The Nation Newspaper

Category: Editorial

  • Re: Muck raking in Abia politics

    Re: Muck raking in Abia politics

    SIR: The article written by one Emma Ogbuehi in The Nation of Wednesday February 25, titled “Muck raking in Abia politics” is an effort in futility by the writer who was so biased in his jaundiced analysis.

    He said that “Bullies are cowards” but by reading his treatise one could not but come to conclusion that the writer was a bully, hence the arch-coward. In his first paragraph, he extolled his paymasters assumed to be Alex Otti and demonized Dr. Okezie Ikpeazu (PhD), the flagbearer of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in Abia State.

    When Ikpeazu was transparently elected in the December 8, 2014 PDP primaries, there was hosanna in the highest from far and near, praising his emergence as the party’s preferred choice. The election was never manipulated or marred by irregularities.

    But in the oppositions’ bid to continue to mislead the public, Ogbuehi in his animosity against the government of Abia State and Ikpeazu wrote that the election was flawed. Flawed by who?

    It is only in Abia State that I’ve seen the opposition use foul languages and send their targets to prison before even the persons are pronounced guilty by a competent court. Assuming the election was flawed, it is the business of a court of competent jurisdiction to make the announcement and not the likes of Ogbuehi.

    There has never been any fear in the Government House, Umuahia for the election. But Ogbuehi who was out to misinform the masses wrote that there was. And I ask, fear for what? It is obvious that Ikpeazu stands tall among the contenders in the election and has nothing to be afraid.

    My joy is that he was not anointed by anybody and is not a stooge to anybody or group. The in-thing is that he belongs to the party in which the ruling government also belongs to.

    The government of Governor Theodore Orji has accomplished its electioneering campaign promises and has never operated a faulty leadership. It is obvious that Ogbuehi is not abreast with the realities on ground in the state.

    Ogbuehi praised the Alex Otti, the state governorship candidate of All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA), that he said the election would not be a tea party. Perhaps, Ogbuehi was too emotional than judgmental.

    In an article that was titled, “Alex Otti: Change or Deceit?” one notable Abia son, said that he has been hammering on some fundamental flaws of Otti’s candidacy and no one is serving us the counter, instead they are screaming to deafen themselves from the truth and some are even bored.

    “Manipulation, deception, inequity, arrogance, abuse of due process are all Alex Otti has exhibited and that is not ‘change’ in any way. His career is not enough atonement for these very fundamental flaws and breaches…we must stand firm on the truth at this time…” the writer had said.

    The conscience will remain an open wound that only truth can heal…, said the Abia son. Otti can never ride on deception to victory! In his bid to hang on to his deception, he chose an Ohafia woman as deputy. Arochukwu-Ohafia used to be one local government…By so doing, he has desecrated APGA, deceived and manipulated our collective sensibilities…

     

    • Madubuko Hart,

     Lagos

  • Shipshape security

    Shipshape security

    • Nigeria’s armed forces must be fully equipped to carry out their duties

    The commissioning of four Nigerian Navy vessels by President Goodluck Jonathan last week represents a welcome improvement in the new willingness of the Federal Government to transcend rhetoric in the ongoing battle against terrorism, piracy and other security challenges bedevilling the nation.

    The Navy’s acquisitions comprise NNS Okpabana, a high-endurance cutter from the United States; NNS Prosperity, a fishery patrol boat formerly owned by the Irish Navy; NNS Centenary, an offshore patrol vessel from China; and NNS Sagbama. They are expected to enhance the Nigerian Navy’s capacity to protect offshore oil installations, combat illegal bunkering, tackle piracy, undertake emergency search-and-rescue missions, and provide logistical support to the other branches of the armed forces.

    A strong navy is the backbone of any nation’s military capability. Given its power to project sustained force over relatively long distances, the navy is vital to any strategy aimed at properly confronting the security issues facing Nigeria. President Jonathan himself emphasised this at the commissioning when he declared that a well-equipped navy was essential because of the nation’s dependence on offshore oil resources and the food security and employment potential inherent in the maritime sector.

    In spite of its best efforts, the Nigerian Navy has not been able to fully tackle the problem of oil theft and illegal bunkering to the extent that an estimated 400,000 barrels of oil are being stolen every day. Piracy in the Gulf of Guinea now exceeds that off the coast of Somalia.

