The Nation Newspaper

Category: Dele Agekameh

  • It’s Atiku vs. Buhari

    Palpable tension enveloped the nation’s political landscape over the weekend ahead of the deadline imposed for party primaries by the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC. Aspirants across the political spectrum battled each other for precious tickets preparatory for the showdown in 2019. To get delegates on their side, the aspirants had to make do with foreign currency, particularly the US dollar. Bureau De Change operators in one particular state hosting a party convention were nearly cleaned out. The biggest news of the weekend emerged from the result of the contest for the most expensive ticket of all – the People’s Democratic Party, PDP, candidacy.

    After a long, and sometimes painful, sojourn through the maze of the Nigerian (two) party system, Atiku Abubakar, former vice-president, finally laid his hands on the coveted party ticket that clears him to contest for the office of president in next year’s general elections. To say that it was a hard fought battle for him would be an understatement, as his fight has lasted many years, with many enemies turned friends and vice versa. His emergence as the PDP candidate now presents an interesting contest in 2019 against President Muhammadu Buhari, the consensus candidate of the All Progressives Congress, APC.

    There are also numerous fringe candidates in the presidential race for 2019. But majority of voters have come to recognise that the fight is really between the PDP and APC candidates. On a party level, the two top parties have been accused of being identical, and this view has been strengthened by the seamless movement of politicians across the two parties in the last few years. This particular reason is more likely to make the contest more about the individual candidates rather than the parties. On that individual level, apart from their similarity in being Fulani northerners, the two candidates couldn’t be farther apart in personality.

    Buhari’s often slow but methodical approach to issues, is a sharp contrast to the fast and sharp personality of Atiku, who has always been quick to switch lanes when things are not going his way. Buhari’s moniker of “Mr integrity” also does not match with the general perception of the former vice president whose alleged involvement in Obasanjo era corruption scandals still follow him around like the tail to a cow.

    Atiku may very well be a better and more active politician than Buhari is, but this precisely is one of his problems, as he may have become too much of a politician for the comfort of many. Buhari’s perceived lack of political savvy has done little to dent his massive following in the north over the years, and may have even been an appealing feature in 2015. However, the emergence of Atiku, from the same stock as the president, definitely makes things interesting in 2019.

    Like every aspiring president over the years, Atiku has made some lofty promises about his intentions if he becomes president. Specifically, he has ridden hard on restructuring, promising more measures than most other aspirants from the major political parties are comfortable making. What Atiku failed to disclose is that the kind of restructuring that Nigerians seem to want cannot come from a presidential order or declaration, but will involve a largely legislative action, coordinated between federal and state legislators. Perhaps, as someone who is known to throw money at his problems, Atiku may be well suited for the money grubbing legislators after all, who have joined issues with the presidency on many occasions in Buhari’s administration.

    They say that it is easier to criticise than it is to act and implement. Atiku and the PDP have had an easy job dogging the Buhari administration on every issue, including the herdsmen and Boko haram issues that have remained foremost on the list of problems that face the country. Still, Buhari’s administration has laid the foundation for many good policies that are now in danger of being scuttled should power change hands in 2019, because the fruits of many of these policies have not yet been seen by ordinary Nigerians. In this sense, there is a good case for continuity, but with a short-tempered electorate and a masterful money-bag politician on the other side, there are no guarantees.

    The subject of money also becomes an important factor at this point. Already, financial muscle has proved useful for Atiku in obtaining the PDP presidential ticket, as it is no secret that delegates were financially induced to vote one way or the other. The billionaire businessman is now entering into an electoral contest that looks to be more brazenly money-centric than other elections, if the allegations in Osun and Ekiti are anything to go by. His opponent is supposedly a simple cattle rearer with modest earnings and an ‘integrity complex’.

    The solace for the APC camp about Atiku’s money is that he has been spending it chasing his ambition for years and only just got a presidential ticket based on practical matters; as Tambuwal’s offer of the influence of the Sokoto caliphate and Saraki’s claim of youth were not enough to match Atiku’s money and experience. Buhari and APC can also rest easy remembering that the Jonathan PDP administration lost to APC despite the huge sums expended on the 2015 elections. The power of incumbency may yet edge out the opposition in the end, but that power has been diminished since the APC crushed it in 2015.

    Another big influence in 2019 may be the Igbo vote. While Buhari and APC rely on the increasingly waning power of Rochas Okorocha and the likes of Orji Uzor Kalu to deliver the southeast, Atiku is expected to field an Igbo running mate, who he was yet to announce as at Monday. Atiku has also promised to serve one term only, after which an Igbo candidate can emerge from the PDP.

    We all know that one-term ambition for presidents in Nigeria is a myth. This notwithstanding, an Igbo vice president will be an enticing prospect for the southeast. With the southwest likely to swing Buhari’s way because of APC dominance, the southeast possibly going Atiku’s way will make for a harder contest, especially if Atiku and Tambuwal are able to work together to wrest away some of Buhari’s northern base.  Kingsley Moghalu’s candidacy under the Young Progressives Party, YPP, may cause a mild ripple but is unlikely to be a big differential for the Igbo vote, as there are more practical options. This is another issue.

    There are about 68 registered political parties in the country, and a good number of those parties plan to contest the office of president in 2019. There is no joy in forecasting that the winner will most likely come from just two of them, but it is the truth. The other parties have failed to learn from APC to pull forces together to mount a credible challenge. If Donald Duke and others like Oby Ezekwesili and Moghalu’s short-lived PACT coalition could have pulled resources and banded together, maybe there could have been a third horse in the race. Nigerian politics is now about money and alliances.

    In the midst of money politics and trench digging in strongholds ahead of 2019, the job of INEC has been cut out for it. Despite the financial resources poured into the 2015 elections by former President Goodluck Jonathan, there was a perception of fairness and equity by INEC during that election. The former president still gets kudos for it, and it is important for the Buhari administration to ensure that this perception of INEC neutrality is protected in 2019. That perception of neutrality also extends to the police and other security agencies that will be involved.

    There is no gain in losing the legitimacy that the conduct of 2015 elections bestowed on the Buhari administration by over-exploiting the incumbency factor. Like Chief Chekwas Okorie of the United Progressives Party, UPP, has said, 2019 will not be an easy contest between the PDP and APC and the ball now falls on INEC to put the two sides on check. The president’s ambition is second in importance to the neutrality of INEC, and all political parties should respect this neutrality in their dealing with the body. INEC, again, should be the winner in 2019, not Buhari or Atiku.

     

  • Redefining independence in Africa

    As is the custom every year, Nigeria marked her independence on Monday, October 1.  For 58 years, we have been an internationally recognized state, and it is a feat worthy of celebration. As we celebrate, however, there ought to be room for candid discussion about our true status in the global order. Like many of our African neighbours, we have been forced to grow under heavy reliance on the ‘help’ and direction of other countries, including those that colonized us.

    On May 24, 1963, Dr. Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana stood before a gathering of 32 African Heads of State and Government in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, to urge his counterparts from other African countries not to rest on the success of the political and administrative independence that the countries present had then attained, but to focus on conquering the economic dependence that was sure to remain for years to come if Africa did not stand with one voice.

