The Nation Newspaper

Category: Editorial

  • Reduction of fuel import

    Reduction of fuel import

    •This may be the beginning of what to expect after the elections

    With the report that the Petroleum Products Pricing Regulatory Agency (PPPRA) has reduced fuel import by about 50 percent, Nigerians who have been wondering what could have caused the recent fuel scarcity in the country now have a clue. This is even as the Federal Government has offered no explanation for that policy decision. The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) had claimed the scarcity was the handiwork of the opposition All Progressives Congress (APC) that has prevailed on the marketers to stop selling fuel to the public. It is disgusting that the PDP is politicising such an issue that has caused untold hardship to millions of Nigerians.

    According to reports, the PPPRA has cut import allocation permits to 1.5 million metric tonnes, in the second quarter, from the previous three million metric tonnes for the first quarter. One of the reasons for the drastic reduction of import quotas is because marketers are demanding that the Federal Government should pay their outstanding subsidy claims. The disagreement arising from the outstanding claims was also responsible for the last round of fuel scarcity in the country, a few weeks back. Then, the Minister of Finance, Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, claimed to have solved the problem with the issuance of N100 billion sovereign debt note, out of the N185 billion owed the petroleum marketers.

    The current scarcity traced to the same issue of outstanding debt, confirms that the minister has not solved the problem. As the report indicated, many of the marketers are worried that they may not get their money after the elections, and their fears may be well founded. After all, Nigerians are aware that the subsidy regime is steeped in massive corruption, and any sincere audit of the process will reveal the gregarious corruption going on in the name of fuel subsidy. So, the importers should be afraid, considering the underhand deals pervading that sector.

    As we have severally canvassed on the subsidy scam, corruption in the petroleum products marketing sector is one of the major legacies of President Goodluck Jonathan. It is also a great pity that most of the promises of the government on resolving petroleum products crises in the country have not been addressed. The Federal Government had promised three  ‘greenfield refineries’ to replace the aging ones in the country. That promise remains a mirage. Also, the promise to rein in the fraud in the industry has been more of talk, and less action.

    For us, it is a national tragedy that our country is a major importer of finished petroleum products, despite being a top producer of crude oil. The shame of running down our refineries is another major legacy of the PDP. Yet, every year the party has in the past 16 years engaged in one dubious Turn Around Maintenance after another, at humongous costs to the tax payers. Unfortunately, instead of the refineries getting better, their production capacity has continued to plummet, and today our country imports nearly all her finished petroleum products.

    It is almost certain that the little concern the government is showing to Nigerians on the fuel supply situation is because we are in election season. Once the polls are over, the government is likely to come up with measures that will make Nigerians pay more for fuel, claiming that there is no money to sustain the subsidy regime.

    This is why we again urge Nigerians to reject this irrespective of whatever excuse the government might want to use to effect the policy. Nigeria should have no business importing fuel; we have said that time and again. Any deregulation policy which is anchored on fuel importation should not be paid for by Nigerians. Reduction of fuel import by PPPRA is only the beginning of the bitter pills that Nigerians may soon have to swallow.

  • APC’s campaign fund victory

    APC’s campaign fund victory

    Triumph of the rule of law

    ACTION Congress of Nigera’s (APC) court victory over the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) in a suit the party filed against the commission challenging the latter’s banning of its campaign fundraising platform is a triumph of the rule of law and integrity of the new media. The APC had in late January sued the commission, asking for N25billion as damages, for ordering Etisalat, MTN Nigeria Ltd, Globacom Ltd, Airtel Nigeria Ltd and Visafone Communications Ltd. to discontinue its sms platform created to enable the party get donations from willing members of the public for its presidential campaign.

    The idea was to make Nigerians who are sympathetic to the party’s cause donate N100 each to its presidential campaign fund whenever they sent ‘APC’ as sms to 35350. But, the commission, in a letter dated January 19, 2015, ordered the other respondents to shut down the platform, with a warning that they should “avoid running political advertisement/promotions that will portray them as being partisan.” For effect and maximum compliance, the commission was said to have threatened to sanction any of the telecommunications service providers which failed to comply with the order.