    To further compound matters, the navy’s role appears to have been diminished by a recent and hideous aberration: the emergence of ex-militants as important actors in the nation’s anti-bunkering security infrastructure. It is ironic that the navy’s own acquisition of vessels comes some two months after a maritime security company owned by former warlord, Mr. Government Ekpemupolo (alias Tompolo), took delivery of seven decommissioned Norwegian battleships. Even though the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA) has claimed that the vessels were bought on its behalf, it is still strange that a private firm would be given priority ahead of the navy.

    It also appears that Nigeria’s efforts to overcome the Boko Haram insurgency in the north-east are being hampered by inadequate arms, ammunition and equipment. In spite of repeated denials by the military hierarchy and the Federal Government, several incidents appear to bear this notion out: the so-called “tactical manoeuvre” of August 2014, in which 480 soldiers appeared to retreat into Cameroon in the face of superior insurgent firepower, is a prominent example. In addition, several soldiers on trial for mutiny and other acts of indiscipline have argued that their actions were motivated by a refusal to go into combat without the standard complement of arms and equipment.

    This situation is indefensible, given the trillions voted for defence in recent times, in addition to the U.S. $1 billion loan recently secured by the Federal Government. It is surprising that no attempt has ever been made to undertake a comprehensive audit of all military and defence-related expenditure, in spite of the apparent disjunction between what is budgeted and what actually reaches combat units.

    The consequences of under-funded, poorly-resourced and inadequately-equipped armed forces cannot be under-estimated. Indeed, the ramifications are already tragically apparent in the anti-insurgency campaign: from a local uprising, it has spread to encompass Borno, Yobe and Adamawa sates, with deadly attacks extending to Abuja. Nigeria’s inability to handle the crisis has pulled in Cameroon, Chad and Niger. Worst of all, the shootings, bombings and terror continue unabated. If Nigeria is to triumph over the insurgents, it must ensure that its armed forces are properly equipped to carry out their statutory roles.

  • Visa restriction

    Visa restriction

    •International community should treat partisan military brass with extreme disdain

    It is odd that President Goodluck Jonathan’s administration, presumably a democratic government, could run the country ignominiously like a military dictatorship. Until the infamous announcement by the Independent National Electoral Commission’s (INEC) Chairman, Professor Attahiru Jega, postponing the February elections, many would wager that President Jonathan’s administration is incapable of obtrusively influencing the electoral body.

    But that disingenuous interference, disguised as security challenges, has opened the eyes of Nigerians and the international community to the capacity of the presidency and their collaborators to cause harm to our democracy, unless they are checkmated.

    We consider it reassuring that the United States and her democratic allies are considering sanctions for any further infractions against an orderly election. Observably, while the final push for the postponement of the elections came from the security agencies, nobody is deceived that President Jonathan’s party precipitated the move. So, the fact that the announcement came from the INEC chief should not mitigate the culpability of the security chiefs and the presidency, for that unwarranted interference in the electoral process. We are happy that the international community understood that the National Security Adviser and the service chiefs merely used the security bogey, to act out the unpatriotic script of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

    According to media reports, there are already plans for targeted sanctions on certain government and security officials should the presidential election now rescheduled for March 28, be postponed again. One of such sanctions, according to the report, will be visa restrictions, which the US Secretary of State had hinted on last month, when he made a shuttle visit to Lagos. We welcome the interest of other democracies, towards ensuring that the Federal Government is coerced, if need be, to organise a free, fair and transparent 2015 general elections. It is also appreciated that where there are infractions, those responsible for such intransigencies are singled out and punished, by the international community.

    To achieve the expectations of democratic Nigerians and the country’s international friends, we urge the international community, particularly the western democracies, to make it abundantly clear to the Federal Government that nothing short of transparent general elections would be acceptable. Indeed, should the federal authorities truncate or again undermine the elections, then, officials of state, from the presidency down, should be severely sanctioned. Of course the international community should have more effective ways to sanction anti-democratic offences, than the mere denial of visas.

    It is also pertinent to remind President Jonathan’s administration that Nigeria had worked this precarious path before, where government wantonly interfered with the election process, with devastating consequences for the country. But that was under a military aberration, the infamous Ibrahim Babangida regime, as against a democratic government. We recall the rigmaroles of the military President’s administration, to frustrate a transition to civilian government, which eventually culminated in the criminal annulment of the June 12, 1993 elections. Regrettably, just as in the present circumstance, the sitting military president was determined to ensure he became the chief beneficiary of that manoeuvre; but like all such misadventures, the entire thing ended in a fiasco.

