Category: Editorial

Thomas Adewumi University is one of the little known private tertiary institutions licenced to offer degree courses in the country. Located in Oko Irese, Kwara State, one would have thought it would need years to be nurtured to maturity before it could blaze the trail in any major area of endeavour. But it has chosen to show the light to much older institutions by venturing into solar energy to power its facilities. The proprietor, Dr. Johnson Adewumi, has unveiled a 214 KW solar power farm to supply the 56 KW energy needed by the university community. This is an innovation in a country where even institutions located in major cities suffer epileptic power supply.

Many of Nigerian schools have always pointed out how power outage has frequently disrupted their programmes. Some are forced to shut down when students protest the effect of such disruption as they have no water supply since their boreholes are shut down, specimens could not be preserved in the laboratories and the hygiene needs of staff and students approach the sub-human level. But, by its innovative approach, Thomas Adewumi University has shown the direction to others. Universities exist to find solution to challenges and problems. The institution deserves commendation for this noble effort.

It is even the more laudable that the institution has decided to supply the excess capacity to its host communities, Oko Irese and Omu Aran. This is a worthy example of the relationship that should exist between the town and gown. Dr. Adewumi has also promised to train people from the university and surrounding communities on fixing energy needs through provision of solar energy.

There are so many ways our universities can benefit their immediate communities as major producers of skilled manpower and knowledge. It is not enough that graduates are released to the labour market to seek white collar jobs. While in school, they should be encouraged to interact with their environment with a view to identifying areas of need that they can try their hands on while in school. Such experience would be useful after their graduation, and where the labour market is saturated, they would be innovative in eking out a living and be useful to the country.

Thomas Adewumi University has shown Nigeria one way out of our power challenge. The intractable problem can be solved by institutions and agencies, including private enterprises embracing alternative sources of power supply. This would reduce the over-dependence on the national grid, thus ensuring a more efficient distribution of energy.

One major component of cost of production by manufacturers in Nigeria is the purchase of diesel and gasoline. If some generate their energy needs, or so much is freed for supply by the electricity distribution companies, the cost would drastically reduce and the soaring inflation in the country would reduce. Regular supply of electricity to homes, too, could increase productivity as more people would come to work more refreshed. It could also boost disposable income as money spent on petroleum products by those who depend on generating sets would be freed for other things needed by households.

Apart from supply of electricity to the immediate environment, the university could also explore means of generating funds through meeting the people’s needs. Every university should learn not to depend on a single source of income such as fees and grants from the proprietors, whether government or private individuals. There are many needs that could be supplied, thus ensuring that indigent students could raise some funds and the institution become more buoyant to fund research.

Thomas Adewumi University has taken a major step forward, it should not rest on its oars as there is still so much ground to cover. The National Universities Commission should officially write to commend the institution for this trailblazing effort as a means of encouraging others to do likewise.

Actions by the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), Mr. Abubakar Malami, on claims by consultants that the 36 state governments owe them $418 million have continued to reverberate in the public space in the past few weeks. While the AGF insists that the states owe the consultants so much for efforts to assist them in recovering refund due them from the Paris Club loan, the states, represented by the Ekiti State Governor Kayode Fayemi who is chairman of the Nigerian Governors Forum (NGF) maintains that the chief law officer of the federation has abdicated his responsibility to the public by teaming up with the claimants.

This is a grave allegation by the governors. The AGF had contended last week in press statements and interview with journalists that the governors have no legal ground to back out of a binding agreement entered into with the consultants, which is an indication that such services were truly rendered. He also pointed out that the states had started paying the said claim and should abide by the pact entered into with the six consultants, with the Federal Government attending the meetings. More importantly, Mr. Malami who is a Senior Advocate of Nigeria and Nigeria’s Minister of Justice said he had received an order of mandamus from the court compelling the Federal Government to commence monthly deduction of the said amount over the next 10 years.

These are weighty issues that cannot be swept under the carpet. How could an attorney-general appointed to see that justice prevails nationwide be accused of working against public interest? President Muhammadu Buhari rode into power on the crest of overwhelming public support based on a promise to promote the welfare of ordinary Nigerians. On about three occasions, the Federal Government had to intervene in straightening finances of the federating units. To accuse the same government of abdicating such responsibility by excitedly farming out such money to private individuals is something the President should be personally interested in investigating, especially as Dr. Fayemi said they had taken the matter to him a couple of times.

The issues are quite many. How much is really involved? As the governors have claimed that the document produced by the consultants as court judgment has no sum specified. Then, who contracted the consultants on behalf of the 36 states and the Association of Local Governments of Nigeria (ALGON)? At this point, all documents and those involved should be unveiled in the public interest. More than a sleight of hand is needed in awarding N169 billion to some consultants. How were they chosen, if indeed they were contracted, when and where?

