Category: Editorial

•Internally Displaced Persons must not be denied the right to vote

In line with international principles and conventions, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has said that many of the Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) in the country would not be disenfranchised in the February elections. “These internally displaced persons are people who were forced to flee their homes in large numbers as a result of internal strife or systematic violation of their human rights. It is a global best practice for Election Management Boards to cater for the electoral needs of these IDPs. Records available to us indicate that we have between 981,000 to 1million IDPs in the country,” Prof Attahiru Jega, the commission’s chairman has disclosed.

This is good news because if the commission sticks to its promise, it means about one million people that would otherwise have been disenfranchised would be able to participate in the elections. At least the International Office of Migration (IOM) and INEC agree on this figure, underscoring the need to find a lasting solution to the problem of the insurgency to avoid a situation where the figure would rise, thus triggering a spillover to neighbouring Cameroon, Niger and Chad. The decision to allow the IDPs exercise their civic right to vote is also in agreement with the Nigerian constitution of 1999 as well as the Electoral Act 2010 as amended.

In order to give effect to its decision, INEC held “a crucial meeting” with stakeholders last week. The stakeholders included representatives of governments of the affected states under emergency -Adamawa, Borno and Yobe – as well as members and speakers of their Houses of Assembly, religious leaders, representatives of security agencies and civil society organisations. Others were the Directors-General of the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA) and the Institute for Peace and Conflict Resolution, as well as present and former resident electoral commissioners of the strife-stricken states and INEC’s administration secretaries in the states.

We appreciate INEC’s readiness to see to it that many IDPs vote in the elections. And this should not be a tall order given the fact that the commission had consulted widely before taking the decision. About two months ago, it organised a roundtable conference to discuss IDPs’ participation in the electoral process where experts and academics were brought in to generate ideas to address the issue and a report was submitted to the commission. This culminated in its setting up of a Task Force on how to get the IDPs to vote “within the ambit of extant laws”.

Without doubt, we would have loved to see a situation where every eligible Nigerian willing to vote is given the opportunity. Nonetheless, INEC’s decision to accommodate only those in established camps in the three states for now represents a good start. A point that must be noted is that the IDPs are not responsible for their situation. It is imperative that they cast their votes at the election if they are eligible.

Disenfranchising IDPs in the affected states would be like the case of Nigerians in the Diaspora who are disenfranchised simply because the Federal Government does not take them into account during elections. This should not be the case as the most important constitutional requirements are for a person to be first and foremost a Nigerian, then to be of voting age, to be registered and be in possession of voter’s card. There should be no difficulty in getting voters cards for eligible voters who have misplaced or lost their voting cards.

That is why in the advanced countries voting by displaced persons is not a big deal while its corollary, i.e. citizens living in other countries are allowed to exercise their constitutional right to vote in their countries’ elections. For us therefore, the bottom-line is that, as much as possible, INEC should ensure that at least the majority of qualified Nigerians exercise their civic right to vote at the February 2015 elections; no more, no less.

•Nigeria’s public health system must confront basic health challenges

The recent outbreak of cholera in Rivers State is a sobering reminder of the many fundamental challenges facing Nigeria’s public health system, in spite of the recent triumph over the influx of the Ebola Virus Disease (EVD).

About 20 people have died of the ailment in several communities of Andoni Local Government in the state, out of nearly 200 cases. The disease is apparently making a comeback after having been diagnosed in four other communities last year, even though attempts had been made to contain it. It has been traced to the consumption of unhygienic water in wells and streams, many of which have dried up due to harmattan.

The state government has responded with alacrity, sending its Emergency Response Team to work with the local government area’s Rapid Response Team. Two treatment centres have been set up, and measures are being taken to sink boreholes in order to ensure access to potable water.

For a nation as pre-eminent as Nigeria, the regular outbreak of diseases like cholera is grim testimony to the country’s stark failure to attain standards of hygiene, sanitation and healthcare that are taken for granted in much poorer nations. It is a tragic demonstration of the collective failure to build upon the colonial legacy of education, enforcement and treatment which ensured that epidemics of this kind became a thing of the past.

Successive administrations at the federal, state and local government levels are also culpable for this unhappy state of affairs. Their inability to provide vital social infrastructure like pipe-borne water, effective drainage and waste-disposal systems, comprehensive public enlightenment programmes and adequate healthcare facilities has aggravated the situation. Urban centres across the country are disfigured by widespread filth; especially rubbish heaps, overflowing gutters, the absence of toilet facilities and general disregard for the basic rules of hygiene.

The consequences have been appalling in their enormity. Nigeria has witnessed several outbreaks of cholera that are as embarrassing as they are tragic. Between January and November 2012, a total of 581 suspected cases were reported in 10 states, with 15 deaths, according to the World Health Organisation (WHO). In the same period of 2013, the cases had risen to 4,220 in 16 states, with 145 fatalities. About 35,700 cases were reported in 2014, with 753 deaths.

Taken together with the mortality rates resulting from diseases like malaria, cerebro-spinal meningitis and gastroenteritis, the loss of life from cholera amounts to nothing less than a public health emergency, requiring massive intervention similar to that put in place to combat EVD.

