Category: Editorial

•Our soldiers are heroes and should be committed to earth in grand and open circumstances

The report by Premium Times, that 105 Nigerian soldiers from the 157 Battalion, were killed by Boko Haram insurgents in Gudunbali, Borno state, penultimate week, was very disheartening; particularly if one considers the success recorded in the war front by our military men in recent times. While the military confirmed that Boko Haram actually attacked the battalion, it however denied that its men were killed. Last week, Thisday, quoting military sources, carried a bold headline that “army quietly buries dead soldiers killed in Maiduguri”. The paper asserted that it was the 105 soldiers reportedly killed that have been secretly buried.

For us, and we believe for many Nigerians, the death of a soldier at the war front is a national tragedy. But it will be reprehensible, and a dishonour, to secretly bury a dead soldier as if the supreme sacrifice paid for the country amounted to nothing. That is why the military must come clean on the grievous allegation that it had secretly buried its gallant men who fell in battle, in the hands of Boko Haram a few weeks ago. If truly the soldiers were killed and have been secretly buried, then the military should apologise to Nigerians, particularly the bereaved families, and take steps to set up a monument in their honour.

Even before the advent of the present government, there had been reports of several secret burials of our fallen soldiers. Some claim that many of the soldiers declared missing may have been killed. All over the world, soldiers are regarded as national treasures; and a soldier who dies in the battle front is given full military honours at a burial. So, ours should not be different. We recall that earlier this year, the remains of the 17 Chadian soldiers who died fighting Boko Haram in Chad and Nigeria, were received at the airport by the Chadian leader, Idriss Derby, and they were given posthumous honours before they were buried.

We note that in denying the reported killings, the army spokesman in Maiduguri called the report “a fabrication of the imagination of those sympathetic to Boko Haram ways of life”. Such claim, we daresay, is not borne out of facts, and we urge the military spokesmen to appreciate that while the military has the onerous responsibility to defend the country, the media has equally an important responsibility to hold the national actors to public account, by reporting to the public, their actions and inactions. So, instead of pouring invectives on the reporters, we urge the spokesman to counter the claim with facts, instead of the vague report that the commander in charge of the unit attacked is in contact with his brigade commander.

As claimed in the report, the military spokesman, Colonel Sani Usma, said that ‘the burial of soldiers close to the theatre of war was a routine military procedure’. The military spokesman in the report also denied that the burial that took place last week was that of the 105 soldiers that purportedly died, or that were missing. He however did not give a clarification as to who were buried in the military cemetery in Maiduguri, last week.

While the army chief, as the military spokesman, is in the best position to authenticate such a report, we hope he is not compelled to engage in any cover-up, as the media reports insinuated. Regardless of any setback, we urge the military hierarchy to take solace in the dignity of their struggle, and to ensure that where there are casualties, the Nigerian people are put on notice. After all, if the military mourns, our country mourns.

•A way should be devised to accommodate more Nigerian entrepreneurs in the power sector

Local meter manufacturers in the country may be in for a major trouble, going by reports that electricity distribution companies have opted for imported brands. This may not be particularly unexpected, given that the electricity firms are now in private hands. To some extent therefore, they are at liberty to determine who to do business with.

Perhaps the bewilderment in the matter is that early this year, precisely on January 15, the former Minister of Power, Prof Chinedu Nebo, announced the then government’s approval of funds for the procurement of one million meters from local manufacturers to address the challenge of inadequate metering, which remains a festering sore in the power sector. The scheme was initiated by the Goodluck Jonathan administration and funds for the meters were said to have been deposited upfront in one of the banks.

The question that readily comes into mind is whether the then government dialogued with the relevant stakeholders before initiating the project because, if it did, it is unlikely we would be having hiccups in the arrangements a few months after. Another question is, if it did, what were the terms of the agreement before the government deposited money for the products? Are the electricity companies now discarding the local meters due to a breach in the agreement, particularly concerning prices and standards?

Whatever it is, the Federal Government should be interested in the matter. Metering has been a major issue in the electricity sector for decades, with the electricity firms slamming whatever they like on Nigerians as electricity bills, without consideration of their actual power usage and irrespective of whether there is power supply or not. This manifests mainly by way of crazy bills and estimated billing. Indeed, there are instances that light in some neighbourhoods never blinked for months, yet the consumers usually got outrageous bills that they were forced to settle to avoid their power supply being disconnected. Nigeria is one of the few countries where consumers would be charged for services not rendered and the government would be helpless.

Anyway, we had expected that all these anomalies would disappear with the privatisation of the electricity sector. Unfortunately, it appears the electricity companies are not in a hurry to jettison the ancien regime because it is a source of unearned income. Yet, metering is an important component of the electricity distribution system. Therefore, the government has to bring in the parties with a view to getting the best for the country.

If some people had invested in local production of meters, perhaps in response to a clarion call for same in view of the new developments in the power sector, the best the government can do is assist such entities to survive. As the Director-General, Bureau of Public Enterprises, Mr. Benjamin Dikki, rightly observed, it  makes economic sense to leverage the capacity of local manufacturers, as patronising them would go a long way in saving cost; boost job creation whereas if we keep importing, we would only be helping others grow their economy to the detriment of ours. Patronising local companies also helps deepen the economy.