    But Justice Ibrahim Buba who delivered judgment in the matter awarded the APC N500million as damages, to be paid jointly and severally by the respondents. He said the APC had a right under the constitution to press for the enforcement of its fundamental human right if violated, dismissed the NCC’s counter-affidavit and held that the action of the respondents was illegal and unconstitutional.

    The APC deserves praise for taking the matter to court. Many such illegalities had occurred and indeed keep occurring in the country daily because those concerned do not challenge them in the court of law. By its decision to sue the commission, the party has helped to deepen our democratic culture. At least the commission now knows its limits under the law as far as such matters are concerned; that is assuming it took its action out of ignorance in the first place. Even if it did with the intention of pleasing its masters, the outcome is enough to make it realise the folly of such decision.

    Campaign contribution is a symbol of freedom of expression and political choice. We therefore wonder how such right can be abridged by a government agency that is supposed to have a responsibility to all Nigerians, irrespective of religious or political affiliation. Moreover, this is a partnership that the NCC itself should profit from because the platform was basically business and not political per se.

    It is disturbing that for a country where moneybags have hijacked the political process the NCC would discourage a venture that has the potential of reducing the influence of such moneybags in the polity and thus give the party some form of economic independence. This was the way political parties were funded in the country many years ago, and it somewhat ensured a sense of collective ownership because no single individual could lay claim to ownership of the party so funded.

    It is disheartening that many government agencies see themselves as appendages of the government instead of the public institutions that they should be. It is better for us all if they can be made to realise that they belong to all Nigerians and not to the government of the day. In the specific instance, the NCC even forgot that it allowed a similar platform for the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), which set up the short codes designated: 6661, 662, 6663 and 6664 managed by one Wagitel Communications Limited to raise funds for the campaign of President Goodluck Jonathan and the vice president, Namadi Sambo, in 2010. Our public institutions should do with less of such discrimination in their own interest and that of the country at large.

    We commend the court for disposing of the matter expeditiously. We can only hope many of our courts would emulate the record time within which the matter was decided.

  • Still on the Presidential race

    SIR: Not even a foreigner can disregard the seismic wave of electioneering that is sweeping through the country. The heated debates and the endless chants of ‘Change’ and ‘Transformation’ by fervid stalwarts of political parties herald a great event for the country. And the political banners and posters?  They seem really ubiquitous.

    The 2015 presidential election, which took place on Saturday, should be a keenly contested election in the nation’s annals of democratic birth. The past few weeks have, no doubt, witnessed a resurgence of electioneering by the main political parties—with renewed gusto this time. This contrasts sharply with the lull that enveloped the political scene, following the initial postponement of the polls on grounds of insecurity in the northeastern region of the country.

    However, quite lamentably, the presidential campaigns did not go without mudslinging and muckraking between the ruling party and the opposition party. The jangled nerves and the wagging tongues, therefore, are evident of the politically charged atmosphere of the gladiatorial contest. Every passing day in this geo-political terrain propels us deeper into the fog of uncertainty about the election and its aftermath.

    It is discernible that a new wave of political consciousness is coursing swiftly through the minds of the populace, one replete with resentment and bile towards members of the ruling political party. A close examination of the incumbent president reveals that he is not the much-sough-after messiah for the nation. He has proven to be bereft of necessary political acumen to govern this empire successfully. A litany of his shortcomings will not be attempted in this article, for it runs interminably. It must be stated that a vote for the bowler-hatted man is an endorsement for the continuation of maladministration, and a vote for the gap-toothed retired general is an approval for a change. The agents of transformation must be living in fool’s paradise if they believe they have hoodwinked the Nigerian citizenry with their political chicanery about their standard-bearer.

    Nevertheless, the results of the election can bring forth two things:  Firstly, it may likely pave way for the much-trumpeted socio-economic revamp and national development if well handled. Secondly, it may propel the geo-political landscape into a political maelstrom, resulting in possibly, its disintegration, as predicted by the American soothsayers. However, the latter appears to be the more likely. Thus, it is axiomatic that our fate as a country hinges on the results of last weekend’s election.