    The Organisation of African Unity, OAU, was formed after that gathering in Ethiopia in 1963, but it was a looser union than Nkrumah, and some other African leaders present, would have liked. Sir Abubakar Tafawa Balewa, Nigeria’s prime minister at the time, was, interestingly, opposed to an ‘African bloc’ in international relations, thereby signaling his support for a looser union of African states. Irrespective of the various positions in 1963, the African Union that has emerged is closer than was the case in the early years but still relatively loose in comparison to the European Union, for example.

    With the benefit of hindsight, it now seems that the idea of African unity was approached in the wrong manner by our leaders back then. Having just emerged from the politically suppressive bounds of colonialism, African states were more focused on their political emancipation and the strengthening of political power on the continent and beyond, when, in fact, a long sighted approach to their economic health should have been of paramount importance going forward.

    Nigeria and Africa should have studied the early structure and nature of European cooperation, which was essentially economic. The European Union, EU, of today began as the European Coal and Steel Community in the 1950s, before metamorphosing into the EU. Even now, the EU is still mainly focused on market integration and promoting European markets before any other political motive. In contrast, while the OAU did manage some influence in certain matters, like in the fight against apartheid, it lacked real power, politically and economically, as the sum of its influence was subsumed in that of a few individual African states, like Nigeria.

    Africa’s attempt at economic cooperation was at sub-continental levels, with the likes of the Economic Community of West African States, ECOWAS, which was conceived as early as 1964, but has failed to become a credible economic force, even as it detracts from the African Union. The lack of economic integration between African countries has contributed to the continued economic dependency of Africa and led to African markets and economies being exploited and undermined by outside forces.

    Last September, 53 African Heads of State gathered in Beijing for the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation, FOCAC. At the forum, China pledged an additional $60 billion to Africa, matching its pledge at the same gathering three years ago.  One of the implications of FOCAC is that African countries have finally began to move in the same direction in their trade and economic interactions with the outside world. However, African leaders still have not learnt the hard lessons of history, as they went hats in hand to China, seeking aid, disguised as economic partnership.

    President Xi Jinping of China has always said that the intention of China’s cooperation with Africa is to create a win-win relationship of equal partners, by providing much needed infrastructure to the continent, based on trade and market concessions only. What he failed to mention was that Chinese policy on Africa is a direct challenge to American and European influence in the continent. This is evident in the unveiling of a strategic Chinese military base in Djibouti, which is also the location of America’s only military base in Africa.

    As Patrick Lumumba, the renowned Kenyan lawyer noted at the Rwanda National Security Symposium in May, the “new colonial project” requires that Africa must remain within the sphere of influence of the self-appointed superiors and masters of the continent. China is now feeding into this philosophy having come into its own on the world stage. China’s policy on Africa is a bad commentary on how Africa is perceived in the outside world as an instrument to be exploited and used in the propagation of dominance on the global stage.

    African countries are now playing a game of favourites with world powers in mortgaging their critical resources and infrastructure, instead of leveraging those resources to become a real force in the international community. The continent has been thrust into chaos by our own ineptitude and the subtle but present influence of outside forces that are more concerned with their own prosperity than the economic welfare or awakening of the people of Africa.

    The Europeans and the Americans have now issued warnings to African countries about the dangers of aggressive Chinese investments in Africa and the likelihood of it being a debt trap for dependence; but then such would be expected of rivals who are unhappy about the arrival of a new player in their systematic control of Africa’s resources. There is nothing the Chinese are doing today in Africa that the Americans and Europeans have not done here.

    China and our usual exploiters have all been able to perpetuate their colonial influence on this continent because we have not figured out how to attain economic independence. As Lumumba says, success in this regard must begin with personal conquest.  We must conquer our own aid-seeking mentality to be able to start taking our fate in our own hands. We must conquer our own inferiority complex which was left as a parting gift when the colonialists reluctantly returned to their countries.

    There is outrage at the Chinese because Djibouti may have granted exclusive rights to the Chinese over docks in its Chinese built harbour; Zambia may have entered into uncomfortable agreements for its Chinese-built power infrastructure; and Kenya has given exclusive rights to a Chinese firm for mapping surveys of mines in the country. In truth, things like these have happened in Nigeria and wider Africa for decades, with Shell, Chevron, Total, ENI, Haliburton, Julius Berger etc. being the conduits for harvesting Africa’s wealth by their home countries.

    As Nigeria marks her 58th independence, there is plenty to ponder on, especially if we are serious to provide the leadership we so desperately want to provide for the whole of Africa. Our independence will never be complete without economic independence, and the strategy for that can only be an African strategy, as Nkrumah noted many years ago. Right now, there are no indications that any African country is successfully resisting the economic influence of the neo-colonialists at our gates, simply because many are too weak on their own.

    Straight aid from these colonialists has not been helpful in advancing our cause for economic emancipation, and poorly negotiated infrastructure deals (which also exist in Nigeria) will prove to be no better. There should be well thought out guidelines for infrastructure agreements in African countries, one that can stand the neo-colonial test and still give value to the host countries. Until we stop mortgaging our economy, we cannot rightly celebrate.

    Complacency about what we achieved in 1960 is what led to the unwanted results we have had in almost 60 years. China is said to have been able to pull about 800 million of its people out of poverty in 30 odd years. Coincidentally, its trade relations with Africa increased by 700 per cent in the 1990s, and today it is Africa’s biggest trade partner. Our resources helped make China what it is today. It is time to open our eyes and liberate our people from inexplicable poverty.

  • The test in Osun

    In Saturday, September 22, the political consciousness of the nation shifted to the gubernatorial election that was conducted in Osun State, a state touted as the bedrock of the Yoruba race. On that day, the significance of Ile-Ife amongst other Yoruba towns and the iconic status of the Osun River in Yoruba folklore, were matters relegated to the background as political juggernauts converged on the southwest state to embark on their latest battle for superiority.

    Leading the charge for the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) was Gboyega Isiaka Oyetola, who was, until recently, Chief of Staff to Rauf Aregbesola, the current governor of Osun State. His closest opponent in the election was Senator Ademola Adeleke, the famous dancing politician of the People’s Democratic Party, PDP, who eased into the senatorial seat of his late elder brother, Isiaka Adeleke, when bye-elections were conducted after the unfortunate demise of the elder Adeleke last year. However, it was PDP’s Adeleke that came out tops on Saturday when the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, announced a total of 254,698 votes for him, in contrast to Oyetola’s total of 256,345.

    The little margin between Adeleke and Oyetola made no difference for either of them as INEC then declared the election inconclusive because the difference in votes between the two candidates – 353 votes- was lower than the total number of votes cancelled. A total of 3,498 votes were cancelled in seven polling units across several local governments. INEC has now set a date for re-run elections between APC’s Oyetola and PDP’s Adeleke in the four affected council areas for tomorrow, September 27. The re-run will be the stage for the real election, as the APC or PDP candidate were always the favourites to clinch the results.

    Quite unsurprisingly, the PDP has launched a series of attacks on the ruling APC and INEC officials, claiming that there was connivance between the two, which led to the declaration of the results as inconclusive. Also, reminiscent of the Ekiti gubernatorial elections earlier in the year, there were claims of vote buying on both the PDP and APC sides, this time, allegedly taking place in the cover of dark, on the night before the election. Although commentators and analysts may know that the two leading political parties in the country are two sides of the same coin when it comes down to actual politicking, the two have always carried on in the press like bitter rivals with different tactics and agenda. This is why the back and forth between the two parties this time should be given less attention than preparations for the outcome tomorrow.

