiness to make an arrest if the response is unconvincing. The tight security is a far cry from that in the outskirts of the city and in other less prestigious areas, where petty crime, abductions and armed robbery are rife. It is a case of the poor robbing the poor, while the money bags sit in comfort and relative safety in their well-guarded mansions.

    The people considered to be middle class can be found in Wuse, Utako, Garki, Gwarimpa and other parts of Apo. This class of people are either civil servants close to the top or business people who have found a reliable “connection” to the money bags and government functionaries, enough to sustain their family in the pricey capital. They are the proprietors of businesses that cater to the wealthy or contractors that have perfected the fine art of “access”, especially to government projects and clientele. Where they are not civil servants, they are people whose repeated trips from their original locations have realized enough returns to purchase a permanent or second home in Abuja.

    The satellite towns, like Kubwa in the outskirts of the city, are home to a mixture of these “middle class” Nigerians and others below this class who come in from as far as neighbouring Kaduna and Nassarawa or outskirts like Gwagwalada, every day. The Mararaba/Nyanya/Karu residents and people from other satellite towns, outskirts and neighbouring states make up over 60 percent of workers that troop into the city centre every day. The little traffic situations that develop in the city usually occurs during the mass movement from and to these places early in the morning and at close of business. In Mararaba/Nyanya for instance, one may be reminded of the ‘madness’ of Lagos, as the area is densely populated, as one can imagine. Boko Haram’s limited foray into the capital in the past was largely concentrated in just this kind of places, with the considerably lesser security.

    The true nature of Abuja as “no man’s land” is aptly demonstrated at the close of the year, during the Christmas and New Year preparation and festivities. The city experiences a mass exodus of people who leave the capital to join their families elsewhere in Nigeria. The not so choked streets are near empty during this period, and businesses often feel the strain of reduced patronage during this time. Even the usually busy nightlife at weekends is reduced to a few trickles of people who, for one reason or the other, remain in the capital during this period. In this sense, the allure of Abuja is no match for the pull of family ties and kinship which the capital city cannot boast of, even amongst Northerners.

    It is safe to say that the foreign aid worker referred to in the beginning of this piece never ventured outside the city centre, into the shanty towns that dot the capital or the dense outskirts that house over 60% of the workforce. The foreign aid worker also may have not been forced to use the government provided transportation, similar to the BRT buses of Lagos – referred to as “El-Rufai buses – which are insufficient, and are packed like the famous Molues of Lagos. The private Kabu kabu cars and the associated touts they attract, with their unions and self-designed rules, fill the transportation void in most parts of the city. Slowly, the Lagos vibe is coming to Abuja, and if the population continues to increase the way it is, we may have Lagos-style traffic gridlocks in the city in less than two decades. The signs are already there.

    Many drivers now on the roads of Abuja relocated from places like Lagos, and the Lagos mentality is gradually seeping into Abuja roads. Other people, skilled and unskilled labour alike, are also making the move. Abuja is expanding and word is going round. The growth of the city spells opportunity, and opportunity in Nigeria cannot be reserved for the “privileged”. David Mark, former senate president, famously made the remark that “Abuja is not for everybody”, in reference to complaints by the mass of low level workers who grumbled about the cost of living in the city. It seems Nigerians disagree with the senator, with the continuing inflow of people into the capital. The surging population may soon begin to tell on the wealthy few, who are still insulated in their ivory towers in Asokoro, except the Federal Capital Territory Administration, FCTA, develops a plan to manage the inevitable population growth.

    The beauty of Abuja is a constant image of what can be, in all 36 states, with the availability of funding and careful management. Even though the capital is not a complete project as yet, it is miles beyond most Nigerian cities and the attempt to close the door of opportunity with high living standards is failing so far, precisely because of that disparity. All Nigerians want to live a better life, and until the rural communities catch up, the rural to urban migration will continue, especially amongst the teeming youth of this country.

  • 2019: Talking about issues

    Nigeria is heading into general elections in a few months’ time and political posturing has begun for the race ahead. Most of the states of the federation will also be choosing their governors and federal legislators in 2019. While there has been enough discourse about political parties and their geo-political formations, one fears that not enough attention is being paid to the actual issues that should be driving debate in election season.