    We hope that the present schemers of similar institutional double dealing will remember that monumental national tragedy, and the pains inflicted on ordinary Nigerians. If they were not around then, they should ask those who fought with all they had, to return Nigeria to a democratic part. Considering that many of them played no part in the struggle, they must be reminded that Nigerians are not ready for any form of autocratic government, by whatever name it may be called. So, those who seek to undermine our hard-earned democracy, must be ready for the consequences.

  • JP Morgan alert

    JP Morgan alert

    •It’s economic mismanagement, stupid!

    What Nigeria faces possible removal from the J. P. Morgan Emerging Market Bond Index (EMBI) shows an economy in probable free fall — but why is no one surprised? With a coordinating minister for the economy who seems to know too much and commander-in-chief who seems to know too little, that should hardly be any news!

    On January 16, JP Morgan announced that, over the next three to five months, it was putting Nigeria’s Government Bond Index on a negative index watch, a sort of “investors beware” caveat, to international investors. It gave as reason the tight squeeze on the dollar in the local economy, in a dollar-dominated international sovereign bond market. This setback is, of course, due to the crash in the global price of crude oil, where most of Nigeria’s export earnings come from.

    The JP Morgan alert is serious because its EMBI, for global basket investors, is about the most sought-after guide to decide whether to or not to invest. So, a JP Morgan alarm casts a negative perception on the economy involved — and maybe, if it lasts long enough, sets off a run on that economy.

    But even as in Nigeria’s case, where many of the investors are said to have already sold off their Nigerian bond holdings, the prospects of new investors in Nigerian sovereign bond further diminish. In a globalised economy, where investors are pulling funds from the matured markets of America and Europe to invest in the comparably high yields of the emerging markets of Africa and the Middle East, Nigeria risks losing out in attracting these funds. Other things being equal, that would further retard the economy.

    For an economy prostrate with high unemployment, signifying the irony of statistical growth without development, this is additional bad news. But the structure of the economy makes it even more dire: the parlous state of key infrastructure — power, rail and road — makes the economy import-dependent. If imports are key and there isn’t enough dollars to buy those imported input, the logical result is deepened poverty, misery and very likely, crime. That profile is unenviable; to say the least.

    Still, though the rot is economic, the root cause is failed political leadership. In his well publicised intervention, Chukwuma Soludo, former Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), accused President Goodluck Jonathan of virtually out-sourcing the economy to a coordinating minister, Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, the finance minister, who has made a hash of it.  Prof. Soludo may have his own axe to grind with the duo, particularly the minister. But every objective analysis of the situation points to an economy that could have been better managed.

    The immediate trigger of the present crisis is the collapse of the global prices of crude oil. Yet, in fairness to oil, it gave Nigeria more than enough notice. If a product, for upward of four years, sells fairly steadily for more than US $100, and then for just a few months now, it persistently inches below US $50, and there is already a blind panic, definitely something is wrong.

    What were our economic managers doing in those years when the price was spiralling? Might Dr. Okonjo-Iweala, always (at least under President Olusegun Obasanjo) making a mantra of saving for the “rainy day”, not be walking her talk?

    Also, what went awfully wrong, such that the brazen stealing of Nigeria’s crude suddenly got out of control? Now, the current industrial-scale stealing, combined with the price slump, is a lethal combination for an economy already gasping for breath!

    The JP Morgan alert is a wake-up call: this economy is in dire straits. So, the present managers had better shape up — or ship out.

  • NNPC’s indigenous challenge

    NNPC’s indigenous challenge

    • An industry without engineers is a sad paradox

    THAT the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) is now looking inward in its bid to find solution to the intractable maintenance glitches of refineries in the country should ordinarily be heart-warming. But, it is beyond that, especially given the circumstances under which the decision was taking.

    The corporation said some of its in-house indigenous engineers have been saddled with the task of rehabilitating the country’s three ailing refineries, including Port Harcourt Refining Company, Kaduna Refining and Petrochemical Company Limited and Warri Refining and Petrochemical Company Limited. The decision was reportedly taken to save cost, since foreign contractors working with the corporation threw a bill of $1.6bn (N288bn) on its laps as against the in-house engineers’ $550m (N99bn).