    It is hoped that the result will reflect a situation whereby the masses elect a captain who will manage the affairs of the nation’s ship excellently. It is our constitutional right. So, to successfully navigate through this Scylla and Charybdis will be to heed the suggestions of Nicollo Machiavelli, in his classic ‘The Prince’, meaning that the masses would choose a lesser evil when plagued by two evils. From the foregoing, this is a formidable decision.

    The global community is not oblivious of the political upheavals lurking in the dark suffice the efforts at enabling the two contestants reach a peace accord. Even President Obama has deemed it expedient to address Nigerians and admonished them against violence, especially when some muddle-headed elements have threatened to turn the nation into a theatre of war if their tribesman does not emerge victorious at the polls. Professor Jega and his team of experts must be commended for their innovations.

    • Kingsley Charles,

    Ikorodu, Lagos.

  • Lessons from Lee

    Lessons from Lee

    Lee Kuan Yew has a lot to teach us in his biography for lifting a humble outpost onto the league of the world’s elite

    The name of Lee Kuan Yew, the charismatic phenom of statecraft and governance, has been a reference point among politicians and political commentators in Nigeria in the past decade. Many see him as a model, and one to be envied and aped.

    When that man died March 23 at the age of 91, he closed the chapter of a generation of leaders who have left their world better than they met it. He belongs in the class of men like Tito and Mandela who would not stand idle while decay and tyranny shadowed the earth. They played a role, and for that history and the destiny of humans would be forever indebted.

    When Lee Kuan Yew was born on September 16, 1923, Singapore was a colonial outpost in thrall of Britain. He became a pilot of the small outpost’s trajectory through the rough and tumble of colonial weaning. He formed a political party, The People’s Action Party (PAP), and staked his genius and his brand of patriotism and politics until his party rose to ascendancy and helped pry it from the grip of colonial Britain.

    He led the country from 1959 to 1990, and in those years Singapore soared from what is known as the Third World to first world, an idea he relished as evidence in his book, From Third World to First World. His is one of a biography of a stallion in statecraft. Singapore was a poor country with no resources. Compare that with Nigeria with the abundance of resources like oil, palm produce and groundnut, and we can understand the power of one man to loft a humble people to the company of the world’s elite nations.

    As he himself had confessed, Singapore did not fall into the stereotype of a strong and vibrant nation. It did not have one language, one culture, a homogeneous population, a common sense of destiny. It overthrew all the assumptions and stood tall. That evokes a strong challenge to Nigeria, with a variegated population with conflicting languages and ethnicities and even religious variance. If Singapore was able to rise above all its insularities, why not Nigeria?

    In Nigeria’s election season, we have seen that tribes and faith have become a central part of electoral permutations and loyalties with the bigger canopy of Nigeria retreating to the shadows of contempt.  As this editorial is written, Nigeria is in the thick of an election with the furies of tribe and faith at play.

    Before Singapore became completely free of Britain in 1965, Lee kuan Yew sought a sort of alliance with Malaysia and that lasted between 1963 and 1965, when it failed, and he had to contend with the distrust and uproar of ethnic tension between the dominant ethnic Chinese and the Malay and Indian minorities. Lee recalls that period as a “moment of anguish,” since the minorities threatened a fragile nation. It was about the same time that Nigeria receded into ethnic imbroglio that crippled the country in a 30-month bloodbath of a civil war.

    But with Lee’s sublime cunning and tough hand and large heart, the ethnic differences did not pop up again on his watch. In 1965, the country became independent. The country grew in the years of Lee’s reign with a system that has become a case study among political scientists and political economists since the 1980’s. He introduced the Westminster model of government in the fashion of Great Britain, and he served as prime minister. In spite of the apparent liberalism of the system, he shunned a multi-party system, so his PAP was the solo party in Singapore. He was not a democrat, and he saw his decision as a pragmatic step. He thought that his style conformed to his impatience for development, and the Cambridge University graduate with double star first class in law, derided the west for its contempt for his authoritarian style.

    His economic model, however, was liberal and he embraced the five Cs of capitalism – cash, condos, credit cards, cars and country clubs. That vaulted the country into what he described as an “oasis of a first world in a third world.” He ran a corruption-free government with transparency and the rule of law. His country topped the World Bank’s ‘ease of doing business” rankings. He took advantage of the country’s natural harbour into a strategic advantage on the Malacca Strait, and was nexus of 40 percent of the world’s maritime trade.