The contention that the governors have started paying is not enough indication that the liability is admitted. It is also not acceptable to suggest that, having allegedly signed an agreement for payment about one decade earlier, a new set of governors being called upon to make payment have no right to scrutinise the said judgment. It is surprising that Mr. Malami could suggest that such humongous amount should be paid to the consultants without due interrogation of all the issues involved.

Read Also: Governors insist on litigation to end Paris Club refund row

The contention that only a minority faction of the governors forum got involved in the contentious negotiations has introduced a fresh dimension. At the time in 2013, the official chairman of the NGF was Mr. Rotimi Amaechi, then governor of Rivers State and now Minister of Transportation. But, a minority had rallied behind Mr. Jonah Jang as chairman. Anything done or purported to have been done by the then governor of Plateau State is at least questionable and further action on such agreement should await judgment by the Court of Appeal before execution could be levied.

Who are these consultants and what technical competence do they possess? The better known of them, Mr. Ned Nwoko, Dr. George Uboh of Panic Alert System and Mr. Orji Nwafor-Orizu are not known to possess extraordinary experience in forensic audit to have been contracted for such assignment. Were they scrutinised to ascertain their requisite experience in undertaking such assignments? Why were private consultants contracted to perform functions that the ministries of justice and offices of the accountants-general of the states are statutorily equipped to perform? If they could not go into determining how much was over-deducted from their states in the circumstances, what do they exist for? As Governor Fayemi pointed out, Mr. Malami is Attorney-General of the Federation, and as such should have watched out for the interest of the people in all the states. Even if the consultants came calling, the AGF ought to have invited his brother attorneys-general from the states to determine what could be done to avert what would appear a catastrophe. The strident defence he has continued to put up for the consultants conflicts with the known responsibility of whoever occupies such a high position.

It is even more curious that this is coming at a time when all things appear to have gone comatose in the public sector. State governments are finding it increasingly difficult to pay salaries and pensions, let alone improve health and education facilities, improve on road infrastructure and generally attend to welfare needs of the most vulnerable in the society. That the AGF ordered the Debt Management  Office to issue promissory notes against states’ allocations from the Federation Account is thus most insensitive. There is a lot he could have done. He ought to have summoned the consultants to a meeting where the puzzle surrounding the said debt could have been resolved. How was the deduction arrived at? Were the local governments, known to be the weakest tier of government in the country and said to owe a chunk of the money consulted? Did ALGON have the capacity to fully appreciate what it was going into at the time it purportedly signed the said agreement?

In all this, the AGF has been suggesting that he is acting strictly in accordance with the law; that his hands are tied. But, need anyone point out to the lawyer that there is a pending case by the governors before the Court of Appeal? Isn’t this sufficient for the AGF to weigh in on the side of caution until the legal conundrum is solved?

President Buhari as the Chief Executive Officer of the Federation should immediately step in and invite the parties again to review the issues. It should not be so difficult since the AGF is his appointee, and another appointee of his, Mr. Amaechi, has been mentioned as having full knowledge of what transpired. Fortuitously, too, Dr. Fayemi was his minister before he got reelected governor of Ekiti State and consequently chairman of the NGF. Where public finance is involved, due diligence must be fully applied. A forensic audit to verify all claims should be immediately ordered, especially with claims that a particular consultant got paid seven million dollars to review a judgment. Is this a standard practice?

The matter has lingered enough. There have been allegations flying about the roles played by public officials since the Obasanjo administration. It is time to lay it all to rest expeditiously. Further delay is in no one’s interest.

When the programme was announced with funfair last year, through the Federal Ministry of  Labour and Employment, the Special Public Works Programme (SPWP) was enthusiastically received by large numbers of Nigerians who saw this initiative as a welcome intervention to alleviate poverty in an economic climate made even more inclement by the rampaging Coronavirus pandemic. The SPWP was designed to create temporary jobs for 1,000 unemployed youths in each of the country’s 774,000 local government areas. Each of the participants in the scheme was to receive N20, 000 per month for three months, spanning October to December, last year.

When he appeared for his ministerial budget defence, the Minister of State in the Federal Ministry of Labour and Unemployment, Mr Festus Keyamo, answering questions raised by some of the senators as regards unpaid beneficiaries of the job scheme, revealed that some of the participants are still being owed N7.3 billion by the ministry. While noting that this challenge had to do largely with banking issues, Keyamo promised that all yet to be paid beneficiaries will receive their money before the end of this year.