    President Muhammadu Buhari of the All Progressives Congress, APC, and former Vice President Atiku Abubakar of the People’s Democratic Party, PDP, are the main contenders in the coming election. The president is seen as a tough anti-corruption crusader, and many of his policies and activities in his administration have mirrored this perception. However, members of the opposition have alleged that his crusade is lopsided. On the other hand, Atiku is running on the promise of a better economy, leveraging on his substantial investments in the country and his business know-how.

    The major areas of importance in a civilized democracy are education, health-care, security, and the economy. Many areas of concern are directly or indirectly tied to these, which underscores the importance of getting the right policies in place to positively impact these aspects of the nation’s existence. The power problem in Nigeria, for instance, affects all these four sectors and, conversely, progress in the power sector is directly affected by decline or otherwise in at least two of them. Even our ethnic and tribal fixation in this country may contribute more to insecurity and weak economy, for instance, than we may all realise.

    For our intending leaders to be fit to lead Nigeria out of the rot of past years, they need to be able to make the link between our current problems and these issues, with a clear path on how to free us of our disgraceful burden. It is not unimportant that an aspirant needs to have the required qualifications stipulated by law before he/she can contest elections. It is not unimportant that an aspirant ought to be of unimpeachable character, with good and clear record of dealings, especially in relation to past public service. More important, though, are the ideas they propose for taking the country forward. We ought to engage candidates on the cardinal issues when we have the opportunity to do so, and not spend the whole time debating their standing as individuals and candidates.

    In the education sector, there is clearly a lot to be done. State governments have more to do in terms of providing basic education in every state. With recent revelations showing that many states have not been accessing funds provided through the federally funded Universal Basic Education Commission, UBEC, the priority placed on education in the country becomes clear. There is absolutely no reason for a state government to leave those funds unattended. True, the funds require counterpart funding to be released, but the need for educating Nigerians should be at the top of the priority list for state and federal governments, especially given the literacy levels and quality of education in the country.

    Health-care in the country also leaves a lot to be desired. Recently in the news, the National Health Insurance Scheme, NHIS, has been very popular, because of tensions between the executive secretary and the board of the agency, which led to the suspension of the former. Meanwhile, critical infrastructure is still lacking in state and federal health establishments and the poorest members of our society struggle for any access to healthcare at all. The solutions to these problems should be of paramount interest to voters, instead of controversy about what region Atiku decided to pick his running mate or whose permission he sought to make his decision.

    The question of security is particularly perplexing. It is a problem that has outlived many administrations, across party lines, since the return to democratic rule. The army is basically policing the country in many regions, and this did not begin with the Buhari administration. Security in this country has been tenuous at best for far too long, with ethno-religious tensions fanning the flames of insecurity in the most volatile parts of the country.

    Until community leaders and others start to see how ethno-religious tension affects security and the local economy, they may continue to embark on peace brokering missions that only serve as unsustainable band aids in the long run. It takes the eloquence and sincerity of a good politician to outline the connection between the tension, security and economic development. It also takes ingenuity to find a lasting solution to address the issues. What are our candidates saying about security, beyond making empty promises?

    The most difficult area to manage of all the major sectors that have been outlined here is the economy. Whereas adequate funding and proper management of resources in the education, healthcare and security sector is bound to lead to noticeable improvement in the medium to long term, the economy is subject to other influences which may not be controllable by the government. Still, where the economy of a country is well grounded, it may be able to withstand some of the shocks that have sent us into recession in the past.

    A mature economy is supported by strength in every sector. Any candidate who promises a strong economy without a good plan for power, diversification and improving essential services is not ready for the task ahead. Our economy is referred to as the largest in Africa, mainly based on the size of the market and theoretical indices that do not really reflect the situation on the ground. The value of the naira is a lasting reminder of where we truly are in relation to many of our neighbours. Further driving exports and attracting more investment is achievable when the country is at peace and its people comfortable.

    Nigerians have been very vocal about the power problem, as it is impossible to ignore in our everyday life. Engaging candidates on the plan for more coverage and better supply nationwide is paramount. Another issue that has generated public debate is the issue of restructuring. On this issue, there is no guarantee that the clamouring is coming from an informed position, on the part of the people and even on the part of some politicians. The restructuring campaign in most cases stems from ethnic motivations, which makes it a dangerous subject.