    But it must be noted that not all of Lee’s style will fit today’s globalised world of twitter, internet, instagram and yen for equality and liberalism. A writer called it “Disneyland with death penalty.” Even after he stepped down, his PAP faced revolt and he lost his position as mentor.

    What we must learn from him is the sense of focus in governance and disdain for corruption. The country only had a harbour and it took advantage of it to create a prosperous nation. We must make our own heroes while learning from the virtues of the world’s great. Lee was one of them.

  • March of 28

    March of 28

    • The world is watching; so Nigeria must get this exercise right

    Just as well this editorial is starting with the twin trigger that could make or mar it: the electoral umpire and state security apparatus.  Unfortunately, both agitate us ominously.

    First, the electoral umpire.  The ruling People’s Democratic Party (PDP) and its agents and privies, has ruthlessly demonised Prof. Attahiru Jega, the chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), as an integral part of their electioneering.  The latest of such irrational attacks is a front page advertisement, in the Leadership Newspaper of March 25.  It is headlined: “Exposed: How Jega plots to rig election for APC”.

    In the advert, a body that calls itself The Sentinel Group, alleged that Prof. Jega had set up a body called “Presidential Election Result Collation Committee,” which would allegedly help Jega to “collate” the results of the presidential election.  It also alleged that the committee boasted people allegedly sympathetic to the opposition All Progressives Congress (APC).  An independent body should investigate this allegation and bring culprits, if any, to book.  Indeed, anything that could cast a slur on the integrity of the elections should be discountenanced.

    But aside from the alleged partisan tilt of the committee, how does a “collation” committee automatically amount to a “rigging plot”? Would the Jega body (assuming such a body exists) manufacture its own figures, independent of figures returned from the various polling zones, local governments and the 36 states and Abuja, which will then form the final tally?  Therefore, if not, how could it possibly rig the “collated” figures, already in the public space, signed and counter-signed by party agents?

    This advertisement is, of course, the latest in a chain of reckless attacks on the INEC chairman.  Earlier unproven allegations included that Jega had met with APC elements in Dubai to perfect a rigging plot, that registration of voters and collection of permanent voter cards (PVCs) were higher in the North (even the war-torn areas) than in the South, that Jega must abandon the use of PVCs for temporary voter cards (even if money from the public till, time and efforts had been spent on this innovation), that Jega must not use smart card readers which, with the PVC chips, would authenticate genuine voters.

    But pray, if everyone wants free, fair and transparent election, why would anyone protest measures to ensure democratic integrity — and on that account goad the likes of MASSOB in the South East, and OPC, in the South West, to protest these anti-vote theft innovations, and call for Jega’s sack?

    Add all these to the now failed threat to sack Jega via the president ordering him to go on pre-retirement leave before a crucial election, the anti-Jega stance by the pro-Jonathan Southern Nigeria Consultative Assembly (SNCA), with otherwise respected elements like Dr. Chukwuemeka Ezeife, Dr. Femi Okunrounmu, Chief Olu Falae, all led by Chief Edwin Clark.  They have also called for Jega’s sack for no less frivolous reasons.

    On security, Col. Sambo Dasuki (rtd), President Jonathan’s National Security Adviser (NSA), defiled his job with politics in London to fly the kite of poll postponement because of low PVC collection rate. In an absurd second act, security chiefs lined up behind him but on security and not PVCs. Dr. Frederick Fasehun, the OPC factional leader’s boast that he, with some unnamed others, forced the postponement from February 14, simply because they realised President Jonathan would lose, further speaks of a bubbling conspiracy, at which core may be the security forces.

    Then Inspector-General of Police, Suleiman Abba added his own voice.  He gave an advisory that voters should, after voting, leave the polling zone to “cool down and relax” in their homes.  Prof. Jega countered that, by the Electoral Law, voters could stay around, so long as they don’t disrupt voting, or disturb the peace.  The Police later aligned themselves with the INEC position — only for IGP Abba to later go on Channels TV, indulging himself in the sophistry of loitering in the context of the Electoral Law.  He virtually threatened that the Police were at liberty to interpret loitering however it suited them!