It is, of course, unfortunate that the ministry waited for questions to be asked by the legislators before informing the public as regards the hitch experienced in meeting the ministry’s obligations to some participants in the programme. One of the senators, for instance, Senator Kabiru Barkiya, from Katsina State had told the minister that “ In my state, Katsina, some of the beneficiaries were asked to open an account with a bank that has no branch in the state”. A routine press statement or press conference to acquaint the public, including the beneficiaries, with the cause of the delay and promising that all pending payments would be settled before the end of the year would have calmed nerves and dispelled any notion or suspicion of underhand dealings in the disbursement of the fund.

Of course, we are aware that many of the beneficiaries actually started work in December, 2020, rather than October when the programme was slated to start and this could cause some delays in payment.

Read Also: Labour to Ayade: civil service is dying

Going by the minister’s explanation to the Senate Committee on Labour and Employment, what has happened is an unforeseen glitch in the administrative process and not a deliberate attempt to dupe the beneficiaries or inflict hardship on them. According to the minister, “Why we insisted on certain banks was because of auditing process. This is so that we have audit instead of us chasing banks all over the place. We said the banks should use their local branches to ensure that those 1,000 people selected in the local government area go to those banks within their locality”. The minister disclosed that the ministry made adjustments in the payment mode in the last few months by opening up the process and allowing beneficiaries to use any bank in their locality. Consequently, Keyamo assured the committee, a particular bank is no longer being attached to a local government, thus making it possible for beneficiaries to make use of banks of their choice in their locality.

Also briefing the legislators, the Director-General of the National Directorate of Employment (NDE), the agency directly responsible for implementing the SPWP, Mr Abubakar Fikpo, gave an indication into how the fund for payment of the beneficiaries is being handled to ensure proper standards of transparency, accountability and integrity. He pointed out that the N52 billion appropriated for the scheme had been domiciled in the Central Bank of Nigeria ( CBN) with payment to beneficiaries routed through selected commercial banks. Explaining the process further, Mr Fikpo said the NDE compiles details of the beneficiaries, including their bank accounts, which are forwarded to the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation. The latter then instructs the CBN to disburse funds for payment.

The complaints of beneficiaries, who are yet to be paid to their legislators, must have been due to an avoidable communication gap between the participants involved and the ministry. Certainly the beneficiaries cannot be blamed if they entertain apprehensions that they were probably being denied their rights after fulfilling their own part of the bargain with the ministry. Since the ministry has the contact details of the unpaid beneficiaries, it should communicate with them through text messages on a consistent basis assuring them of the pending payment of their allowances. This will elicit confidence and inspire hope by the beneficiaries in the good faith of the ministry. Again, when a project of this scale is being undertaken by ministries, departments and agencies, it is important to have detailed and meticulous planning at every stage of the programme design and execution. That way, in this case for example, the banks in every local government area would be ascertained and necessary adjustments made to ensure smooth payment to all beneficiaries.

Meanwhile, we call on the minister to make the payment of beneficiaries’ pending allowances a priority of his ministry and ensure that his promise of paying the outstanding obligations before the end of the year is a pledge by which he is bound. While the ministry deserves commendation for trying to abide by high standards of transparency and accountability in the disbursement of the funds, it should also bear in mind the hardships faced by unpaid beneficiaries, most of who subscribed to the programme to find some succor in the current hard times.

Leaders of countries in the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) have just slammed fresh sanctions against military juntas in Mali and Guinea, serving a strong notice that coups were no longer tolerated in the sub-region. They also called on both countries to diligently commit to schedules outlined for restoration of democracy or risk further sanctions.

Rising from an extraordinary summit of the Authority of Heads of State and Government in ECOWAS on November 7, in Accra, Ghana, the leaders resolved to impose fresh sanctions with immediate effect against identified individuals and groups of persons, particularly the transition authorities and related institutions in the two countries. They said in a statement that the new measures included travel bans and asset freezes on members of the transition authorities and family members, adding that ECOWAS would consider additional sanctions by December if no progress is made towards democracy. The latest raft of measures is, perhaps, the bloc’s toughest response yet to military takeovers.

Mali’s interim government took power following the military’s overthrow of President Ibrahim Boubacar Keita in August 2020, and had promised to oversee an 18-month transition that should culminate in elections on February 27, 2022. But the junta has since pedalled back, notifying ECOWAS of its inability to meet the transition deadline. Only last October, it expelled ECOWAS special envoy to Bamako, accusing him of “actions incompatible with his status.” Although the sub-regional body had imposed sanctions, including border closures, on the heels of last year’s coup, it lifted the sanctions barely two months later when the coup leaders agreed to the 18-month transition schedule.

In Guinea, Col. Mamady Doumbouya early in September led a coup to overthrow President Alpha Condé, marking the fourth time within 12 months that the frontiers of democracy were being rolled back in the sub-region. There had been two military takeovers in Mali, a failed coup attempt in Niger and extra-constitutional succession of slain President Idriss Déby of Chad by his son, General Mahamat Idriss Déby. Outside of West Africa, there was military seizure of power in Sudan on October 25, and arrest of Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok.