    The incessant security challenges and the inadequacies of a centrally controlled police force may, for instance, present a good case for reform of the police structure, by giving states the control of their own security. This presents potential problems of its own, but that is why we need to engage sound and informed candidates about their thoughts on the issue. Many arguments for geo-political restructuring of the country may lead to even more conflict if not reasoned out properly.

    As in every case, the position of the incumbent is most vulnerable, because the opposition has a wealth of very current data on performance of the incumbent to criticise and evaluate, but always with the suggestion that the opposition can do better. The onus is not only on candidates to present their position and plans concerning pressing issues, but the people also have the responsibility of balancing the different viewpoints and strategies, taking into cognizance the capacity of the candidates as members of the current administration or the opposition.

    In a recent televised exchange aired on Channels Television between Festus Keyamo and Segun Sowunmi, spokesmen for the two main political parties and candidates, both men did a shoddy job of presenting their party’s plans for tackling the various issues posed. The debate, or interview, escalated into a shouting match, with name-calling and blame-trading. That exchange is representative of the attitude of many of the political parties and their candidates, and one hopes that we hear more about plans and solutions in future interviews or debates.

  • The Shiites’ conundrum

    For a period of about five days towards the end of the month of October, Nigerian security forces were involved in clashes with members of the Islamic Movement of Nigeria (IMN). The Nigerian army later emerged as the principal antagonists in media reports of the series of clashes that began with a face-off between the group and some soldiers in the Zuba area of Abuja on October 27.

    IMN claimed that the soldiers had threatened a peaceful procession of the group before opening fire on its members, in a bid to break up the procession. The army on the other hand claimed that its men were on a mission transporting ammunition to a military base in Kaduna, when they were attacked by the group in Zuba, forcing them to use live rounds to protect their cargo.

    Unsurprisingly, the soldiers were heavily criticized after the deaths recorded in that first incident. Those deaths later led to further clashes, days after, near the Nyanya axis of Abuja, where even more deaths may have occurred, and in the Wuse 2 area, right in the city centre. The major criticism against the army has been for opening fire on protesters who were “only” hurling rocks at its men, instead of seeking other less lethal methods of dispersing the crowd or maintaining orderliness in each of these cases.

    In judging how blame should be apportioned in the series of clashes, there is need to refer to history, beginning with the history of the soldiers and members of the majorly Shiite IMN. The head of the group is Sheikh El-Zakzaky, a popular Shia cleric, who is currently being held by the Department for State Security, DSS. He was arrested during the bloody aftermath of the alleged obstruction by the IMN of a convoy transporting the head of the army, General Tukur Buratai in 2015. In that episode, it is alleged (and since upheld by a judicial panel) that the army killed over 300 members of the group, who were later buried in mass graves. El-Zakzaky has also not been released, despite various court orders directing his release from custody.

    It is rumoured that resentment against the group may have continued to brew in the army after the defiant act against the army chief, while the members of the group have continued to harbour a deep dislike for the military, for the death of its members and the continued detention of El-Zakzaky. The IMN have held numerous protests in the past demanding the release of their leader, some of which have led to heavy crackdowns by security forces. In short, the relationship between the group and security forces in general has been one of very high tension, and those clashes at the end of October are symptomatic of deeper issues that could spiral out of control if left unresolved.

    As always, history is the best guide in the emerging tale of the Shiites’ ordeal. Many years ago, in Maiduguri, an Islamic scholar under the tutelage of Sheikh Mahmood Ja’afar, a popular Salafist Islamic cleric, broke away from Ja’afar’s spiritual guidance as he developed ideologies that ran contrary to that of his teacher. He garnered some following with his eloquence and later held a public debate against his former teacher, who held more conservative opinions about the spread of sharia. Sheikh Ja’afar was shot dead in a mosque a year after that debate, and some other clerics and others lost their lives in similar manner.