    Since the IGP’s unfortunate raid on the House of Representatives, he has given the impression, of a rather disturbing penchant, to veer off partisan trajectories, just to impress the powers-that-be.  But he should put himself in check for the elections, and lead the Police according to law and their oath of office, but not his whims.

    Of course, there is the perpetual threat, at times subtle, at times brazen, of possible militarisation of the polls.  The courts have conclusively ruled twice (one of them, an Appeal Court judgment; and another, a definitive High Court injunction), saying the military have no role to play in elections. The military should stay neutral, resist being used for any lawless job and stick to their oath of service.  Even with the unresolved Ekiti rigging audio tapes issue, we believe the military are patriotic enough to resist being led to any anti-democratic crime.

    Now, a word for INEC itself.  Since berthing in 2010, the Jega INEC has not conducted any “perfect” election.  Yet, Prof. Jega’s personal credibility has somewhat engendered some confidence that, maybe, he could make a change.

    But all that risks tragic change if Jega blows his swan song — the 2015 elections.  The commission has always said it is ready.  Now is the time to walk its talk.  So, the smart card readers must be well protected and work on the day. The materials should get to the polling zones in time. INEC officials must not only be fair, they must be credulously seen to be so.  The innovations of PVC  and corresponding card readers are laudable.  But they would count for nothing if there were any major snarl.

    Indeed, INEC must acquit itself well.  Global eyes are on Nigeria.  Fear of possible civil rupture has compelled the United States, according to news reports, to station no less than 400 marines in neighbouring Ghana, with at least three helicopters, to ferret out its diplomatic staff and other US citizens, at the slightest sign of trouble.  News reports also speak of Nigerians in their hundreds relocating abroad till after the election.  Those at home have been stocking up on foodstuffs and other supplies in the event of a national lockdown arising from any crisis. The tension is that high and palpable. The Jonathan administration must not allow the nation to slide. We have the first republic and the June 12 sagas as sober examples. It will be tragic and foolish for us to travel those evil roads again.

    But the simple antidote to this doomsday scenario is a free, fair and transparent election.  The key has three handles: the INEC, the political parties and the people. With vigilance and insistence on the right results, democracy will triumph on March 28. President Jonathan must realise that any bloody recourse or major paralysis will be on his head as the nation’s leader.

    A credible poll is the surest way to a renascent and democratic Nigeria.

  • Who’s afraid of INEC Card Reader?

    Who’s afraid of INEC Card Reader?

    SIR: The discussions on usage or not of card reader for 2015 elections is

    an issue that has, for months, dominated the political space. It has taken a dimension that warranted suspicion and therefore increases the inquisitiveness of an average Nigerian as to the importance and effects of introduction of card readers into our electoral system.

    This republic has witnessed three presidential elections besides the 1999

    election that brought in Chief Olusegun Obasanjo; all the elections were

    characterised by heavy electoral malpractices. Even, the late

    President Umaru Yar’ Adua, a beneficiary of 2007 presidential election,

    admitted his election was flawed. The implication of electoral malpractices is grave and it has negative effect on the people and the nation at large. Indeed, electoral malpractices have impeded good governance in Nigeria. Professor Jega-led INEC conducted the 2011 elections and at different times later conducted gubernatorial elections in Anambra, Ekiti and Osun states.

    The experience acquired equipped the commission with the ability to organise election in 2015 with especially the introduction of card reader machines.

    Politicians during elections naturally want to outwit one another. They

    look for every means possible to make their candidates or party win, hence

    the need for the umpire to put in place a fool-proof electoral process. Card Reader, an electronic voter authentication system configured by INEC to each of the polling units to authenticate the commission’s PVCs and accredit voters is here to the rescue. Cloned cards will be rejected. The usage will be of tremendous benefits as it would confer credibility on the electoral process since multiple voting, impersonation and ballot stuffing that characterised previous elections will be eliminated.

    The card reader, according to INEC, for the purpose of results audit from

    the polling units, will keep records of all cards read as well as those not verified and transmits the collected to a central INEC Server via GSM data service.  The collation officers will also use information transmitted by the card readers to audit polling unit result sheets and determine whether accreditation figures have been altered. All should embrace this lawful marvelous innovation, as it would seriously minimize electoral malpractices in all elections.