Read Also: ECOWAS Bank secures 40b francs credit from BOA Group

Guinea’s Doumbouya promised a return to democracy but didn’t say when he would organise elections. ECOWAS leaders, at their extraordinary summit, appointed ace diplomat Mohamed Ibn Chambas as special envoy to engage with the transitional regime, while upholding Guinea’s suspension from all ECOWAS governing bodies as well as the travel ban and financial assets freeze imposed on junta officials and their family members until constitutional order gets restored in the country. Speaking on respective situations in Guinea and Mali, Nigeria’s Vice President Yemi Osinbajo, who represented President Muhammadu Buhari, said: “It appears from all indications that much progress has been made in Guinea, although we are still concerned that there ought to be much more clarity on transition. But Mali is a much more difficult situation, there is much concern because very little progress has been made.”

It is commendable that ECOWAS is taking a tough line against military adventurers in power. Osinbajo was quoted saying: “One of the important points that the ECOWAS Heads of State and Government make is that coups and coups d’état generally are just completely unacceptable, and that we cannot continue to have a situation where they are tolerated for the simple reason that in Africa, West Africa in particular, we’ve gone way beyond military coups as an answer to the question of change in political actors.” We are in total agreement with the Vice President on this score, and on his call that multilateral organs like the United Nations, African Union and European Union should rally behind ECOWAS in pressing sanctions against actors who choose not to follow the democratic path in changing governments and rather stage coups.

But the point must again be made that good governance must become a consuming passion of African leaders to foreclose excuses typically seized upon by military opportunists. In other words, tough aversion to coups is good, but diligent commitment to good governance is way off better.

Just as well: the Steering Committee of the National Taskforce on the illegal importation of rice through land borders is mulling an inter-agency approach to policing Nigeria’s porous borders.

The Benin border has been a beehive of economic sabotage, with tonnes and tonnes of smuggled rice, via the Cotonou Ports.  That is despite that the ECOWAS Protocol on movement of imported goods frowns at such unconscionable sabotage.

It’s high time, therefore, Nigeria got tough: against Nigerian Judases, who for personal greed sabotage their home economy; and for Benin Republic, which seems unable to resist illicit revenue at Nigeria’s dire expense.  This twin-reckless behaviour must stop.  The security agencies should sit up and see to it.

Andy Ekwelem, director-general, Rice Producers Association of Nigeria (RPAN), just shared a rather troubling intelligence: over 566, 000 metric tonnes of rice had arrived Republic of Benin Cotonou Ports from Thailand and India.

It takes no especial acuity to figure that armada is meant for Nigeria, via smuggling.  Benin simply lacks the capacity to consume all that stuff.  The clear target is to derail Nigeria’s goal of food security.  That must be resisted by all legal and legitimate means.

It’s even more roiling that such umpteenth outrage comes from the Benin front, after its border with Nigeria was shut for some one year, following complaints linked to rice, fuel and allied smuggling.

But it is equally heart-warming that the Nigerian Customs Service (NCS) appears rallying to the challenge.  ”It is always like that at the end of the year,” Timi Bomodi, NCS deputy public affairs officer disclosed. “We anticipated this and more officers are going to be deployed to the borders to check the smuggling.”

He further enthused: “There is no number yet but they will come from the various intervention units; the commands, the Federal Operations Unit.  We have the Strike Force Unit, the border drill which is a combined unit that comprises Customs and other military and paramilitary officers,” he told The Punch.

Read Also: Rice smuggling on the rise

That not only appears impressive but it is clearly in sync with a re-booted inter-agency approach Col. Hameed Ali (rtd), the NCS director-general, had pushed at the steering committee meeting.

Ali had declared: “The NCS cannot fight alone in the operation of border patrol.  It needs other security agencies such as the Nigerian Civil Defence Corps to beef up the joint operations of the task force.”

At that meeting too, Dr. Mohammed Abubakar, agriculture and rural development minister, said Nigeria could not risk a rise in rice smuggling, which could scuttle the gains it had made these past six years, in increased public-private sector investment in agriculture.

Indeed rice (and the bold investments in its entire value chain) has been the poster-crop of the Buhari Presidency’s campaign for Nigerians to “grow what you eat and eat what you grow”.

Rice also appears the clear symbol of a putative rebirth of a thriving local real sector, with agro-allied industries powering back re-industrialisation; and creating millions of new jobs.  These goals are too vital to be derailed by rice smuggling.