    That scholar was Mohammed Yusuf, widely believed to be the founder of the Boko Haram sect. Members of Yusuf’s sect had gradually renounced the influence of all secular authority in their affairs, with rumoured backing of elements in the Borno State government. They had carried on independently and in defiance of all regulations outside their strict sharia code long before the government clamped down on the sect in 2009, killing Yusuf in the process. Today, events in Maiduguri and the northeast generally still tell the tale of that error in government judgment.

    El-Zakzakky is thought to have developed ideologies modelled after Shiite principles that led to the Iranian Islamic revolution in 1979. He maintains close ties to Iran that, some fear, may go beyond mere scholarly enthusiasm. Notably, in its drive to export revolutionary thinking against secular authority outside its borders, Iran is said to have introduced Hezbollah into Lebanon, a move which has altered the politics of Lebanon permanently. Given this background and El-Zakzaky’s public rants against the establishment, it is fairly understandable that the government may be jittery about the IMN.

    In the past, people resident in Kaduna have reported on the hostile nature of the IMN members to any interference during their processions and gatherings, often carried out in public places. With the IMN under El-Zakzakky already showing signs of disregard for constituted authority, some were not surprised about their altercation with the army in 2015. The reaction of the army to that event was highly heavy handed and deserves the condemnation it has generated, but the old issues surrounding El-Zakzaky and his followers have not gone away because of the lack of restraint by the army then, and they are still present after October.

    It seems that El-Zakzaky had been on the radar of the security services before that unfortunate altercation with the army in 2015 and so provided the perfect opportunity to bring him in. The security fears that El-Zakzaky’s IMN appears to pose may have given the security services the confidence to continue to hold El-Zakzaky even after court orders for his release have been issued. It brings back the old debate about the interplay of the law with issues of national security. The president has been criticized for suggesting that national security exigencies take precedence over the rule of law. The truth is that this is a delicate matter that requires a delicate solution.

    The killing of members of the IMN in October and at every other time certainly is not delicate. The storming of security barricades and use of Molotov cocktails by protesting IMN members is equally indelicate. Hurling rocks at military men carrying live ammunition and unprepared for anti-riot missions is also not respectful of the lives of those men, who were only doing their jobs, or the lives of others going about their innocent activities who may have been killed or injured during those clashes.

    Just as the security forces and the protesting IMN members seem to be at an impasse about how best to proceed, Nigerians have been finely divided in their reactions to the series of clashes involving security forces and the IMN. That is just what overt state action leads to – division of people and radicalization of otherwise moderates. It is not inconceivable for there to be protesters who may have become hostile because a family member was part of the first 300 killed in Kaduna.

    Religious division has caused Nigeria dearly in all its years of existence, especially in the recent past, and we are still reeling from the consequences of ill-conceived government action along those lines. As has been noted by domestic and international analysts, Nigeria cannot afford another insurgency of any form, and that is why it is so crucial for the government and security forces to get it right this time. El-Zakzakky needs to get his day in court and this cannot happen if the government continues to disregard the authority of the courts. Neglecting the courts is tantamount to summary, extra-judicial judgment and punishment.

    If IMN’s ideologies under El-Zakzaky pose a threat to national security, only through the outlining of facts leading to such conclusion in a judicial setting can get the people behind the government. Otherwise, the continued life-threatening irresponsibility of the security forces and the IMN protesters will lead to deep divisions that may finally be exploited by selfish foreign interests for their own gain. The government, and Nigerians as a whole, must be mindful of the lessons of history and adopt measured response to this delicate matter.

  • The NHIS minefield

    The imbroglio surrounding the purported suspension of Prof. Usman Yusuf, the executive secretary of the National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS), has generated different shades of controversy within and outside the agency. There is hard-line obstinacy by the parties to the matter, with the governing board of the NHIS insisting on its power to suspend Yusuf, while Yusuf maintains that he is only answerable to the president.

    In the background of the clash between Yusuf and the board of the NHIS are the Health Maintenance Organisations (HMOs) and some staff of the NHIS who want Yusuf gone. Since Yusuf was appointed by the Buhari administration in July 2016, there has been palpable crisis within the NHIS, as it became apparent that it would not be business as usual. Yusuf has personally alleged wide scale corruption at the NHIS, touching on the HMOs, during the years preceding his appointment and he promised to return administrative and financial integrity to the healthcare insurance in Nigeria.