    Nigerians at different times have clamoured for transparent, free and fair

    elections. Why are the ruling party and the presidency now jittery?

    Whatever may be the thinking of Mr President and his party on the 2015

    elections, guaranteeing a united Nigeria should be of paramount

    consideration. Professor Jega had repeatedly promised Nigerians an improved 2015 elections using PVCs and card readers; let us support the commission to achieve the feat of organising a credible poll that we have long yearned for to regain the lost glory of a leading country in Africa.

    • Hon Bashir Omolaja Bolarinwa is a former member, Federal House of

    Representatives.

  • Lousy Labour

    • For a second time, NLC’s election is botched at a time the nation needs it sorely

    Ayuba Wabba’s emergence as the new Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) President is causing rippling reverberations among the nation’s Labour family. Until his new position, he was the President of Medical and Health Workers Union (MHWU). His election factionalised the congress with the formation of Restoration Group that is led by Joe Ajaero of Nigeria Union of Electricity Employees (NUEE) and Igwe Achese of National Union of Petroleum and Natural Gas Workers (NUPENG).

    Wabba succeeded Abdulwaheed Omar after the expiration of his eight years rule and reportedly polled 1,695 votes to defeat his closest rival, Ajearo of NUEE who scored 1, 140 votes. Other officials that also emerged from the polls at the Eagle Square, Abuja: Peters Adeyemi, Kiri Mohammed and Najeem Yasin, Deputy Presidents; Asuguni Amechi, Dutsinma Lawal: Oyelekan Lateef – Vice Presidents (unopposed) and Khaleel Ibrahim, National Treasurer (unopposed).

    Ajearo rejected the result of the elections in which a total of 3,119 delegates drawn from 43 affiliate unions, cleared by the electoral committee headed by President of the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU), Nasir Fagge, participated. The NUEE and NUPENG delegates equally rejected the result on the ground that it was fraught with irregularities.

    The first election was also botched again, on grounds of alleged irregularities amongst the candidates. The ballot papers used in the rescheduled election were redesigned to reflect names of all the candidates for a particular position on the same ballot paper. In the first one that held at the International Conference Centre (ICC), Abuja, names of all the candidates were printed on different ballot papers, leading to allegations that some candidates’ names appeared more than once in a booklet.

    While not saying that it is not unlikely that the former President, Abdul-Wahid Omar, as he was being accused, actually manipulated the electoral system, such should not be sufficient to cause factionalisation of the NLC. We strongly believe that the election could not be deemed illegal since all the 43 industrial unions voluntarily participated in it.

    It is high time the Labour movement got its act together. The union should know, in case it has forgotten, that what is at stake is not only about Labour. The group is an important part of democracy because over time, the NLC, has been in the forefront of the campaign for enthronement of democratic rule; it is therefore a sad irony that its house is now divided because of frictions over selfish anti-democratic bickering.

    We consider it a sad historical commentary that the NLC is splitting not on grounds of principle but over its inability to keep its house in order regarding its elections. What this has shown is that most Labour activists have lost compassion and commitment for the struggle since the movement is now largely seen as a money-spinning venture and its officers’ elections, a do-or-die affair. This fact has made the factionalisation of the congress to be a whole contradiction of the essence of what the Labour movement stands for.

    As Issa Aremu, General Secretary of National Union of Textiles, Garment and Tailoring Workers of Nigeria and a contestant for the post of Deputy President in the election puts it: “Disagreement, contestations are part of our heritage and tradition. Nigeria Labour Congress is made up of industrial unions.’’ This better be as this disagreement has to be resolved amicably otherwise, the NLC’s top members and leadership will lose the moral aptitude to contribute to national democratic discourse.

  • Bloodbath in Benue

    • Has the federal government abandoned farmer-cattle Fulani crisis

    In the unending wars between the Fulani herdsmen in the North and farmers, another bloodbath was witnessed in Benue State on March 15, when about 70 suspected Fulani herdsmen reportedly slaughtered 95 people, most of them women and children, in Egba Aguta Local Government Area of the state. A survivor, simply identified as Oche, said that the herdsmen stormed the village between 5am and 6am and started attacking people.