    There are many factors that could still influence the results at this point. As has been the case in elections in Nigeria for so long, there was the rash of defections into and out of APC and PDP in the run up to the elections. Significantly on the APC side, Moshood Adeoti, the Secretary to the State Government, SSG, in Aregbesola’s camp had resigned to join the African Democratic Congress, ADC, after it became apparent that he would not enjoy the endorsement of his boss or the ruling party for the Osun top job. He later became the frontrunner for the ADC in last Saturday’s election where he recorded a total vote of 7,681.

    Concentrating purely on numbers, one would assume that Adeoti’s following may have added a sizable number of votes to Oyetola’s tally, even without the ADC platform. This is why his defection is significant. Other factors that may have influenced the voting was Yusuf Lasun’s grievance with the outcome of the APC primaries, where he felt shortchanged, and Iyiola Omisore’s candidacy under the Social Democratic Party, SDP, which further stripped the two leading candidates of a precious 128,049 votes that he polled on Saturday. The position of Omisore, Lasun and Adeoti, going forward, may become vital in influencing votes during the re-run.

    Some have said that the opposition would have benefitted a great deal from closing ranks against the ruling party in the run up to the election in Osun. Most times, there is zero opportunity for cooperation as it is lack of management and space for competing egos that gives rise to many of these opposition parties in the first place, as aggrieved party members find solace elsewhere. Just as there was contention for the top job in APC, there was even sharper contention for the ticket in the PDP, where Adeleke edged out Akin Ogunbiyi, with a slim margin of only seven votes in the primaries.

    It is curious to see if Adeleke’s streak of narrow margins will continue, eventually ushering him into the Osun State government house after the re-run. If for nothing else, the slim margins speak to Adeleke’s testy candidacy. It suggests that elements within his party and the wider Osun are unsure about his suitability for office, especially in the light of doubts raised to the authenticity of his school certificate, his refusal to attend any of the debates leading to the election and his unusual social manners and habits that have made him more famous than any policy positions or intellectual angles he has ever championed as a private individual or as a senator.

    The 64-year old Oyetola would appear the more obvious choice for the conservative voter. He has a long track record in partisan politics and as an insurance broker and some may even say he walks, talks and socializes more like the leader of a state should. However, in a political climate where age is an increasingly testy issue at the polls and the critical advantage of incumbency is not as potent as it used to be, there is no telling where the vote will swing.

    The re-run in Osun is a journey back to square one, into the never ending battle between the only two viable political parties that we have – APC and PDP. As neutrals and people who are only interested in the advancement of the country into prosperity and greater development, many of us want a vibrant political environment where wit comes to play with intellectual dexterity and political savvy, the kind of contest that inspires admiration from all quarters, even across political divides. This re-run in Osun fortunately grants us an opportunity to see how our politicians handle political pressure.

    Depending on where one stands, there are many negative angles to the result of the Osun election. Still, it is an altogether positive outcome that the activities of the ‘lesser opposition’, viable or not, had an impact on the result of the election. It may signal the beginning of better management of issues in political parties and stronger alliances that may drive Nigerian politics in the right direction.

  • Adeosungate

    Last Friday, September 14, marked another sad turn in the history of Nigerian politics. A second minister of finance resigned on that day. Her resignation was most likely in fulfilment of a private directive from her boss. But the circumstance of her eventual exit from office tells a tale of official corruption and political immorality that can cripple our democracy if allowed to continue. Kemi Adeosun became the latest casualty of a system that thrives on immoral stamina, and the agents of immorality have ensured that public discourse is centred on a forged certificate.

    There are many talking points, especially on the issue of the forged certificate of exemption from the National Youth Service Corps, NYSC. On that issue, one can safely say that the minister was a victim of the atmosphere of corruption that we wallow in within our borders. One can imagine a promising professional with lofty dreams and ambition, eager to play her part in the emancipation of Nigeria from the political doldrums we have been resigned to for years, who realised that the small issue of a certificate from NYSC could stand in the way of that.

    Now, it is difficult to imagine that a person that had been groomed in the British system of education and who spent her early career in the United Kingdom would have decided to obtain a forged certificate by her own volition. Given her position and status at the time that document was procured, it is reasonable to assume that she had farmed out the procurement to an associate or aide who would have been directly responsible for whatever act of illegality was committed in the procurement. This, however, does not remove the former minister from possible liability or complicity, especially if the aide intimated her on the plans to obtain the document illegally. Even if she was unaware, the entire episode, once it went public, remains as a stain on her person and office and she would never have been able to maintain a safe distance from it.

    For those who called for her resignation after the matter became public, there is no criticism or condemnation for their calls or outcry. Even if a certificate of discharge or exemption from the NYSC is not an express condition for being nominated as a minister in the Nigerian government, the presence of a forged item as a supporting document in a person’s pack of credentials, is not a negligible issue. However, in the circumstances of this case, the issue of when the certificate was discovered, and the immediate course of action by whatever person or authority that discovered it is more important in the long run.

    The online publication, Premium Times, broke the story first, after what appears to have been considerable investigation of the lead over a considerable period of time. The same publication brought to light, that members of the National Assembly, especially those in the leadership, had been aware of Mrs Adeosun’s defective certificate for a long time before it became public. Not only that, the leadership of the National Assembly had likely blackmailed the former minister into towing its line on many issues, especially in the disbursement of huge sums to the National Assembly, based on the threat of exposing the defect in her document.

    If these allegations are true, it implicates the National Assembly and exposes the immorality that pervades the leadership of that institution. It also implicates the former minister herself, at least after the fact of the forgery. Whether or not she consented or was privy to the fact of the forged certificate that found its way into her credentials, she may have become an accessory after the fact when she did not reveal it as at when she became privy to it and when she possibly played the game of blackmail with the leadership of the National Assembly. Following this line of thinking, the former minister was complicit and deserved to be relieved of her office, but then, the greater crime may have been committed by the leadership of the National Assembly and every member of that institution that may have been aware of the blackmail.

    The first Minister of Finance to resign was Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, who served in that capacity on two occasions. She was forced to resign in the Obasanjo administration when her team’s advice and policies were continually jettisoned by Obasanjo era politics. In her books, Reforming the Unreformable and Fighting Corruption is Dangerous, she chronicled her experiences in her first and second outings as minister in the Obasanjo and Jonathan administrations respectively. Mrs Okonjo-Iweala revealed how the National Assembly continually made calls injurious to the nation’s finances and held the treasury to ransom when its demands were not met. Her books are an expose on how the National Assembly is the bane of finance ministers in Nigeria and how little progress can be made without somewhat accommodating the excessive and self-centred appetites of members of that arm of government.

    Now that we know of the possible blackmail that Adeosun may have been subjected to, it is not surprising to discover that some members of the legislature remarked that Adeosun had been the most co-operative minister of finance till date. To remain in that job under the weight of the blackmail was a disservice to the country and whatever political or party considerations that could have led to that cooperation will be insufficient to absolve the minister of the guilt. Even though her time at the helm of affairs at the ministry of finance has been largely positive, even with the recession we experienced, this matter has put an unshakeable blight on her character. It would seem that when she was faced with the options of personal disgrace or rolling in the mud with pigs, she chose the immoral option of her immoral tormentors.