    Mr. Ian Udoh, NNPC’s Executive Director, Refining and Petrochemicals, during a media parley on preference for indigenous engineers and costing puts it succinctly: “For the three refineries, the estimates going with the nominees of the original builders of the refineries would have come up to $1.6bn. But we can’t afford that because we are not going to get any funding from the government for that. We examined the work scope and picked up the essential things that we must do to get these refineries to operate optimally at around 90 per cent of capacity. That was done and we did the pricing template; not the international rates, we used the local rates. And everything for the three refineries combined came to around $550m, which is significant, maybe up to 70 per cent reduction.’’

    He added: ‘Even the $550m is quite much. So, we amortised it over 18 months so that we will be able to swallow it in bits more easily. The 18 months started since last October and this means that early next year, the refineries should be in shape.” In other words, therefore, funding was the necessity that brought about the ‘invention’ in this case. This is where our fear lies.

    Why did it take the NNPC this avoidable snub and its attendant high cost to know that these foreign engineers have shown no commitment to the nation but to her money? But the corporation is to blame for this belated recognition of indigenous engineers in its stable in over 54 years of the nation’s independence. The question of local engineers handling the TAM ought to have been settled years back; indeed they ought to have been understudying their foreign counterparts since the establishment of the refineries. If they had done that, they would have been familiar with the operations of the refineries and we would not have cause to be apprehensive over reports that they (local engineers) are now to do the TAM.

    However, having settled for the option, perhaps the point the corporation is making is that it is better late than never, to challenge our local engineers with a view to bringing out the best in them. But what we would not want is a situation where the refineries would be used for trial and error purposes that would end up being counter-productive to the nation. These are critical equipment that require specialised skills to handle. Our fear is exacerbated by the fact that the original builders of the refineries had pushed forward their purported partners that are not willing to give the standard engineering pledge of post-rehabilitation performance guarantee.

    All said, we hope that the current NNPC leadership would do everything to ensure standards for the TAM under any circumstance. One of the things that Nigerians want from the corporation are functional refineries. It is a shame that Nigeria is the only major crude oil producer that is importing refined petroleum products.

  • In defence of Obasanjo

    SIR: In 1982 when economic ship of our dear nation was sinking, the sage of our time, Chief Obafemi Awolowo voiced out to the consternation of the mediocre leadership of our Second Republic. He was vilified, castigated and condemned. Events in the later part of the regime however vindicated him. The eye sees not itself except by reflection.

    In fact, the economy of Nigeria was at the brink of collapse before Buhari /Idiagbon struck on December 31, 1983 and the military junta saved the most populous black nation from the economic wreck.

    Today, we have similar situation; the conservative ruling class is the driver of our economy. The mediocre leadership of the Second Republic has resurrected in the ruling PDP. Good enough, we also have another man warning us of the dangers ahead. Like Chief Obafemi  Awolowo, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo has been warning the current political players and alerting the nation of the inept leadership. We have many reasons to believe Obasanjo; after all, he is the third eye. Experience more than anything outweighs age and the man is proud of both. Kleptomania is the order of the day. In the words of Shakespeare “If correction lies in the hand of he that committed wrong, to whom do we complain?”

    Obasanjo’s whistle is the hunter’s call to a straying dog. The snooty lieutenants in the Jonathan administration should be thankful to Obasanjo rather than taking cudgels against him. His warnings should serve as a wakeup call to embrace change. If they do not know, Nigeria is greater than all of us. Posterity awaits us all. But they should know that investment is consumption suspended. The message of General Mohammadu Buhari (GMB) is apt and concise “If we don’t kill corruption, corruption will kill all of us”.

    Before corruption will kill us though, we will all vote it out.

     

    •  Adelani Olawuyi,

    Odooba – Ogbomoso. 

  • Moment of reckoning

    •Nigeria now paying for its govt’s insatiable appetite for loans and fiscal indiscipline

    Two elements stand out in the 2015 Federal Government budget which, aside being difficult to ignore, speak to the inverted priorities of the Jonathan administration. The first is the capital spend for the year put at N387 billion – a paltry 8.9 percent of the total outlay – (the initial figure announced by the finance minister, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, in her budget presentation last month was N634 billion). The second is the whopping N943 billion voted for debt servicing this year – a figure which comes to more than 20 percent of the N4.357 trillion budget.