Also at that meeting were Dahiru Ado, chair of the Presidential Committee on Trade Malpractice, A. E. Obekwe, representative of the commandant-general, Nigerian Civil and Security Defence Corps and Babatunde Irukera, CEO of the Federal Competition Consumer Protection Commission.

It is good that the meeting pushed for stiffer penalties against companies smuggling in foreign rice through land borders (clearly illegal, as rice is only allowed in through the sea ports, where the requisite duties are charged).

It also advocated the further re-orienting of Nigerians to buy local rice so as to shut out foreign brands, particularly with progressive improvements in rice milling, packaging and allied processes of the past six years.

While Nigeria could consider signing anti-smuggling pacts with its nettling neighbours, the Presidential Committee on Trade Malpractice should also explore invoking the Protocol on the movement of imported goods to seek ECOWAS sanctions against Benin and its treacherous rice imports.

The inter-agency security agencies too should crank up their act against this renewed smuggling.  However here, talk is cheap.  Smuggling couldn’t have thrived this far without rogue border patrol elements cutting sweetheart deals with smugglers.

Let the revamped inter-agency border patrol, therefore, not prove yet another Yuletide “growth area” for unscrupulous troopers at the borders. Nigeria must kill smuggling before smuggling kills Nigeria.

The latest report that the banking system has, despite the odds, remained resilient with all the major banks expanding their assets base is heart-warming. Nonetheless, it raises the long acknowledged, yet troubling, disconnect between the sector and the larger economy.

According to this newspaper, from N42.2 trillion at the beginning of the year, total assets of the top-tier banks grew to more than N46 trillion by September 30. In all, the report showed a percentage increase of between three and 19 per cent across the sector.

Yet, as if to put to lie any claim about the development being a measure of strength and possible lending capacity of the banks, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in its latest 2021 Financial Access Survey (FAS) actually found that Nigerian banks not only closed 234 branches in 2020, some 649 automated teller machines (ATMs) were taken out of business during the same period. Specifically, the shutdown of bank branches and ATMs is said to have led to a decline in Nigeria’s Financial Access Score (FAS) to 4.44 in 2020 as against 4.78 recorded in 2019.

There were also related findings such as decline in the number of registered mobile money agent outlets across the country from 145,800 in 2019 to 129,154 in 2020 and a rise though in the number of borrowers from commercial banks from 25.42 per 1,000 adults in 2019 to 29.61 per 1,000 adults in 2020.

Interestingly, deposits with commercial banks per percentage of gross domestic product (GDP) is said to have risen to 20.50 in 2020 against 16.31 in 2019 just as outstanding loans from the deposit money banks increased to 12.93 percent of GDP in 2020 from 11.80 in 2019.

Read Also: Court bars banks from releasing N11.79b to couple, firm

To be sure, the development merely highlights the familiar paradox of banks posting healthy balance sheets when the economy is going down. For, while the past year was a particularly challenging one, chiefly from the lockdown occasioned by the COVID-19 pandemic, yet, the picture overall – at least from the reports – is that the banks not only managed to ride the fierce headwinds but actually kept going somewhat, which was not exactly the case for the larger economy.

Yet, if we understood the need to keep fewer number of bank branches open as part of measures to contain the pandemic, it’s hard to justify the permanent closure of any branch under any guise given its dire implications not only for the economy but the personnel involved. Similarly, that hundreds of a major alternative channel for cash withdrawals which the ATM represents could be put out of action for whatever reasons at that point in time when the economy was on a lockdown is just as inexcusable.

Both cases seem to us instances of putting profit over and above their social responsibility.

It is certainly not sufficient for the nation’s banks to wear the tag of resilience; the real test actually lies in their ability to lend to businesses, particularly the micro, small, medium scale enterprises (MSMEs), to grow the economy. For the resilience to be meaningful, it must translate into real financial inclusion and ease of credit administration. In other words, the old order of perennially whining about constraints, of frustrations and moral hazards when it comes to lending, has to yield to a new paradigm of innovation and effective use of ICT.

For, if the banks under that old order of lending to a narrow band of operators routinely churned out huge profits, offering financial services to a broader segment of Nigerians in dire need of credit will certainly serve the sector better as indeed the economy in the age of Bank Verification Number (BVN) and National Identification Number (NIN). It will mean more businesses and potentially more profits for the banks. But this can only happen when the banks shed the old mindset that seeks to put profit first and last in credit administration, and also their penchant for short-term lending that delivers pretty little value to the economy.

In pitching for more cash in each respective tills, neither the Federal Government nor the states are saints or sinners.  Each just hankers after where its bread is buttered.

Still, in the Federal Government’s latest proposals for a new revenue allocation formula, you could glean an unfazed unitary mindset cloaked in frothy paternalism, with  excessive fixation with local governments which, by the way, ought to be an exclusive business of the states.