    The real casualty in this episode is integrity. Once again, the agents of immorality that are scattered across the public and private sectors in Nigeria have sent a possible reformer out of office. When Okonjo-Iweala’s mother was kidnapped in 2012, it was a step out of the closet for these agents of doom who ordinarily prefer to act in secrecy and with less than obvious tactics, like blackmail. Since then, we have known them to be in the shadows, plotting and forcing their will on the nation and its treasury. Corruption does not fight back as people say; it has rather been engaged in an unceasing siege on our collective identity and future as a nation. Sometimes we fight back, but more often than not, we play along to the tune of the immoral. This is likely the untold story of Adeosungate.

    The lesson intending office holders and all Nigerians should learn from Adeosungate is that there is no skirting around corruption for the “greater good”. The end will never justify the means, especially not in this country. There are opposing agents of immorality who ironically serve as a moral check on the other when damaging information is discovered. The groups that heightened Adeosun’s certificate brouhaha today are covering up much worse acts themselves. The key is to develop independent institutions that are beholden to no one, and can be trusted to investigate and publicise their findings without fear or favour. In this case, the press played this role to the extent of its being used as an instrument of vendetta against the minister or her principal.

    There is no saying that the National Assembly should have made public its finding on the certificate if, indeed, it discovered this in 2015 and rather decided on using the fact as an instrument of blackmail. For Adeosun, she ought to have come clean and removed herself from the situation if she had not been part of the whole enterprise from the beginning. This is probably why people with good intentions steer clear of government roles; it is the place where integrity goes to die.

  • Nigeria: In search of patriots

    In the past week, we heard news of Boko Haram victories and unprecedented number of casualties amongst Nigerian soldiers engaged in the fight against the religious extremists. The police hierarchy is also locked in a blame game with a very highly placed Niger Delta elder who was a victim to what was again described by the police as an ‘unauthorized’ raid by some of its men.  While all of this is going on, there are men currently lining up behind the flags of their political parties to indicate their interest in charting the course of the country, for good or bad.

    In truth, the country needs a determined leader to take it through the coming years, especially as we are in a make or break phase of development in many areas. This crucial time in our history is proving tough, as should be reasonably expected in a country with so many diverse interests. There are times when one is simply proud of what we have achieved and the potential that we still hold, while at other times the daunting task of nation-building seems to be a lost cause. In the end, it is the people who hold this union together, through their acts and their belief in our prospects and survival as a country. This is where the trouble lies.

    Nigerians are amongst the most mobile groups of people in the world. After the Chinese and Indians, Nigerians are probably the most likely group of immigrants you will encounter in most parts of the world, even in regions with stark differences in weather, culture and language. The average Nigerian considers it a step forward to be able to pack their belongings and leave the country behind, even to uncertain fates in foreign countries. This does not portray a picture of people who have faith in their chances at home or a belief in the prospects for a good life in this country.

    Sometime after our independence, Nigerian immigrants moved freely to the United Kingdom where many families remain rooted till this day. When the British began tightening their borders, there was a concentration on American visas, and many Nigerians can now be found across the vast territory there. Again, the Americans tightened their borders through more stringent visa requirements and now the exodus is concentrated on Canada, where the signs of restricted intake of Nigerians are already materializing. Wherever the next destination may be, life in the country is still pushing people out, even at times when there seems to be improvement. When will visas stop being more important than national identity cards or voters cards?

    Every day, more people make the seemingly bold move to restart their lives in other countries, sometimes uprooting entire families in order to give their children a fighting chance in the vastly competitive world out there. We no longer believe in dreams made in Nigeria, but want to be part of the American dream, or share in the openness of Canadian society. Nigerian children are learning to speak languages in continental Europe where the natives themselves are looking to expand their horizons and teach their children more of the popular culture in Britain or America.

    We are so quick to trade our identities for the safety of a working society that we leave gaps in our own country that contributes to the poor development of our sectors. Many Nigerians serve in the British army or in the American military, even recent migrants, when the Nigerian army is engaged on multiple fronts at home and abroad. One cannot fault their decisions, as everyone is responsible for themselves, especially when it seems that we are faced with insurmountable obstacles at home.

    Promising entrepreneurs and employers of labour flee the country to become employees in foreign countries where they get lost in the demographics and lead ordinary but safe lives. Ideas that can make positive impact in our society are sold to the west for the promise of a life there, only for the end products of those ideas that were conceived in the mind of a born and bred Nigerian, to be imported into the country at a premium.  Our biggest employers of labour are foreigners who are mining the potentials of our unique market and repatriating the proceeds to their home countries. Behind crude oil and maybe the products of a rejuvenated agricultural sector, our biggest export is labour, and unlike oil and agricultural produce, it is a negative to national development.

    Most of our public servants are not left out of the race for greener pastures. The ones that do not themselves have dual citizenship have ensured that their children have not missed out on the massive advantage of citizenship in successful countries where dreams are born and nurtured for the advantage of those societies. In many cases, their offspring identify more with the foreign nationality, for obvious reasons, and never visit or return home. For the ones who return, they are met with plush appointments facilitated by the standing of their parents or the natural advantage of their foreign background and education.

    The returnees become policy makers and leaders of industry who understand the theoretics of global business and public management, but are deficient in the practical knowledge of how things work in the country. As a result, they are deceived, exploited and used by those that know but have no moral integrity. The shock of being jolted to reality leads many to leave or join the band of exploiters, having never felt, first hand, the consequences of their elitist ideas. They join a class of Nigerians that consciously or unconsciously propagate a growing class divide, widening the wealth gap through an established system of elitism that ensures non-inclusion.

    A striking thing about the most developed countries is the sense of patriotism of the citizens there. Those that think Nigerians are patriotic merely confuse our natural defensiveness for patriotism. Over 80 per cent of Nigerians will readily trade their Nigerian passports for British or American passports and never look back. About 77 per cent of Nigerians are currently living below the poverty line and it is without question that they will be willing to make such a trade. Of those living above that line, one assumes that a quarter already have dual citizenship or are working on a migration plan.

    What may encourage patriotism in the Nigerians that choose to live here, or simply have no choice, is not so difficult to decipher. Everyone wants to be able to lie down at night peacefully and wake up in the morning with peace of mind. For those living in the north east or outside fortified areas like military cantonments in other parts, this may be difficult. Security, therefore, is an important factor. This is closely followed by the guarantee of a respectable means of livelihood and access to affordable healthcare, education and other daily needs.

    There is no shaming or praising people that leave or stay as everybody’s experience is personal. What is clear is that it does Nigeria no good when its best brains are in flight or when there is no belief in the country by its own citizens. Dora Akunyili of blessed memory tried to launch a rebranding programme that evidently has not sailed, like the vision 2020 plan that failed several years ago. We need to believe in our own strength to fight the obstacles we are faced with, before our country can emerge from the ashes of yesterday’s failures.

    The measure of a country, it is becoming clear, is not by the wealth of its richest people, but by the aggregate of citizens actively working and succeeding at making a better life for themselves. We are grateful for the work of people like Aliko Dangote, Oba Otudeko, Tony Elumelu and others who are inspiring the next generation and creating a dream for Nigerians to follow. But there are obstacles that even they cannot help many cross, and we may have to rely on the resilience of the Nigerian spirit, channeled into nation building and growing together. This is what we expect today’s politicians to do, not ganging up to loot our common patrimony as it were.