    If it seems necessary to restate the thrust of our earlier editorial on the subject last week, it is that spending 91.1 percent to service the bureaucracy that is at best an indolent one at this time of acute deficit in infrastructure – the critical enablers needed to power the stuttering economy to growth – is, to put it mildly, bad for the political economy.

    But then, no less confounding is the N943 billion voted for debt servicing in the current year. Of course, we knew that a moment such as the nation is currently experiencing would come sooner or later. That was why we alerted the administration to the wisdom of spending within its means over the course of several editorials, as well as on the danger of a relapse to the past habits which landed the nation in debt peonage.

    Of course, we were roundly ignored. When we raised questions about the wisdom of borrowing when oil prices held steady and high, the administration’s hierarchs not only rationalised their appetite on the grounds  that the nation was under-borrowed; and to drive their point home, they advertised the low  Debt-GDP ratio as if that is supposed to be a licence to ratchet dubious debts.

    Today, our fears have been confirmed. From an external debt stock of US$4.26 billion in June 2010, the Federal Government’s external debts stock had ballooned to US$6,445,631,547.93 as at December 31, 2014. The situation of domestic debts is even worse: from N3.76 trillion in June 2010, it has grown to a humongous N9.53 trillion by December 2014 – unfortunately, with very little to show for it in terms of projects.

    As it appears, the illusion of an invincible economy, one reasonably insulated from macro-economic shocks has since evaporated – no thanks to the dip in oil prices; worse, the fears have returned to haunt.

    As one would imagine, the administration appears to have learnt nothing from the experience. In the current budget cycle, for instance, it seeks $5.7bn (N2.97tn) from external sources – under the guise of using same to finance infrastructure projects.

    Of these, $100m (N16.8bn) is expected from the World Bank; another $800m (N135.4bn) is expected from both the African Development Bank and the Islamic Development Bank for the East-West Road Project, while $4.8bn (N806.4bn) is expected from China Exim Bank for the Mambilla Hydro Electric Power Project. These are aside the $12bn under negotiation from the Chinese for the coastal rail project.

    The point really is that the administration has neither demonstrated the fiscal rectitude nor the acuity to convince Nigerians that the loans – or any loans for that matter – can ever be well utilised. They would wish that they could point at specific projects for which the earlier loans over which they are now saddled with the burden of repayment were deployed.

    While borrowing has since become the second nature for the administration, the greater task, which it has proven unable to undertake – is clean up and eliminate wastes in government; and to capture all revenues due to the federation account, particularly the operating surpluses of the countless agencies and parastatals of the Federal Government. While the two steps may not entirely eliminate the appetite for debts, it would at least reduce both the craving for, as well as the burden of debt.

  • Pipeline vandalism

    •200 cases in six months intolerable!

    Our fear regarding the nation’s oil sector’s grubby management is better exemplified by scandalous reports emanating from a senior government official, stating that the nation in the last six months recorded over 200 incidences of crude oil and gas pipeline vandalism. So, what other confirmation could better corroborate the reality that law and order have finally broken down in that money-spinning sector of the economy?

    Prof. Chinedu Nebo, Minister of Power, at a media parley in Abuja alarmingly declared: “Over 200 incidences were recorded in six months on the Trans Niger crude pipeline in the East, affecting Okoloma gas supply. These regular interruptions on the Trans Forcados crude oil pipeline affect gas supply in the West. Sabotage incidents have constrained gas supply to power plants and held generation at less than 4,500MW.”

    Sadly, the government has routinely regaled Nigerians with how such criminal practices have been impeding power supply since 81 per cent of power generated in the country originates from thermal generation plants that rely solely on gas. But the government hardly told Nigerians how many billions had gone into employing militants to guard the pipelines without meaningful results.

    Apart from pipeline vandalism, the nation has been befuddled with routine oil thefts to the tune of 400,000 barrels per day despite having several millions of dollar security contract with the leadership of Niger Delta militants. For example, some former militants and self-styled ‘generals’. Ebikabowei “Boyloaf” Victor Ben and Ateke Tom, have for almost three years been reportedly receiving $3.8 million a year each to have their men guard oil pipelines they hitherto attacked in the Niger Delta creeks. The same applies to another militant leader, Government “Tompolo” Ekpumopolo who purportedly receives $22.9 million a year to perform the same job. Asari Dokubo, a popular militant leader, is reportedly enjoying his own bite of the juicy pipelines protection deal.