“The Federal Government spends most of its resources on and for the states and local governments …,” declared Boss Mustapha, secretary to the government of the federation (SGF), in the tone of a caring father.  He spoke through Andrew David Adejoh, permanent secretary, political and economic affairs, Office of the SGF.

It was at an Abuja Town Hall meeting, organised by the Revenue Mobilization Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC), where the Federal Government bared its mind on a new revenue allocation formula, as the states had been doing in geo-political zones, these past two weeks.

It was, therefore, with the vexed tone of a caring but hugely unappreciated father that the SGF blurted out: “When you juxtapose this with the equally greater number of responsibilities on the Exclusive Legislative List, you would even want to make a case for greater allocation to the Federal Government.”  Hear!  Hear!

To be clear: there’s nothing wrong having a caring Federal Government.  Indeed, no country would demand for less.  But in this case, that care is not working — precisely because of the so-called “number or responsibilities on the Exclusive List”: a huge deform to the federal principle, which the Federal Government nevertheless now pushes to rally its cause.  The irony of it all must have been lost on the SGF, as his representative made the federal case.

What is more? With all due respect to the central authorities, their fixation with local governments is rather misplaced — in any case beyond the six area councils of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT).  FCT is where the Federal Government can deploy cash and effectively monitor how it is spent.  Pushing that activism to states seldom works, as can be seen by current attempts to shovel cash directly to the 774 recognised local governments nationwide.

That brings the matter to the Federal Government’s specific proposals, on how the new sharing formula should look: “As an interim and immediate measure,” the SGF announced, “the Federal Government is declaring the following: Federal Government, 50.65 per cent; states, 25.62 per cent; Local Governments, 23.73 per cent and derivation allocation, 13 per cent.”

The news here is that for the love of the local governments, the Federal Government is prepared to shed little weight from its current 52.68 per cent takings.  It wants 3.13 per cent extra for the grassroots mayors: 2.03 of that should come from its current share, so long as states too should shed 1.10 per cent from their current allocations.

Now, what is this?  Genuine charity towards the local governments? Or crass cynicism to browbeat the states from asking for higher allocations?  Whatever it is, the Federal Government is at liberty to cede some of its cash to local governments.  But it clearly goes beyond its bounds to couple states to the deal.  That itself is a Freudian slip, which betrays the central arrogance that continues to trump the essence of federalism, but enthrones unitary thinking, in a supposed federal state.

But settling for the federal principle for organic growth is no carte blanche for the states who, posturing under a popular push to re-federalise, have displayed no less greed to corner resources for its sake, not from a proven track record of solid responsibility — beyond jejune matters of “paying salaries”.

For the records, governors want own allocations to crest at 42 per cent (from 26.72), the federal share to dip to 37 per cent (from 52.68), and local governments’ to rise to 23 per cent (from 20.60).  Why, one of the South-South states even proposed that Niger Delta derivation jump from 13 per cent to 50!  Although the principle of that request appears on solid grounds because the 13 per cent ought to have been constantly reviewed, 13 to 50 per cent is clear wild posturing craving more reasonable negotiations.

Again, the states commit no crimes looking out for selves just as the Federal Government has done for itself.  But they stand fairly accused of abandoning fundamental chores — Universal Basic Education and Primary Health Care — which the Federal Government now uses against them: and not unfairly too!

Abuja did not mention this one but states’ past irresponsible behaviours is why a unitary system has been imposed on the Nigerian judiciary, with every judge paid from the central purse.  That also tells the sad history of how basic education became a federal matter, an area where dutiful and responsible states should never have shared their glory with anyone!

Indeed, it was in this very area that the Western Region, under the premiership of Chief Obafemi Awolowo, made the brilliant difference; and forced both fellow regions and even the Federal Government, then the Leviathan in Lagos, to adjust own policies to compete in a laudable race for development.

But alas!  That was a different era — pre-independence.  What we are not sure of now is whether we are progressing or retrogressing!  One thing is sure, though: if generally states have no strong records in education and health — critical development indices that should make a difference for their people — on what basis would they make a strong push to throw off the central unitary yoke?  Beyond the umpteenth bleat of “paying salaries” the states must up their acts in key developmental areas!

Still, what this federal-state jokey for more cash has shown is there is no alternative to a sound and vibrant federal system, where cash is strictly tied to tasks and responsibilities.  That much Elias Mbam, the RMAFC chair, acknowledged when he declared the new sharing formula would be “tied directly to the responsibility of each tier of government.”

So, let the December deadline for the new formula spark fresh thinking on the federal question.  If RMAFC does a vigorous link between cash and responsibilities, transferring many federal chores to states, with the accompanying cash (via constitutional amendment, of course) it may well lay a solid foundation to re-federalise the polity.