  • The Music House demolition revisited

    In 2016, a serving governor in a state in the Southwestwent live on air at a radio station to admit that his aides had advised him to demolish the building housing the station. The reason given was that the owner of the building and station was a critical voice against the governor’s administration that deserved a harsh lesson for his dissent. The governor claimed to have ignored the advice because he saw no reason to go ahead with the demolition. Two years after, AbiolaAjimobi, the governor in question, authorized the demolition of parts of Music House, which housed Fresh FM, the radio station in Ibadan, Oyo State.

    Though the matter has since been resolved, this is a classic display of political gymnastics, where a two-faced politician says one thing and turns around to do the opposite. Beyond the treachery and lack of integrity that stands out in the Music House episode, there are many other unpalatable details that show the defect in leadership in our country. Leaders like Governor Ajimobi ‘ascend’ unto the throne of political office to wield the kind of power that only traditional rulers in old Yoruba kingdoms could wield. I mean the notion that the king could do no wrong. Perhaps, governors ought to be addressed in the same way as Yoruba obas are still addressed today –kabio kosior the more common, simple truncated version, Kabiyesi, which literally means “there is no questioning you”.

    For YinkaAyefele, the owner of the demolished building and chairman of the radio station, the episode will be one he wants to quickly put behind him. Having achieved success despite losing the use of his legs in a ghastly accident in 1997, Ayefele has proven over the years that he is made of tough stuff that helps him rise above challenges in his life. More importantly, his music career has brought him the love and affection of millions of Nigerians, and his against-the-odds rise to fame also attracts the admiration of many. After condemnation from Ayefele’s many well-wishers, the governor had to do another about-turn when he pledged Oyo State resources to rebuilding Ayefele’s Music House.

    The question of whether Ayefele’s Music House was in actual violation of Oyo State’s town planning laws comes secondary to the question of why the government chose to act now, after the governor’s statement in 2016 on Fresh FM. Even though the spokesperson for the governor claims that all appropriate notices had been served on Ayefele since 2017, before the eventual demolition on August 16, the comments of the governor in 2016 and after the demolition are so much in contradiction not to suggest ulterior motives at play. The rule of law is only effective when laws are invoked and upheld transparently and timeously, and not when the ruler/governor decides it is convenient to do so.

    What is more disturbing is that the trend of selective enforcement of the law is not unique to Ajimobi’s government in Oyo State, as it is replicated all over the country. There is also controversy about the disregard of a court order in this matter that sounds only too familiar to Nigerians, as the rule of law seems not to apply to institutions of government or political office holders in the country.

    If the story of the government is to be believed, then it means that the government knew that there was a defect in the development of the property but continued to accommodate and levy the defective building for years before the governor of the day decided that it is time to apply the law. This is an unsustainable system, not only for its obvious incompatibility with the rules of natural justice, but for its destructive impact on society and the institution on government. The outcry should not be viewed as an emotional defence of a loved popular singer, but an appeal for sanity and integrity in office.

    Also disturbing is the claim from Ayefele’s camp that the demolition was put in motion because Fresh FM had been unrelenting in its criticism of the Ajimobi government. If this is true, it would mean that the entire episode is a result of muscle flexing by an administration that cannot handle criticism. Again, this is not altogether shocking in the Nigerian context, as it has somehow become part of the power dynamics in our politics for people to openly be punished for going against a sitting government. Our kabiyesis in high office believe they are chosen by God to dispense power and make determinations at their whim.

    Perhaps, if Ajimobi’s character and attitude since he came to power had been better, one would have been persuaded to believe that his inconsistent position on Music House was something other than oppressive power playing. Since he became governor, he has governed like an absolute ruler who determines the good or bad fortune of his subjects based on his personal emotions. The other day, it was Ajimobi that angrily addressed protesting students of the LadokeAkintola University of Technology like an emperor that must never be challenged, instead of a calm reassuring leader. It would seem that his ego is driving his government as he is more interested in obeisance than he is in engaging in clear debate about his performance or failings.

    One wonders how many more cases have fallen between the cracks, because the victims were not popular musicians with large following that can spell danger for a politician’s political party or plans for succession. That is the real worry of the Music House episode, as it gained publicity because of the status of the person involved. Our society runs a democratic system, which emphasizes the shared burden of power across the citizenry, through their electoral choices. In reality, autocrats emerge from this system most times, to oppress the people who are the real custodians of power. These autocrats that emerge neither acknowledge the power of the people nor make their welfare the priority in decision making.

    Ajimobi has once again showed us the dearth of our government institutions, which are, in practice, more and more subsumed into the single office of the top executive. The power of the president and governors is swallowing our government institutions and this system of democratic autocracy is unsustainable.He had no reason at all to be involved in any notice fromthe Oyo State Ministry of Physical Planning and Urban development in Ayefele’s matter. Yet, he got involved in 2016, and this last August, for reasons best known to him,which are likely not in the least based on any respect for the rule of law.

    In an ideal situation this matter ought not to have risen higher than the appropriate ministry involved, and any notices in respect of it should have been followed up with whatever the due process demanded at the time any defect may have been discovered. From the reports, it appears not even the ministry knew how to handle the situation, probably because of political interference.

    The governor’s involvement was clearly not a case of micro-management by a dedicated chief executive, it was simple political interference. Institutions need to be allowed the space to flourish, and their heads and staff need to be held to the highest standards.Ayefele is not above the law because he is a popular musician or a successful physically challenged person, but any right thinking person would agree that the circumstance of this case is heaped in suspicion of ulterior motives and official misuse of power. The rule of law has likely been used as a weapon, instead of a shield by Ajimobi’s administration.

    The old Oyo Empire was volatile and the rulers needed a strong hand to rule the extensive territory. Perhaps,Ajimobi has been caught by the spirit of those old times and has forgotten that we run a 21st century democracy, a deliberate system of government with departments designed to work independently. He,and all others like him, needs to discard their emperor’s hat and act like the public servants that they are.

  • This boiling cauldron

    In 1847, the Commonwealth of Liberia was declared an independent state, making it Africa’s first republic. Formerly a cluster of colonies created by the American Colonisation Society for the absorption of freed slaves from America, Liberia avoided subsequent colonization by the Europeans, with support from America. 171 years on from that point, Liberia is worse off than many younger African nations that were still colonies when it was considered an independent state.

    The Liberian example counters the view that Nigeria’s young democracy is the reason for the failure of governance that we are accustomed to in this country. After all the years Liberia has functioned as an independent state, the United States’ dollar is its de facto currency and the standard of living compares with the poorer countries in Africa. Nigeria’s lot is not much better, even as we sometimes record fractional growth on increasingly unreliable development meters like the GDP. Our real problem has been one of leadership and this problem is a collective fault in a democracy.

    Almost everywhere one turns to in Nigeria today, there is strife, hunger, and mindless bloodshed that leaves people feeling helpless and vulnerable in their own ancestral homes. Many suffer amidst the splurge of affluence by a few, who co-incidentally make up a large part of the ruling class. Their wealth mostly comes from immorally acquired riches, through legal and illegal means, enabled by their positions of authority and their wealthy friends/collaborators. The National Assembly is the biggest representation of despicable legal plunder of Nigeria’s commonwealth, but the law books provide no practical way to stem the immorality that pervades that institution.