    Yusuf however landed in a pot of his own controversy when NHIS top officials accused him of fraud and mismanagement, including corruption in the handling of about N919 million without due process, and other matters. The Minister of Health, Prof Isaac Adewole, ordered his suspension in June 2017, to clear way for proper investigation of the allegations. However, President Buhari lifted the suspension in February and this, after rumours of tension between Yusuf and the minister of health had seeped into public knowledge.

    The board of the NHIS announced its decision to suspend Yusuf again on October 18, and some of the staff of the NHIS, especially at the Abuja headquarters, openly jubilated the decision and even went further to form themselves into a barricade to prevent Yusuf from gaining access to his office. Yusuf sought the protection of policemen to enter the premises, in protest of the board decision and in defiance of the revolting staff members – a step that has generated separate controversy. The question now is whether Yusuf is a reformer and crusader for positive change or a new player in the field of public corruption that does not play well with others.

    The experience of civil service in Nigeria generally does not cast the revolting staff members of the NHIS in a positive light. They want Nigerians to believe that whatever steps have been taken by them and the board has been in the interest of Nigerians. Interestingly, the HMOs who threatened to challenge, in court, the decision of the president to reinstate the suspended Yusuf earlier in the year, also claimed to be working in the interest of Nigerians.

    Usually, in the civil service, when people bandy together in this manner, it is in protection of their own interests, which, like our politicians, is paramount. In the different claims levied against Yusuf, he is said to be “insubordinate” and to have run the NHIS with an “iron hand” since he took office. In Nigeria, this could be a euphemism for blocking avenues for cash leakage or administrative profiteering. The involvement of the HMOs and their campaign against Yusuf also deepens suspicion of the motivations behind the move against him, especially as Yusuf has not been shy about his criticism of the HMOs or their relevance in the healthcare sector.

    There is data to show that the HMOs have underachieved in all the years the NHIS has engaged them, as they are the recipients of billions of naira from the government which ought to be transmitted to health service providers. It was revealed in hearings before the House of Representatives that the HMOs have only used a fraction of these funds in the manner stipulated, for varying reasons, while the huge excess was not being remitted back to the NHIS.

    In the Nigerian civil service that has been the principal enabler of corruption in public office, racketeering is rife and mafias are often found around major destinations of government funds, for which the NHIS is an example. Neither the staff of the NHIS, who are revolting nor the HMOs have addressed the ghost enrolees of the scheme that have been uncovered and blocked in Yusuf’s time at the helm. Instead, it seems like a campaign of calumny is being orchestrated against Yusuf for daring to shake the NHIS/HMO table of corruption. One suspects that this is why the presidency, and the House of Representatives at a point, have backed Yusuf’s reinstatement.

    In any case, it is not for the staff of the NHIS to handle their dissatisfaction in the manner they did on Monday, October 21. There are processes to be followed for every act in government. The staff of NHIS have no power to suspend or restrict the movement of the executive secretary. Already, there is open controversy as to whether or not the board of the NHIS has this power, as leading legal minds have agreed that the NHIS Act does not expressly confer this power on the board. It would have been sensible for the aggrieved staff to urge the board to seek legal determination rather than subject themselves to suspicion by their overt act that led Yusuf to seek police protection.

    In alleging lack of due process in Yusuf’s management of finance and affairs of the NHIS, one expects that the board would be mindful of following due process in taking any action. Where the process is unclear, and especially when their action is being contested as in this case, it is expected that the board will seek legal advice and redress. Whether backed by the board or not, the physical attempt to restrain Yusuf introduces an element of bias and probable selfish interest and malice into what ought to be a public interest matter.

    Nigerians should not be bamboozled every time someone comes up with stories involving huge sums of money to accuse a government official of corruption, especially when the claim is arising from an organized group of civil servants. Like our politicians, we should not readily take the word of civil servants who have been the greatest collaborators in the history of corruption in Nigeria.

    No part of this opinion is exonerating Yusuf from possible culpability or guilt in any of the accusations made against him. This is a common sense take on the reaction of Nigerian civil servants to a change in leadership which apparently has not been favourable to them, for whatever reasons. One ought to apply caution in a case like this. The EFCC is in possession of a petition against Yusuf, and all pressure ought to be exerted on this agency and the courts to obtain any outcome, not through public campaigns of calumny, blame trading and deflections that have been seen in this case. It does not speak well of our public service or of the understanding of due process that the board and aggrieved staff of the NHIS suggest they have. Where allegations are made in a matter involving the civil service, the smart thing is never to assume that there are any saints.