    They came with arrows, locally made guns and knives to attack the people, most of whom were still sleeping. The herdsmen then escaped to Nasarawa State. Oche, who could not give the number of those wounded in the attack, said he “believed that those wounded are between 95 and 100 as I counted up to 80 bodies being taken away by people in uniform. Most of those slaughtered were women, children and the aged. Almost all the houses in the community were razed by the attackers”.

    Although the state police commissioner, Hyacinth Dagala, who confirmed the attack had directed the area commander to ensure that adequate security is provided to the area, we see this directive as belated. Deadly attacks by Fulani herdsmen in Benue State have become a recurring decimal. On February 11, about 30 people were feared killed, apart from those who sustained varying degrees of injuries, in the Logo LGA of the same state when some Fulani herdsmen allegedly attacked and sacked over 24 communities and villages in the area, some of which are said to be only four kilometres away from Anyin, the country home of Governor Gabriel Suswam.

    For the umpteenth time, we state that security matters should be taken seriously all over the country, especially in volatile areas in the Northeast and North central parts of the country. Lack of effective security in these areas has largely been responsible for the havoc wreaked by Boko Haram insurgents in the Northeast and parts of North central, and the abduction of over 270 school children in Chibok. It is therefore no surprise that the Fulani herdsmen have always succeeded in killing people in the area with considerable ease and with impunity.

    Our security personnel must curb what has become a blood-thirstiness of the Fulani herdsmen by taking proactive actions  to preempt attacks rather than reacting after the fact. We also understand that the Fulani are sometimes provoked by the people who rustle and steal their cattle.

    We opine that this carnage has gone on for too long for the government to take some decisive action to find solution. We think it is only an irresponsible government that would look on helplessly while her citizens are slaughtered in such large numbers at every turn.

    Apart from beefing up security and intelligence gathering, the federal government working in conjunction with the affected state governments, must speedily bring fresh ideas to bear on cattle rearing in the country.  Normadic cattle rearing is not peculiar to Nigeria; we must borrow a leave from other countries on how they solved similar problems.

    Sending relief materials to the survivors in affected areas of attack is medicine after death. The police and the military should wake up to their tasks of securing these areas, and prevent further attacks on innocent people in the future by gathering intelligence on the activities of the Fulani herdsmen to curb their penchant for frequent killings of innocent people. We say enough is enough!

  • IGP Abba’s unconstitutional call

    IGP Abba’s unconstitutional call

    SIR: Millions of Nigerians have been having a good laugh since the Chairman of Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Prof. Attahiru Jega last Friday punctured the illegal and unconstitutional warning of the Inspector General of Police (IGP) Suleiman Abba a day before that voters should vote and go home; that the police will to protect our votes.

    On the national television a day after, the INEC chairman came on air to educate and sensitize Nigerians that there is no provision either in the constitution or in the Electoral Act that gives the police the right to tell voters what to do on election day, that they can wait but should conduct themselves peacefully and in orderly manner in policing their votes so that it is counted and announced publicly in their presence. The duty of the police is constitutionally and solely to provide security on election day, just like other days, no more, no less.

    IGP Abba must be a wag to think in his wildest imagination that Nigerians will be intimidated or gullibly surrender the protection of   their sacred votes to the Nigeria police bearing in mind their antecedents, which is not endearing. This same IGP whose organisation cannot recover over 200 girls abducted by criminals for about 340 days now; what a shame! Is this not the same IGP that ordered his men to desecrate the federal legislature through unlawful closure last year and who in solidarity with President Jonathan, illegally withdrew the security aides of the speaker? It is this same IGP that sat in his office while behaving like the Lord of the Manor by assaulting our sensibilities and democracy.

    Honestly, this IGP is a first class example of a lawless officer who has no respect for the constitution and constituted authority, hence one is not surprised that he has good company in AIG Mr. Mbu Joseph Mbu of “I will kill 20 civilians for every one policeman killed,” amongst others.