    Despite this unnecessarily huge security expenditure on incorrigible militants by the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC), the humdrum vandalisation going on and the despicable oil theft have left us wondering why the contracts with these militants have not been terminated. Without equivocation, the whole essence of the contracts has been defeated.

    We consider as imperative the need to ask some questions: Who are the vandals destroying these pipelines? Are they known to the militant leaders, and truly under their control? If yes, why has the problem of pipeline vandalism been so nauseatingly persistent over the years? What happened to the money so far given to Tompolo, Dokubo, Boyloaf and Ateke Tom, to ensure adequate protection of the pipelines? Does it still make sense to continue the contracts in view of the obvious failure of these militants to justify the contracts? Would the problem of pipeline vandalism ever be solved with the suspected complicity from powerful quarters?

    The revelation by Professor Nebo on the upsurge in pipeline vandalism is a serious indictment on a government that spends millions of hard-earned currency yearly on the protection of oil pipelines without getting the desired results. Assuming those vandals are saboteurs, then those militants paid to do the job of protecting the pipelines but are found wanting in discharging their duties are no less so. Even those paying such amount to them at a time that majority of Nigerians are facing hard times qualify for the same appellation.

    We are tired of a government that has made daily bemoaning of sordid state of affairs in the oil sector its pastime when it has all the powers to change the tide for good but has demonstrated gross incapability to do this.

  • Military and our democracy

    Military and our democracy

    Assurances by the military that it is set to defend democracy is suspect

    Trying times. These two words best describe the situation with the Nigerian Armed Forces today. The ruling by a Justice Abdul Aboki-led panel of Appeal Court Justices that Mr. Ayodele Fayose’s election was marred by intimidation and harassment by soldiers let  loose by the military authorities has called to question the self-assigned roles that men who bear arms to defend the state now perform in civil matters.

    While ruling on the contention by the All Progressives Congress (APC) that the military presence at the polling units and the streets on the Ekiti governorship election poll date made the exercise unfair and thus lacking in credibility, Justice Aboki said: “The question is that who ordered deployment of military or soldiers in the Ekiti governorship election? Was there any act of insurrection to warrant the call on the military to restore order? And was such deployment in accordance with sections 217 (2)(c) and 218(4) of the constitution?

    “There is nothing before us in the records in answering the posers positively.

    “With this, whoever unleashed soldiers on Ekiti State disturbed the peace of the election on 21st June 2014, acted in flagrant breach of the Constitution, and flouted the provisions of the Electoral Act which required enabling environment by civil authorities in the conduct of elections.”

    We agree with him. And, it remains to be said that, in such circumstances, it cannot be determined who would have won if the polling was free and fair. It could not have been easily determined how the deployment could have affected turnout, especially with the hostile disposition of the security forces to the APC before Election Day. It is gratifying that the APC has decided to challenge the finding of the courts below at the Supreme Court.

    The Appeal Court ruling is instructive against the background of the military’s current overbearing posture in the democratic space. While announcing the postponement of the elections earlier fixed for February 14 and 28, Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Prof Attahiru Jega, had hinged it on a military diktat that the safety of the polling officials could not be guaranteed. The service chiefs had unanimously claimed that they would be in no position to deploy troops for the civic exercise if it was held any time before the new date. It amounts to overruling INEC that has the constitutional responsibility of organising elections. It is to be noted that, while the military has the duty of warding off external aggression and fighting the country’s enemy, the police have the duty of protecting the citizens and only using minimal force in combating electoral crimes.

    It is even more ludicrous that the military, through the Director of Defence Information, Major-Gen. Chris Olukolade, found it necessary to issue a statement pledging a superfluous commitment to defending democracy. In normal times, this should be taken for granted. It is not a favour being done the polity, but a primary responsibility.

    However, the vaguely disguised motive for the statement was betrayed as the military spokesman said: “The Armed Forces of Nigeria is quite conscious of the fact that apart from its primary constitutional role of defending the country from external aggression and internal insurrection, it also has the responsibility of providing support in aid of civil authority such as the need to provide complementary security arrangement to protect our electoral process.”