    The interest of Nigerians is not best served by a board somewhere or a group of civil servants getting their way, it is best served when the processes of government are carried out as prescribed by law. Where the law is sketchy, the law courts should be consulted. Anything outside of this is against the interest of Nigerians, especially when a few people stand to gain more from an outcome. In the end, better management of this issue is a matter of public interest.

  • Nigeria’s underbelly of violence

    Last week, in Kaduna, communal clashes claimed about 55 lives in Kajuru Local Government Area, leading to the intervention of the military and declaration of a 24 hour curfew in Kasuwan Magani town and environs. Before Kaduna, it was Jos; before Jos it was Ebonyi, Benue, Zamfara, Adamawa and so on, for not so different reasons. It seems that there is a brewing culture of violence within the fabric of our society that we are not paying enough attention to, and we need to explore the underlying causes.

    According to science (and even modern religion), early men established dominance by force. Power was obtained through the force of conquest, just as it obtains in the animal kingdom. Somewhere down the line, men began to see the futility of endless fighting and instead, resorted to more subtle ways of settling differences. But the tendency for violence never left us, so laws were established, and an elaborate system of education was developed in most human communities to promote civility.

    Long before the missionaries and colonialists came to these parts, there existed education systems, though largely informal, and the system of laws in the different communities and kingdoms that characterised this part of West Africa, which worked well for our society at the time. When the west and others came, they introduced new systems of education, laws and religion that soon shifted our old ways to the background. It was not so much a consolidation as it was an overhaul.

    When the missionaries combined formal education, as we now know it, and religion, it seemed like they had found the missing bridge for modern civic education, but schools do not run themselves. Many missionary schools have now closed down or deteriorated badly and their replacements have become too expensive for many to attend. As western education became more expensive to obtain, a challenge of inclusivity developed.

    Today, churches and mosques still reach even the furthermost parts of Nigeria, but they are not being built together with schools in most cases. The civility that religion alone preaches is based on rigid doctrines and absolute obeisance to a supreme being that outranks all authority. The doctrines have to be interpreted, and the devil, in this case, is in the interpretation. Religion can be easily corrupted, either by the ministers of the doctrine or in the mind of the individual.

    The rule of law on the other hand, which is promoted and taught in formal education, is a continually evolving concept that adapts to the changing values of society, and as such, is not so rigid. Formal education promotes independent and reasoned thought, but many still cannot afford and/or do not have access to formal education.

    If we do the math, it becomes clear that a whole section of society cannot get formal education, and there is little or nothing to fall back on, for civic education. This section of society comprises of the poorest of the poor, who can be found in the remote towns and villages or within the cracks in the urban centers, trying to hustle a living. Most of the communal clashes we have had in Nigeria have occurred in just these places. And it is no coincidence. The Kaduna killings last week is said to have begun when two wheel barrow pushers in a popular market got into an argument. They just happened to be of different religions, and the rest is history, as they say.

    Current statistics released by World Bank maintains that about 77% of Nigerians live in poverty. That is a very dangerous statistic.  Viewed from another perspective, it means that 77% of Nigerians are likely to either have no formal/civic education or are more likely to respond to undesirable primal instincts because of lack, regardless of any education they might have had.

    Many states are developing policies for free education that ensures that every child at least gets basic education. However, within the worst hit sections of society, some families cannot afford to send their children to even receive this free education, as every member of the family is bringing something to the table, even children as young as seven years in some cases. School age children are working on farms, hawking on streets or in rich households as stewards, contributing their bit to their families.

    These families are the vulnerable section of society, prone to manipulation and violent outbursts that the more ‘cultured’ members of society may be able to resist. The tripod of poverty, illiteracy and unfettered religious influence has cost the country more lives than we may realise, since poor people are more likely to be radicalized and exploited by others to carry out inhumane acts of terror and wickedness. In Nigeria, education does not guarantee freedom from poverty, but it may guarantee an improved thought process and heightened civic awareness.