    However, to say that we weren’t expecting this illegal and irresponsible warning from Mr. Suleiman Abba prior to the 2015 general election is to be economical with the truth about the antecedents and character of this police officer and his office. It was in this same country and during elections in the past that Suleiman Abba’s predecessors like Hafiz Ringim, Ogbonnaya Onovo and M.D. Abubakar warned voters not to take their phones to polling units.

    So in effect, Mr. Abba is not saying anything new but only following the tradition of his predecessors with regards to perpetuation of illegality and unconstitutionality. Therefore, like the Nigerian voters dealt with his predecessors in the past by ignoring and daring them, so also will Nigerians do with Mr. Abba’s latest reckless, inciting and offensive warning which should be ignored for what it represents – illegality.

    Come March 28th and April 11th, 2015, Nigerians should go to the polls in a peaceful and orderly manner to vote wisely for a candidate of their choice and wait till the votes are counted and publicly announced in order to engender citizen’s participation and ownership of the process.

    Your vote is your power; use it wisely, so says a popular aphorism.

     

    • Nelson Ekujumi,

    Surulere, Lagos.

  • Soldiers and polls

    Soldiers and polls

    •The courts have spoken and the government is duty bound to obey the law

    If anyone is in doubt about what the role of the military should be during elections in the country, such doubts ought to have gone with court judgments on the matter in recent times. The latest of such judgments was delivered by a Federal High Court in Lagos on Monday.  While delivering judgment in a suit filed by Mr Femi Gbajabiamila, a member of the House of Representatives and chieftain of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Justice Ibrahim Buba said deployment of soldiers for polls was unconstitutional. Mr Gbajabiamila had taken President Goodluck Jonathan, the Chief of Defence Staff, Chief of Army Staff, Chief of Air Staff, Chief of Naval Staff and the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice to court over the legality of deploying soldiers for elections.

    The Court of Appeal and a Federal High Court in Sokoto had earlier said that troops cannot be deployed for elections as President Jonathan did during the Anambra, Ekiti and Osun governorship elections; and as he is even threatening to do in the forthcoming general elections. As a matter of fact, soldiers had already been deployed in some states for this purpose. With these judgments, it should be stridently clear to President Jonathan that he has no powers to unilaterally deploy soldiers for elections. And, if at all they must be involved, Justice Buba said the president has to go through the National Assembly.

    These judgments are timely and profound, especially given the penchant of the Jonathan administration to deploy troops for elections. The way the present government has been using soldiers for election duties, albeit illegitimately, is most deplorable. Indeed, it is as if we never conducted elections before its coming to power. In Ekiti State, the soldiers’ role has become so messy and contentious with the video release by Captain Sagir Koli that implicated top military officers in shameful connivance with chieftains of the ruling People’s Democratic Party (PDP) to tilt the result of the polls in favour of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). But for the eternal vigilance of the voters in Osun State, perhaps the soldiers would have replicated what they did in Ekiti in Osun, if only with their intimidating presence during the polls.

    We align with Justice Buba that there is nothing peculiar about the nature of elections and electioneering in Nigeria, as painted by the defence counsel, Dele Adesina, to justify the president, as commander-in-chief, unilaterally deploying soldiers to maintain law and order during elections. Apparently those who drafted the constitution took cognizance of a time like this when our kind of incumbent president would not be comfortable having elections without soldiers deployment, when preparing the document.

    We equally wonder why the same soldiers who were serially being court-martialled for mutiny, with some of them straying into neighbouring country on ‘tactical manouevring’ show unusual excitement when deployed for election duties; a job primarily meant for the police. The military itself should know by now that its involvement in elections has altered its perception as the military of the ruling party rather than that of Nigeria. This is unhelpful of professionalism and is a potential time bomb that could explode unless we stop involving soldiers in partisan election matters.

    With the pronouncement by the courts on the matter, it will amount to presidential impunity to deploy soldiers for the polls this weekend. The law is higher than any administration or government. That is the meaning of the rule of law.

    Those hinging presidential deployment of troops for elections on the Armed Forces Act no longer have any valid case because even if that is expressly stated in the Act, such provision is a nullity to the extent of its inconsistency with constitutional provision. What we need to do is to reduce the influence of soldiers in elections and this can be done by empowering the police to be able to cope with the demands of the period. In the past, soldiers were seldom seen in public; we have to return to that glorious past.