    Spurred by the need for a more inclusive and sustainable model for growth and development, the World Economic Forum, WEF, releases an annual assessment of the performance of 103 countries called the Inclusive Development Index, IDI, which some consider as a better rubric for measuring progress than other methods. The index uses the three “pillars” of growth and development, inclusion and inter-generational equity as indicators in assessing each country’s progress. Nigeria ranks 63rd out of the assessed 74 countries under the emerging economies category for 2018. The index rightly notes that economic growth has not benefitted Nigerians, and identifies geopolitical instability due to religious and ethnic factions as the key impediment to inclusive growth.

    However, what the index does not say is that the privileged few hijack the machinery of government for their own benefit, and the growth of the economy is likely a reflection of their personal enrichment. This is why poverty rate in Nigeria stands at 77.6% and the daily median income level is $1.80, at a time when economic performance is on the increase. This is also the reason the average Nigerian complains bitterly about the harshness of life in every administration, despite the boisterous  announcement of favourable economic statistics by successive governments who seem to be clueless about how to translate this into tangible results in the pockets and stomachs of the 77.6%.

    The index also notes our ethnic and religious divide. What it does not say is that politicians have mastered the art of using this divide to their own ends, and that the further deepening of the divide is to their advantage. This is why seemingly faceless herdsmen, of no identifiable masters, lay waste to human lives and property with impunity, and identifiable associations like Miyetti Allah make reckless comments in support of the carnage, to no consequence. Perhaps emboldened, factions of the same cattle breeders association have gone on to defy the seat of government by threatening to forcefully eject the senate president from office. The comical irony of the affront is that the senate president himself is a controversial public servant who has displayed telling signs of the selfishness that oozes off our supposed representatives.

    The people rage at the antics of sketchy politicians like Bukola Saraki and their would-be tormentors, then at each other, because we have been conditioned to be unable to see beyond our differences. We look to a government that seems unable to see the cracks that push us further apart, even deepening those cracks by its own outrageous management of crisis. This was the case when the only Christian girl out of many kidnapped school girls, was left behind after a deal was made by the government to free her friends and co-captives. The outrage continues, as this monumental oversight still remains uncorrected many months after the release of her friends.

    The government is said to be beset by geopolitical instability, but the individuals that make up the government propagate this instability through their own unstable allegiances and whimsical political decisions that leads to division of the people. We have seen it in Kano, Rivers, Akwa-Ibom, Imo and many other states and in the rash of defections that have almost become a source of entertainment. The polity is boiling, and the quality of leadership is sinking to new lows at a time when we need it to be at the highest possible level.

    We invite strangers into our home through calls for foreign investments, while we have not settled our differences. We deceive them with statistics and the superiority of our jollof rice while we keep our machetes hidden under our chairs and mattresses in readiness for our own neighbours. It is an unsustainable image, as the trouble that is boiling beneath the surface can burst into the open at any time. Our politicians socialize and shake hands in public with their neighbours in highbrow areas of Lagos and Abuja before going behind to sabotage each other through the agency of gullible men and women in shanty towns and villages.

    Democracy is not a system that needs to develop; it is an already developed system that ought to ensure freeness and fairness if practiced conscientiously. Our social immaturity as a people is the real problem and the road to maturity begins with social awareness and responsibility for our actions. The bulk of Nigerians let so-called religious and political leaders control the narrative and set the tone for their personal interaction with others. This is foolishness as everyone should be responsible for their own choices.

    Our problems are not partisan, contra-religious or contra-ethnic. They are a collective pain that we share, through which we are connected, and oddly so. Our ability to unite and solve these problems will be the mark of our social maturity. From there, our democracy can blossom and we can begin to hold each other to greater standards than we already are and be comfortable to have high expectations of those we elect to serve us. We cannot be divided as a people and expect our chosen leaders to work together for our collective good.

    In this light, we can see the rancour between the presidency and legislature clearer, and we can understand why the political parties are so ideologically porous. Our politicians are pre-occupied with other divisions and differences that are not ideological or at all logical, sometimes influenced by the intolerance of the people. Without an ideological foundation for their candidacy in most cases, they comfortably nudge ethnic and religious sentiments without thinking about the wider consequences. Being a deeply religious country, this is not difficult, especially as the lines of religion and ethnicity conveniently cross in most parts of the country.

    As our politicians and office holders often implore when met with a tough problem, we must now work and pray for a quick attainment of social and political maturity so that this country can move forward from the pit of irresponsibility we have been stuck in for decades. Events are unfolding right before our eyes that can put our feeble union at risk. Now, is the time to fast and pray, since we like to pray, before a politician or religious leader “implores” us to do so. The future is in the hands of people who take responsibility for their lives and our responsibility to ourselves should not be subject to manipulation.

  • Reforming SARS

    While President Muhammadu Buhari was away on holiday, Prof. Yemi Osinbajo, the vice president, made some decisions that largely satisfied Nigerians. One of those decisions was a presidential directive issued to the Inspector General of Police, ordering an overhaul of the “management and activities” of the Special Anti-Robbery Squad, SARS, across the country. Whether it was due to the vice president’s popularity or for sheer exhaustion from endless clamouring for the dissolution of SARS, majority of Nigerians warmed up to the announcement, even though the notorious squad is, in truth, only getting a face lift.

    Ibrahim Idris, the Inspector General of Police, IGP, swiftly responded to the directive by commanding his men to institute measures that they were already directed to carry out since last December. Even though the move was rejected back then by Nigerians because it was seen as merely cosmetic, the IGP re-echoed his directive, stating that all SARS operations would now be subsumed under Federal-SARS, commanded by a Commissioner of Police working straight from the police headquarters in the Department of Operations.

    With the exception of the IGP’s “declarations” that SARS operatives will now undergo psychological evaluation as well as maintain human rights desks across all formations, every other part of the IGP’s order had already been announced last December, and it has made no difference to SARS behaviour. The vice president, like the IGP before, was motivated by a need to display concern for the continued demand for action on the SARS problem. But just like before, many are struggling to see how the IGP’s orders will change the behavior of the same men that were simply ‘SARS’ not too long ago.

    Perhaps, it would be unfair to say that the IGP has not complied with the directive of the vice president who ordered him to overhaul the “management and activities” of SARS. In the IGP’s order, the F-SARS unit is to steer clear of all civil matters, concentrate on prevention and investigation of armed robbery and halt all conduct of stop and search activities on Nigerian roads. The problem with this is that he had given these same orders in December and people have been accosted by SARS operatives on the roads since then, without any intelligence backing but solely to extort. Popular musicians Reekado Banks and Dr. Sid are very public examples of people that have suffered harassment and extortion since December.

    The argument of the police force has always been that it is inappropriate for the people to call for the scrapping of a police unit that is integral to its fight against crime. The argument of Nigerians, in response, has been that the unit fights less crime than it harasses everyday people going about their daily lives, and if a misunderstanding of its objective is fundamental to its operations, then the unit might as well not exist at all. Thus, the debate has become about preserving the core essence of the unit by keeping it alive as opposed to addressing its ugly reality by scrapping it altogether. Although a few SARS operatives have been exposed and punished in the last few months, the percentage of those punished is terribly low in relation to the widespread abuses faced by Nigerians.

    It is not clear what the police leadership hope to achieve by ‘federalising’ the unit. Some may say that the creation of a federal commander at the force headquarters may be an attempt to insulate the IGP and the top hierarchy of the police from responsibility for the excesses of the unit by presenting a scape-goat in person of the F-SARS commander. Also, the use of the unit by the police itself encourages misunderstanding of its objectives. There is an understanding within the police that SARS men are the go to squad for carrying out unpopular tasks and assignments, due to their lack of proper identification.