    If we want the violence to stop, and zero recruits for Boko Haram or any other violent militias, we need to educate our people and raise them out of poverty. Education also needs to be of good quality, with careful planning and syllabus, devised based on progressive thinking rather than with religious and ethnic motivations. It is totally feasible to protect our heritage and religious traditions through education, while still ensuring that wider societal values and cultural integration are promoted above all.

    One is aware that there are educated rascals littered in every sector of society. The National Assembly, for instance, has proved that inadequate education or just sheer individual rascality can lead to violence just as hunger and deprivation can. However, there is a preponderance of evidence pointing to the fact that the less privileged section is the hot bed of unrest, in Nigeria and everywhere else in the world. This is why the numbers of our poor is a national emergency.

    In truth, there have been steps taken to tackle this problem in this administration and in others before it. A problem of this magnitude is difficult to ignore or solve, and that is why restorative approaches and forward thinking preventive approaches need to go hand in hand to reduce the poverty margin as quickly as possible. Just as there are instincts for violence in us all, no matter how carefully we suppress it, there is capacity for civility in everyone too, under the right circumstances.

    Our schools should be revamped with much needed budgetary allocation and career educators put on the boards of institutions. More social and economic intervention projects like the N-Power scheme and the cash transfer programme (trader money) should be introduced to reduce the impact of poverty on those found below the poverty line, until the fruits of other long-term projects like better technical colleges and the drive for an export driven economy can materialise.

    Respect for the law is also tied to welfare. People tend to be more civil in a system that guarantees their welfare. This is an area that extremists exploit, as they have been known to provide for the families of their recruits and take care of their other financial needs. The government cannot legislate people into making good decisions, but it can help ensure that the benefits of maintaining a peaceful status quo outweigh the rewards of chaos.

    Illiteracy about changing laws and land rights may drive a cattle herder into a farmer’s land. Illiteracy about the effects of climate change and the prospect of economic ruin may drive the farmer to overreact. Thus, a bloody cycle begins. Perhaps, if there was a social trust to compensate any of the parties that have suffered loss in this scenario, calmer heads could have prevailed.

    International and domestic organisations have since linked poverty to some of the violence we see. We should pay attention to their research and consider their recommendations. Political solutions can only carry us as far as the next administration in some cases. The government should employ social and other lasting solutions that will put places like Jos, Kaduna and the other hotbeds of violence at peace for good.

  • Beneath Ganduje’s Babaringa

    A shameful video surfaced online recently, purportedly showing the governor of a key northern state engaging in a disgraceful act of corruption. The individual in the video bears the unmistakable features of Abdullahi Ganduje, Kano State governor. In the video, he is seen receiving bundle after bundle of well packed United States dollars, smiling contentedly, while stashing a large portion of the cash somewhere beneath his babanriga, before depositing the rest in a brown envelope. The audio was cut off and no one else can be seen, except the hand of at least one person handing the smiling governor the bales of cash.

    Ganduje has denied the video, stating through a spokesperson that he believes that the video was “cloned” (whatever that means), while threatening to sue the outlet that published the video online. However, other trusted journalists and experts who were privileged to view the full video, with audio, have since examined the video and have authenticated it. Not only that, the video is said to be part of a series of about 11 similar videos recorded over a period of time, in a sting operation that lasted about two years and saw the governor receive a combined sum of five million dollars.

    It is now left for the Nigerian system – which, here, includes the general public, civil society, judicial authorities and, most importantly at this point, the Kano State House of Assembly – to decide how to respond to this moral challenge. The Ganduje video calls to mind the Farouk Lawan bribery scandal, involving oil magnate Femi Otedola, where both men claimed to have masterminded the “sting” operation that led to the video. Most members of the general public do not now know the status of that case, as it has been passed from court to court since prosecution of the matter began.

    From the emerging story in this Ganduje video, the secret camera that recorded the incident had been planted on a government contractor who had been forced to pay a percentage of a project sum to Governor Ganduje. The contractor had reportedly been fed up with the back payments and had agreed with journalists to plant a recording device on his person.