    In view of the ruling of the Appeal Court on wrongful deployment of troops for electoral purpose, the position of General Olukolade appears a contradiction of its pledge to uphold the Constitution. What the two-star General said in that statement is a disregard of the law of the land and he must be told in clear terms that an insubordinate Armed Forces is an anathema in a democracy.

    It is unfortunate that the President and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, Dr. Goodluck Jonathan, sees nothing wrong in the flagrant disregard for the law, sensibilities and mood of the nation that sending soldiers to usurp the functions of the police would amount to. We call on the President to speak out and let the nation know his mind on this. As the law states, even to put out insurrection in the land or any part thereof, the President would require the approval of the National Assembly to deploy troops. Elections are not wars. Polling is no excuse to militarise the country and turn weapons purchased at great costs to combat insurgents showing surprising strength in 14 local government areas against innocent people who are merely engaged in performing their civic obligation.

  • DHQ’s mud-slinging

    DHQ’s mud-slinging

    • Esprit de corps and decency were casualties in its attitude to Obasanjo

    Already scandalised by the perceived influential role of the military in the decision to reschedule the country’s general elections by six weeks, Nigerians were further shocked by the foul reaction of the Defence Headquarters (DHQ) to remarks credited to former President Olusegun Obasanjo criticising the postponement of the polls. Obasanjo, who is also a former military head of state, had alleged that President Goodluck Jonathan and the service chiefs may be plotting an unconstitutional  presidential tenure extension.

    The DHQ in a statement queerly posted on its Facebook page said in response: “Much as the military desires to respect the old General and his views, it has become necessary to point out that his conduct and unguarded utterances of late has fallen short of the standard of discipline expected of an individual who has had the privilege of service in the military and risen to the status of a General.”  It further said: “The behaviour of retired General Obasanjo has been so unbecoming and continues to constitute a serious embarrassment to the military.” The DHQ added: “the world has moved beyond that parochial and self-adulating reasoning and mindset which he seems stuck to.”

    Unsurprisingly, some retired senior military officers have correctly expressed the view that the DHQ’s statement reflected a sorry state of affairs in the military, especially given the implication of disrespect for seniority and status conveyed by the indecorous language employed.

    Indeed, apart from the reality that Obasanjo is entitled to freedom of thought and expression, however unfavourable this might be considered by the military authorities, the concept of discipline in the armed forces is a major casualty in this case. In the context of hallowed military practice, the DHQ’s rather frontal verbal aggression constituted a hierarchical convulsion and further exposed perhaps the unravelling of the famed esprit de corps. In the circumstances, the DHQ could have been, and should have been, more circumspect in communicating its displeasure, if any.

    Properly situated, the DHQ’s reaction was not only a lamentable wrong step but also a public relations disaster. At a time the people obviously have demonstrable reasons to be suspicious of the intentions of the military and its support for democratic institutions, and the onus is on the military to exhibit professional fidelity by shunning political temptations, the DHQ ought to have grasped the futility of its combative approach to Obasanjo’s claims.

    No degree of personality bashing or mud-slinging will be adequate to convincingly clarify and confirm the political neutrality and non-partisanship rationally expected of the armed forces, particularly at election periods. Therefore, the DHQ should seriously address the public questions and doubts about the armed forces and their role in the rescheduled polls, rather than concentrate on the observations of citizens who have a right to express their worries.

    Relevantly, it is instructive that the January 29 judgment by Justice R.M. Aikawa of the Federal High Court, Sokoto, and the February 16 decision of the Court of Appeal, Abuja, outlawed President Jonathan’s unilateral deployment of members of the armed forces for election purposes.  It is hoped that the Presidency will respect the position of the law.

    It is noteworthy that the DHQ also said in its statement:  ”Indeed, he needs to be told that by virtue of their better training, exposure, education, assessment and environment, the military personnel of today are already far beyond his level in their appreciation of democracy and its indispensability for the stable and prosperous society which Nigerians cherish.”

    This pompous talk will simply not do, as the military seeks to repair its damaged image following observed signs of an alleged unholy romance between its leadership and the presidency. Certainly, what will redeem the armed forces is a concrete apolitical character informed by the letter and spirit of the country’s Constitution.