We agree that there is a limit to how far things can be pushed down the throats of the electricity companies because they are now private concerns. But then, the government intervention has to be by way of engaging all the stakeholders, with a view to straightening the curves in the chain. The major fear of the electricity firms is standards; perhaps the other is cost. None is insurmountable if the will is there on the part of the stakeholders. The government must insist on standards; it can also assist the meter producers by way of concessions since it is common knowledge that our environment is generally not conducive to doing business. It would also not be a bad idea if the electricity firms could buy into the meter companies.

• Nigeria Police should take advantage of Babcock’s scholarships and generosity

The apparent refusal of the Nigeria Police Force (NPF) to take up the recent offer of scholarships for the children of its personnel testifies to an institutional inflexibility that does not show the NPF in a good light.

In spite of a well-earned notoriety for extra-judicial killings and frequent acts of indifference and brutality, the sacrifices made by the Nigeria Police in its campaigns against crime, inter-communal clashes and insurgency cannot be ignored.

Hundreds of police officers have lost their lives over the past few years and the repercussions on the families they left behind have been very hard. In some instances, they are driven out of their official accommodation. Benefits and entitlements of the deceased are often not paid on time, condemning their dependants to lives of suffering that they do not deserve.

This is why it is so difficult to understand why the NPF has ignored Babcock University’s offer. It is even less comprehensible when it is known that the current Inspector-General of Police, Mr. Solomon Arase, understands the importance of scholarships as a motivational strategy.

In July, the IGP announced scholarships to the children of police officers killed in anti-insurgency operations in Bauchi State, as well as posthumous promotions for the deceased officers. Three months later, in Osun State, he stated that plans were under way to set up a foundation which would disburse scholarships to the children of police personnel.

It is obvious that the police are not opposed to the granting of scholarships; why then would the NPF ignore Babcock’s offer? It is probable that the odd response stems from bureaucratic inefficiency rather than malevolent inaction.

It seems that the NPF simply waited for Babcock to contact it with details of its offer. Given its uniqueness, the urgent need of its prospective beneficiaries, and the time-bound nature of the admissions process, such a laid-back approach was clearly inappropriate.

When the offer was announced, the police should have made assiduous attempts to follow it up by visiting the school and interacting with its authorities in order to understand the scholarship’s terms and conditions.

How many places was Babcock offering? Are the scholarships partial or full? Are they restricted or open? Would applicants be required to take a special scholarship exam, or would the conventional post-UTME be sufficient? These are the things a proactive NPF would have sought to find out.

The police’s lack of responsiveness could have negative consequences if it is not addressed quickly. It could discourage other universities, corporate organisations and philanthropic individuals who are of a mind to follow Babcock’s example. It might dishearten police officers, and thereby drain them of the motivation to carry out their duties efficiently. It would certainly not be helpful to the grieving offspring of deceased officers, who would now have to add disappointed expectations to the bereavement that they are already struggling to come to terms with.

Fortunately, it is not too late to turn things round. The police must set processes in motion aimed at taking up Babcock’s offer. A formal acceptance of the proposed scholarships must be communicated immediately to the school, followed by a request for a meeting at which the details can be ironed out. Once that is done, the NPF must ensure that those who are eligible to apply for the scholarships know about them and are given whatever assistance they need.

Babcock University, for its part, may need to exert a little more effort if the police persist in this tardiness. The university could advertise its offer and request applications from eligible candidates, ensuring that they meet the primary criterion of being children of police officers. Their generosity is commendable; it is to be hoped that other institutions of higher learning and public-spirited individuals and organisations emulate them.

Sir; when the Freedom of Information Act was signed into law in May 2011, we thought we had unlocked the door on official secrecy and corruption. We celebrated and felicitated that our struggle of over two decades finally paid off. I have heard it on different occasions that, after the 1999 constitution, the most important law today is the Freedom of Information Act. Yet, four years after its passage into law, it does appear that we only unlocked the door, we rarely enter the room to find the skeleton.

A deconstruction of the Attorney General’s Implementation Reports for 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014 shows that many of the institutions that submitted report (as much as 30 and 40% in 2013 and 2014 respectively) did not receive any request for information in a whole fiscal year. In fact many institutions have been submitting reports but have never received any requests at all over the years. These include the Debt Management Office, the Federal Character Commission, Nigeria Football Federation, Office of the National Security Adviser, Nigeria Investment Promotion Commission, Ministry of Police Affairs, Police Service Commission etc, just a few to mention. This does not include the over 500 public institutions that have never submitted any report at all. Does our silence and not-asking questions about and from these institutions imply that we agree that ‘all is well’?

The fight against the cankerworm of corruption is not just about the government, but also about doing everything we all can, albeit within the limit of the law to expose corrupt practices; and one of those ways is by effectively utilising the Freedom of Information Act: asking questions and requesting for information from public institutions in the interest of discouraging official corruption and encouraging accountability.

Put in the words of Tavis Smiley: “We can’t be in an ideological battle to redeem the soul of this country if we don’t have the facts”. Therefore, we cannot fight corruption without information and collective efforts.

As Vivek Wadhwa noted: “An open-minded and diverse population that readily shares information (and) encourages experimentation… is what makes Silicon Valley the successful hub that it is”. This is a wakeup call for Nigerians.

• Sulaimon Ridwan A.

Media Rights Agenda, Ikeja – Lagos.