    Now, the question of whether the back story emerging from the leaked video is true or not is inconsequential. There is absolutely no reason for a sitting governor to handle the amount of cash seen in that video, for whatever reason, based on money laundering regulations and mere moral obligations of a law abiding citizen. In the least, the governor, or his alleged clone, need to be put to question and a credible explanation should be provided for the video, with punishment applied where due.

    It does not escape the mind that this video is coming out in the thick of election season. Whether or not its release has been engineered by the political foes of the governor is also inconsequential at this point. Where corruption is exposed, any consequential political gains by specific people pales in comparison to the significance of public knowledge and official action on the matter.

    Too often, we have been at this juncture, with audio and video tapes of governors ordering electoral malpractice, demanding bribes and even conspiring to murder, and these allegations have been denied by the purported perpetrators and discountenanced by the general public and government authorities after brief publicity. Those episodes have been resigned to the back bench of memory, invoked only by political foes at sensitive times, to little or no effect. That Ganduje has not tendered his resignation by now is evidence of the cancer of corruption that has taken over our national consciousness, assuming that the video is really authentic.

    Beyond Ganduje and the many videos, audios and other evidence of official misconduct that have emerged and been buried, we need to have a frank discussion amongst ourselves on the limits of our tolerance and where the moral line falls in Nigeria, and particularly, in public office. Many investors come to this country with their cash vaults ready to disburse bribes on demand, not because it is the way they do business elsewhere, but because there is a sense and understanding that this is how things work in Nigeria. Leaders like Ganduje preach the fight against corruption in public and turn around to sink the country into disrepute in private, through the kind of backroom dealing that was seen in the video.

    When David Cameron, former British Prime Minister, said in a private conversation that Nigeria is fantastically corrupt, there was uproar from many quarters, including in government, amongst the very individuals that orchestrate the fantastic corruption that plagues us in the international community. The horror of this corruption is the lack of finesse employed in its conduct, and the insult on our intelligence adopted in denials when these cases manage to come out in the open.

    If Ganduje were an ordinary citizen, there is actionable evidence for an arrest and cursory questioning in the least. In this case, however, he is covered by executive immunity, which means that action cannot be taken against him until such a time as the Kano State House of Assembly has invoked their right to impeach the governor or until he serves out his tenure, which is more likely to happen this close to general elections next year. In the interim, if Ganduje insists on his innocence, the people deserve a more robust response and denial than the flimsy ‘cloning’ excuse that remains the only official response from the governor’s reps.

    Like one presidential hopeful said in a recent interview, the fight against corruption needs to go beyond punitive and reactionary measures against perpetrators alone. Corruption exists in many forms that are still openly being practiced in this government, knowingly and unknowingly. Any favour or reward for a process of government that has not been prescribed in the rule books is corruption, even to the extent of monetization of access to the president and other key government officials. If we do not understand corruption, we cannot eradicate it or bring it to the bare minimum level that is required for a just society.

    One would expect that the Kano State House of Assembly has already instituted a panel of enquiry to investigate the video, which may lead to a summons of the governor to answer questions before the house. That is the next logical step for a mature democracy where the rule of law is not encumbered by the politics of allegiance and party alliances. There should be no sacred cows when it comes to the image of the country or accountability to the people who have voted individuals into office or, more importantly, accountability and submission to the law.

    In a country where politics is the biggest industry, it is sad to say that there is no telling how this can play out in the next couple of weeks or months, because political exigency – not respect for law and the processes of government and society – may be the critical factor in determining the outcome of this case, or the speed at which any obvious outcomes will be reached.

    That is why civil society, pressure groups of all kinds and the citizen needs to take responsibility for moving the authorities to act. There is such a thing as a writ of mandamus in our law, which allows a court order to be made, at the instance of anyone, to compel a person or body in lawful authority to perform their duty. Let us begin to take advantage of the existing tools we have, to achieve the outcomes we want in society, rather than wait for the authorities to act.

    Our attitude to corruption should go beyond mere outrage. The hash-tag of #BabaringaMobileBanking has now gathered speed online as a joke, started by a sitting senator of the federal republic. We should not laugh at our shame, but resist the image that a few individuals have placed on our name in the international community. However, in keeping to the oldest traditions of law, Ganduje remains innocent until proven otherwise.