    Reports had it that SARS men were part of the arresting officers that took Lawal Daura, the immediate past boss of the Department for State Security, DSS, even though he is not an armed robber. Premium Times journalist, Samuel Ogundipe, was also reportedly arrested and held by SARS operatives on trumped up allegations of mishandling and ‘stealing’ official secret documents. These are examples of SARS men being used to perform duties that are not within their purview, likely because of a reliance on their ruthlessness and the fear of it.

    While it is understandable that the police may have to consolidate men from different units to perform specific duties that require extra manpower or specific skillsets at any time, there is really no reason SARS men should have been involved in arresting one man in Aso Rock Villa or a harmless journalist in the course of his duty. The indiscipline and propensity to stray off the line of duty begins with these little needless assignments from the police leadership that serve as an endorsement of SARS rascality.

    The police may not be forthcoming about the truth of its formations being majorly staffed by the men of SARS after extensive and excessive guard duties with top government officials, public and private establishments and ‘important personalities’ have dwindled the cache of active, functional and somewhat rational men. What may be left is the runt of policemen known as SARS men who cannot be dispensed with, else the wider country is left unprotected. This could explain the insistence by the police that SARS cannot be scrapped.

    In any case, the one part of this issue that the police hierarchy ought to concentrate on is the actual personnel that make up the notorious unit. Whatever re-organisations and “management overhauls” that may be made to SARS, the key concern to the public is the caliber of men operating in its name and their mentality towards public engagement and safety. SARS men who have been conditioned to extort and harass for many years cannot change overnight because of a negligible change of name and new uniforms.

    Although the IGP announced psychological evaluation for men of the unit, we as Nigerians know that this measure, if indeed carried out, will be an exercise in futility because the force will not or cannot pay real professionals to carry out the evaluations and if this miraculously happens, up to 80% of the men of the unit may be recommended for dismissal. It is a tempting idea, to see the men of SARS dismissed in their numbers but the ripple effects of such an extreme measure may be more dangerous for the public. It is therefore imperative that this measure be incorporated into a more robust recruitment regime to stem the inflow of thugs into the police at the initial stage.

    Apart from the fact that many of the men already recruited are a very thin line away from being armed robbers themselves, mass dismissals may leave the police exposed, especially when training of new officers takes time and may be more financially demanding if the police hopes to attract rational people into its formation. What may work, however, is a gradual and systematic phasing out of the toxic elements in SARS and the police by transfer to less sensitive duties, and eventual dismissal if need be. The decision of the presidency to set up a task force to periodically appraise and inspect the activities of the unit, without notice, may help with more responsible behavior overtime, but only if it is matched by effective sanction of erring personnel.

    It is becoming clear that the government may not be able to do away with the unit or the men that comprise the unit, at least not abruptly. The road to a cleaner and more responsible police is likely to be many IGPs and administrations away in the future. While we are on the journey, we may have to take the little we can get as we continue to push for reform every day.

  • Daura: Conundrum of authority

    It is no longer news that the chickens finally came home to roost for Lawal Daura last week when Vice President Yemi Osinbajo terminated his appointment as head of the Department for State Security, DSS. The move was a shock, just like many of Daura’s own stunts in his time as the head of the country’s secret service. Daura was said to have been sacked, then whisked away through a back exit, while his security detail waited in vain at the administration gate of the Villa.

    It was a fitting departure for the controversial spy chief as he finally met his waterloo after yet another controversy regarding a blockade of the National Assembly complex by his men. Daura’s record as the head of the secret service was marred by lawlessness and disregard for authority, including that of his principal, President Muhammadu Buhari. In an administration that has been markedly liberal in its attitude towards exercise of power by its appointees, Daura reached new heights in excessive use of authority and cast unwarranted publicity on his agency’s activities, often in contravention of extant laws and superior directive.

    Unfortunately, Daura’s official impudence is not an isolated case. Most appointees in the Buhari administration seem to be working on their own clock, carrying on as if their connection to the centre has been severed by their self-importance. The most visible example of this has been in the case of security chiefs who seem to be going beyond the line of their duty in the pursuit of unclear agendas. Daura, for instance, went toe to toe with the presidency on the issue of the appointment of Ibrahim Magu as head of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC. While the independence of certain institutions is necessary to properly run a democracy, one expects that there should be a meeting of minds on many matters, especially when the acts of government agencies always reflect on the president.

    The ultra-liberal approach to the delegation of authority by the Buhari administration has been more disruptive than it has been productive. It is in the nature of appointees overseeing government agencies to follow directives, and where no direction is forthcoming from the appropriate quarters, there is a danger of control of the agency being hijacked by others, who may not have the best interests of the administration at heart. Time after time, we have seen the presidency dissociate itself from the acts of its appointees in one agency or another. The public has to contemplate whether the presidency has been feigning ignorance of its own orders or is really out of touch with its appointees.

    It could be this disconnect in the line of communication between the centre and its agents that led to the recent commotion at the gates of the National Assembly. The errant head of the secret service enjoyed the advantage of a very long leash from the presidency which may have opened up the DSS to influence from forces that were opposed to the smooth running of government in this administration.

    Bukola Saraki, the senate president, has been fingered as a possible mastermind behind the reckless show by the DSS last Tuesday. If there is any truth to this, it casts more aspersions on the ability of the president to manage his appointees and run a tight ship than it does on the senate president for being a cheap opportunist. Either way, the outrage expressed by the presidency, and by the vice president in particular, shows that Daura may have become uncontrollable and had to be served his walking papers. The question then remains, that how many more of Buhari’s appointees need the same treatment?

    Daura’s sin of storming the National Assembly without proper authorization is equal to the excesses of others like Ibrahim Idris, the Inspector General of Police, who has himself laid siege on the Benue State House of Assembly in a shambolic impeachment proceeding, or Ibrahim Magu who has been accused of freezing state accounts or carrying out selective prosecutions against interests not aligned with that of his principal. The outrage at Daura’s act of ‘betrayal’ is somewhat an endorsement of the excesses of these other officials and many more like them who have remained untouched despite compromising the ethos of their office.

    There is so much activity in the political and public space and one cannot distinguish between issues propelled by self-interest and those driven by public good. Many government agents find themselves serving multiple masters in the conundrum that government authority has become. This is aided by the supremacy battle between the legislature and executive which has produced a senate president who is ready to dismiss all practical legislative conventions in order to win one over the ruling party and the president.

    Whether the senate president was behind the DSS siege on the National Assembly or not, he has proven to be a chronic opportunist and master of deflection. A senate president who thinks it is good and practical politics not to resign after defecting to the opposition, despite leaving the ruling party, must be deeply immoral. Politics, like the one he practices, is what has led us into the recent political commotion we are experiencing, and the commotion in-turn fuels confusion and abuse of authority by agents of the government.

    Now that the country has seen what a lack of cohesion in government can do, it is time the presidency starts setting the tone for its administration by strengthening its chain of command and outlining the bounds of the exercise of power by its appointees in the different agencies of government. It is not enough to appoint a person into authority; there needs to be a synergizing of objectives and the activities of the government as a whole. If this is achieved, the united front on the executive side may inspire cooperation from the legislature, within its ranks and in collaboration with the executive arm to carry on the business of governance.