But beyond demonising federal arrogance — hardly unfair — and states milking sympathy from “restructuring” sentiments, the states must prove their mettle for a re-federalised Nigeria to work; just as the Federal Government must rid itself of cynical paternalism.

 

The Abdulrasheed Maina saga came to a denouement last week, with the jailing of the former chairman of the defunct Pension Reform Task Team for eight years, and an order to forfeit N2.1 billion which he could not account for. Many Nigerians consider the sentence a slap on the wrist, considering the gravity and sociological implication of the offence he committed. Delivering his judgment, Justice Okon Abang said: “The facts of this case portray the moral decadence of the society we live in, having considered the monumental fraud about how pensioners’ funds were stolen.”

Justice Abang went on: “It is a clear case that the convict is inhuman, heartless and had no compassion for the pensioners. Some of them have suffered; others have died while waiting to get their reward on earth whereas the convict was feeding fat from their sweat in faraway Dubai, buying properties, driving bulletproof cars that were beyond his legitimate earnings.” He then found Maina guilty of six out of the 12-count charge, and sentenced him to various years of imprisonment for each offence, the highest of which is eight years.

The pension thief will also forfeit about N2.1 billion found in his account, $223,396.30, two houses at Life Camp and Jabi districts in Abuja, while the bullet-proof car found in his premises will be auctioned. Considering the calibre of persons Maina’s stealing would have put into misery, we consider the judge too lenient, not to have passed the maximum sentence of 14 years on him. Maina’s crime is not just that he stole, he dealt a heavy blow to the fortunes of people who had toiled all their lives.

He disrespected and plundered the lifetime work of Nigerians in their hoary years, and the consequence is that those people will not be in peace until they die. As the judge noted, some of them have died waiting for what Maina stole to lubricate his pleasure and callousness. Indeed, a thief like Maina deserves to spend the rest of his life in jail, and forfeit any money that can be traced to him.

Read Also: Maina jailed eight years for N2b pension theft

If Maina had denied people their lifetime savings in their old age, and sentenced them to a life of misery, he does not deserve to enjoy his old age in luxury, as it seems will be the case. With the eight years imprisonment running with effect from October 25, 2019, when he was arraigned, he barely has about two more years to be in prison, as eight years does not translate to eight calendar years.

We wonder how those he has condemned to destitution by stealing their pension would feel, when they see him free and enjoying life in a few years from now. The legislature should tinker with the sentencing for those who steal or plunder our common wealth. The punishment deserves to be more grievous than what was handed to Maina a few days ago.

Some powerful interests tried to circumvent the wheel of justice in the Maina saga, by promoting him in the civil service, and when they were found out, they helped him escape to Dubai.

It is strange that those public officials who tried to obstruct justice in the Maina case, are still in government, as if what they did has no consequence. We urge President Muhammadu Buhari to sieve them out of his government and submit them to trial. Also, the banks mentioned by the judge as conniving with Maina should be held to account. We note that banks have been the nodal points of corruption, and it is high time they were served the comeuppance for their indiscretions.

His life was the stage and he had a distinguished career as a man of the stage. His appointment as Artistic Director of the National Troupe of Nigeria, a position he occupied from 1991 to 2000, was a testimony to his expertise. The Federal Government formally established the National Troupe in 1989 to promote Nigerian culture through dance, drama, music, and children/youth theatre.

Prof. Bayo Oduneye, who died on November 8, four days after his 88th birthday, was well equipped for the role.  He taught Directing and Stage Management at the University of Ibadan for nearly five decades, and later worked at Olabisi Onabanjo University in Ogun State. He practised what he taught. He was artistic director of the PEC Repertory Theatre in Lagos, Nigeria’s first repertory theatre.

A tribute by the National President of the National Association of Nigerian Theatre Arts Practitioners (NANTAP), Mr. Israel Eboh, described Oduneye, who was a Fellow of the association, as an “erudite theatre scholar and teacher, mentor, astute arts administrator and director par excellence.”

He was regarded as an expert on total theatre, and directed more than 100 plays, locally and internationally, including some well-known works.  He directed J.P. Clark’s Song of a Goat at Carnegie Mellon University (USA) in 1971,  Wale Ogunyemi’s Langbodo  and  Ijaiye War (1974) ), Wole Soyinka’s Childe Internationale and The Trials of Brother Jero (1973),  and Ola Rotimi’s Our Husband has Gone Mad Again (1980/81).

He also directed Foursome by Eugene Ionesco (1970/73), Orison by Fernando Arrabal (1974), Death and the King’s Horseman by Wole Soyinka (1987), Antigone by Jean Anouilh (1988), and The Trials of Oba Ovonramwen by Ahmed Yerima (1997).