    Also, the timing of executive actions like that which the vice president performed last week ought to be right. Already, there has been foot-dragging about insubordination within the government fold in the past three years. The deterrent value of the sack of Daura may not be immediately seen, but it has sent a clear message to others to sit up and establish a clear line of authority before taking sensitive actions. This is one reason why the presidency ought to take decisive and timely action where it has been exposed.

    The feud between Daura and Magu is public knowledge. Already, Daura has reportedly had his passport seized, while the EFCC has been called in to investigate his involvement in the controversy surrounding about N80 billion linked to the DSS. The presidency should monitor the investigation to ensure that it does not become a mission of vendetta by Magu who may have a personal axe to grind with Daura. The country needs true resolution of issues at this point and not scapegoats for a collective problem.

    If indeed, there was an unauthorized request for the DSS to act in the manner it did at the National Assembly, the truth must be unearthed and appropriate action taken swiftly against anyone who is found complicit. It should also be noted that this is not the first time the government has distanced itself from the acts of its agents. Other cases should be investigated too and those found complicit should be punished.

    In the boiling political landscape right now, there is likelihood that the DSS siege and Daura’s dismissal could be shaded in certain ways to suit the aims of people in or out of government. It is imperative that this episode does not become a case of sacrifice of the scapegoat. Instead, it is an opportunity to tighten ship and do things through normal channels, for the benefit of Nigerians.

  • Politics of ransom

    In the middle of the most tumultuous period in Nigerian politics since 2014/2015, the legislature, judiciary and the president of the country are all currently on vacation. In their wake, they have left uncertainty and discord amongst the people, as the country stands by for more political drama in the coming weeks. Some say our democracy is going through a necessary learning curve, while others see the recent gale of defections and political rigmarole as signs of a system in decline.

    Whatever one believes, the impact of the intense political activity of the last couple of weeks will fall on ordinary citizens and that is why we must look very closely at the unfolding events. There are many talking points, but none can be as bothersome as the case of abuse of power that has featured repeatedly in the last few weeks. It appears that the idea of “federal might” is being taken too seriously, with the brazen and unapologetic deployment of security agents in purely political ‘manoeuvres’.

    The nation woke up to the news of the blockade by the police and other security agents on Senate President Bukola Saraki’s residence and that of his deputy, Ike Ikweremadu, on the morning of July 24, the day the defection of a large number of legislators from the ruling All Progressives Congress, APC, was to be announced. Although the presidency has denied any involvement or interference with investigations, the timing and the manner of the supposed “invitations” that led to the blockade was very suspect. The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, also issued an invitation to the deputy senate president on the same morning requesting that he report to the agency on that same day.

    Days after that incident, there was trouble involving the police again in Benue State, after Governor Samuel Ortom announced his defection from the APC to the People’s Democratic Party, PDP. Scores of police officers reportedly cleared out and cordoned off the Benue State House of Assembly to pave way for eight members of the house to carry out a shambolic impeachment of Governor Ortom. Their futile efforts were not only ridiculous because of lack of majority to carry out such a step in a 30-man assembly, it was also in direct contravention of a court order served on impeached speaker of the house, Terkibir Ikyange and the seven others he led to disobey the law. While the trend of misapplied impeachment is not new to the Nigerian political scene, the heavy involvement of the police was the most troubling issue about that episode.

    Hours after Ortom’s defection, allegations about his misappropriation of around N22 billion based on investigations by the EFCC also resurfaced. This follows in the same line as the Code of Conduct Tribunal trial of Saraki which began after he defied the ruling party to grab the seat of senate president. After Saraki was vindicated by the courts, he was ‘co-incidentally’ roped into another investigation by the police of a bloody robbery operation that took place in Offa, in Kwara State, as his supposed anti-party activities continued. Not to forget also, that Senator Dino Melaye who displayed similar anti-party behaviour is still the subject of prosecution by the police over similar allegations in Kogi State.

    The picture that is emerging from all of this is that of misuse of power to hound political rivals. There is always a tendency for this kind of power play in politics, but the brazen manner in which it has been carried out in recent years, especially by the police, leaves one to wonder whether the security agents are familiar with their core duty, which is to the people and not as pawns to politicians or those in power.  Too many instances of misuse of force by security agencies have been reported. Even though there are denials for most of these allegations of high-handed and vindictive policing, the recurrence of similar incidents prove that bad decisions are being made at some level and it is reflecting badly on the government in power, no matter where responsibility lies.

    Abuse of power is an unfortunate feature of Nigerian politics. Our politicians focus more on the force of power and authority and use it as a weapon where it serves their interests. There is no room for real politicking, where compromises are made and common ground is found. This is why impeachment is on the lips of federal and state legislators at the slightest sign of trouble. There have been many ‘attempted impeachments’ in the history of Nigerian politics, rushed into by angry legislators who, blinded by their vindictive appetites, pay no mind to the law, stability or amicable settlement. The recent impeachment of Eze Madumere, Imo State deputy governor, may yet be added to the list of failed attempts if the courts overturn the 17 members of the Imo State House of Assembly.

    The senate president’s defection from the APC to the PDP has also added fuel to the already raging fire in Nigerian politics in recent weeks. Although it has been a long time coming, the actual act has caused predictable ripples at high levels. Not surprisingly, there is talk of impeachment of the senate president for crossing over to the opposition. The debate now raging in the senate is as to which of the two leading political parties holds a majority. With uncertainty about exactly who has defected to where, the nation waits patiently for the senate to return from recess to see how this situation unfolds.

    In the meantime, rumour is still afloat about reverse defections and the role of threats in those defections. Akwa-Ibom’s strongman, Godswill Akpabio, is reportedly in the process of defecting to the APC. Akpabio was a key member of PDP in the last dispensation who went silent on the floor of the senate in this administration after the anti-graft authorities called him in. He is believed by some to have been involved in extensive corruption during his time as Akwa-Ibom State governor and an EFCC dossier on his activities is now being used as leverage against him.

    If the APC takes in Akpabio, it will be a validation of the popular belief that the APC and PDP are birds of the same feather and that the authorities adopt selective prosecution as a tool for maintaining power and putting the opposition in check. One wonders how many of our serving legislators and other officials have similar files that have been kept in the store for them or whether indeed there exists any politician or serving official without a dossier of corruption.

    These types of political drama always happen very close to elections and caution is thrown to the wind in most cases. Many are of the opinion that the occurrences are necessary for the growth of our young democracy. In truth, there is absolutely no need for our democracy to pass through the rigours of maturing that old established systems went through centuries ago. If we are a young country as they say, we have the years of experience and examples from matured democracies to learn from, instead of stumbling through the same obstacles.

    The law has also not kept up with our growing democracy. One would have expected that the issue of defection and its consequence should be a matter of settled law. Also, because of the rash of unlawful impeachments and the propensity of legislators to abuse the process, the appraisal and endorsement of a superior court, or a tribunal made of senior members of the judiciary should be a more prominent part of the impeachment process. This may forestall hasty and faulty impeachments and the waste of judicial time in contesting the process.

    There may be no fool-proof way for preventing the misuse of power by a person in authority, but there may be a way to ensure that the consequences of abuse of power are suffered by the culprits instead of letting the matter drag on until it can be weaponised as an instrument of blackmail or for a political agenda. This should be the focus of political reforms in coming years.