Read Also: Buju exits Burna Boy’s label

Described as “an actor’s director,” he had gained considerable experience as a technical man and stage manager before becoming a director, which explained his focus on stage movement.  Apart from his competence, his success as a stage director was also a result of the great passion he brought to his work.

It was striking when, in his 80s in 2015, he declared that the “theatre is dead in Nigeria” during a visit by the  leadership and members of the National Troupe to his country home in Ijebu-Ode, Ogun State. He said: “Theatre was alive in the 1970s; part of the 80s and 90s. But funds were a very big problem; unless we get funds, we can’t match theatre in those days.”

According to him, “Theatre, generally, in Nigeria, is dead for lack of funds. Also, the actors have turned it into something else. However, the Federal Government needs to come in and do something that will enhance everything about the theatre.”

This picture of poor funding by the authorities and poor professionalism on the part of actors may well explain the present moribund condition of the National Troupe.

There is no doubt that the troupe is today a shadow of its former self. It is supposed to “achieve high artistic productions specifically designed for national and international tours,” and to “ensure the preservation of the repertoire of the troupe,” among other objectives.  But there is a wide gap between its stated aims and its current reality.

It is significant that Oduneye’s time as the National Troupe’s artistic director is regarded as its golden age.  His death highlights the increasing philistinism in the corridors of power that has contributed to the fading glory of the National Troupe. It is a disservice to his pioneering era that the authorities have allowed the troupe to lose its essence.

His legacies are theatrical commitment, artistic effulgence, and a sense of mentoring. Perhaps the greatest tribute to his services to the performing arts would be the resuscitation of the National Troupe, and its vibrant continuity.

The idea has been in the offing for a while, but it has finally found its day in the National Assembly. The Femi Gbajabiamilla-led House of Representatives took the bull by the horn and staked its reputation on grassroots politics and democracy. Barring any hiccup from the Presidency, a new berth has been born for Nigeria’s democratic experimentation.

The obstacle has been the governors. They were in the primaries that led to the electoral sweepstakes of the 2019 elections. There was a debate in the party. Vice President Yemi Osinbajo had to yield to the superior logic of Speaker Gbajabiamila, whose rigour and potency persuaded the people.

The Progressives Governors Forum (PGF) said it did not like it. They wanted a monarchical version of democracy. The lawmakers voted for the people.

This set off a tension between two important institutions of democracy. The matter got to a head so the echelon of the All Progressives Congress (APC) met in order to put paid to the matter still roiling the soul of the party, and, by implication, the nation’s way of choosing its leaders.

What began in the House of Representatives gained traction in the Senate, and both houses united in this innovative idea of selecting those who govern Nigeria.

Why did the governors, especially in the APC, say no to it? It is because they want to cast the representatives of the people in their own image. The way it goes is this: the governors scour the body politic, and they divide them into who are for the governors’ interests and those who are not.

They select those who support them as delegates. These delegates are rubber-stamp men and women, who have either been bought over with loads of cash by the governors and their acolytes, or who share their philosophy or interests.

Read Also: APC, governors, senators, reps’ meeting deadlocked

The concept of the delegate system is not necessarily anathema to politics and the republican worldview. But it works in sophisticated climes where delegates are even elected.  It  is not done in the hush-hush dark of manipulation and tendentious politicking as we have here in Nigeria.

But if we ask our people to line up and vote who they want to be governor, lawmaker, local government chairman, and even president, we shall find out that we are more assured of who represents us.  It is no magic wand to a great society, but it is a good beginning in our search for a formula that is all our own.

The first virtue of this formula is that it is not a rigged and manipulative system, and therefore, it is transparent. The people see and they believe. We have seen the mass ecstasy at elections where people see the electoral commission show voters instant local results of elections.

Two, it reduces rancour and a feeling of alienation. Three, the people acquire a sense of party ownership. Four, it pares down the influence of filthy lucre. We have had over the decades the power of moneybags in our elections, and what has become known as stomach infrastructure. We cannot say we have removed the spectre of money in elections, but it is a challenge we can tackle in the next phase.  What is more?  One of the brazen displays in which people pay to vote will be discouraged.

Another challenge will be in ensuring that non-registered party members do not vote.  We do not have a situation as in some United States’ primaries where non-party members can vote. That compels us to ensure the integrity of membership registers. The parties must calibrate a system that forbids manipulation of voter registers, so as not to exclude genuine party members and democrats.

The failure of governors to upend the conscience of the lawmakers is bodes well.  But we hope the president won’t be swayed by the insidious wisdom of governors who sometimes mistake this democracy for the oligarchy of gubernatorial vampires. We also hope it will not get to a point where the lawmakers have to wield their veto power.