In formulating an appropriate response to the onset of cholera and similar diseases, it must never be forgotten that prevention is far better than cure; primary focus therefore should be on reinstituting the public enlightenment programmes and rigorous inspection regimen established during colonial rule. It is especially important that the nation’s local governments take up this responsibility, given their relative proximity to the citizenry.

The regular education of adults, youths and children must be combined with continuous inspection of homes, workplaces and public spaces to ensure that they meet laid-down standards of cleanliness. The temptation to turn such exercises into an opportunity for extortion should be prevented by ensuring that those who are found guilty of it are appropriately sanctioned.

The federal and state governments must step up the provision of the social infrastructure which facilitates sanitary conditions. The provision of potable water is essential to the achievement of this aim. Surveillance capabilities will also have to be stepped up; the Rivers State outbreak shows how a failure to follow up a previous outbreak can lead to a recurrence. The expansion, rehabilitation and proper equipping of healthcare facilities is also crucial to keeping fatalities to the barest levels. A nation whose citizens are vulnerable to easily-preventable illnesses is no better than a failed state.

SIR: In 1981, I led the Union Bank Hockey team of 16 players and four officials to JFK Memorial Field Hockey Tournament in Washington D.C. Our budget for the trip: Air ticket, hotel accommodation, meals, allowances for everybody, local transportation and all was N49,000 (forty nine thousand naira only).

Each naira in that year gave us 1.82 dollars.

Earlier in the week, I called Arik Air to book single (one-way) economy ticket from Lagos to New York and I was told to pay N167,618.00! Imagine how much that trip would cost today!

I actually paid N168,501.00 the following day, an increase of N883.00 in one day! This shows how our rulers have ruined our economy!

I retired in December 1993. My take home pension was worked out to be a little over N30,000.00. The dollar was then about N5.00. So my pension was then about $6000.00.

Today my pension is N73,000.00 per month. The dollar rate is over N200.00. My pension now has a value of $365.00. That means my stipend is now 6.1 percent of its original value in terms of the dollar. How do we survive under this hardship?

Where is all the money received for our oil in the last 16 years? The federal government must be made to account for every dollar we earned!

Can we find patriotic Nigerians who can save us from slavery? We need to find them quickly!

I am not the only one involved in this slave labour, several Nigerians are in it. But it ought not be so.

Less than one million Nigerians are enjoying the good things Nigeria produces while the rest wallow in poverty. Let us use our votes to change the status quo. If we do, it will teach a lesson for the future..

• Samuel Owopetu,

Lagos

•It is sad that the claims on his drug had to become subject of litigation

The controversy over Dr. Jeremiah Abalaka’s claim to have patented a vaccine for the treatment of HIV has refused to go away. Of note, 15 years after the federal agency, National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC) banned the doctor and his vaccine, a Federal High Court presided over by Justice Binta Nyako, has lifted the ban on the use of the vaccine. According to media report, the court also restrained the Federal Government and NAFDAC from further interfering with the use of the vaccine.

We hope the judgment of the court is only to enforce the rights of Dr. Abalaka, to be treated fairly as ‘an inventor’ in accordance with the law, and not to grant him a free reign, not to submit to standard regulation, as provided by extant laws on authentication of medical discoveries. Dr.Abalaka had approached the court to challenge the ban placed on him by NAFDAC, and had claimed that he was offered monetary inducement to give away his discovery, which he rejected. Back then, the Federal Government had come out strongly to denounce the doctor, claiming that the discovery could not be authenticated.

It is unfortunate that such a matter that should be handled scientifically in accordance with laid-down rules and procedure, became a subject for litigation, with its own peculiar technicalities. For now, the implication of the judgment is that Dr. Abalaka was badly treated by the Federal Government and her agencies, over a matter that ought to have brought glory to the country, if the vaccine had the potency he ascribed to it.

But for the disagreement and counter-claims, we had thought that there is a standard procedure for the authentication of drugs, before use. Indeed, as the global race for the discovery of vaccine for Ebola disease showed recently, such standards are substantially universal. So, why would a Nigerian discovery, if the claim is true, end up in controversy?

Now that the court has restrained the Federal Government and NAFDAC from interfering with the vaccine, we hope Dr. Abalaka will proceed to conclude the authentication process, which from his claim appears to have been arrested. As a scientist, we believe that he will follow the process to completion, if he has not. Indeed, if NAFADC had made a mistake in unlawfully restraining the doctor and his vaccine, then it must own up, and allow unfettered use of the medication. After all, there is yet no known cure for that dreadful ailment, and who says a Nigerian cannot contribute to the body of medical knowledge for the benefit of the world?

If however the Federal Government feels that the court erred by granting that relief to Dr. Abalaka, then it must return to a higher court, to argue for a reversal of the judgment. The government and its agencies must not be ambivalent over this matter. Considering that it is the health of Nigerians that we are talking about, the relevant agencies should, as a matter of public importance, make a statement as to their position over the court judgment. The National Institute for Pharmaceutical Research which Dr.Abalaka claims authenticated the vaccine, also owes Nigerians a confirmation or rebuttal.

It will also be fair to properly compensate Dr. Abalaka if he was wrongly treated by the relevant agencies. His claim that he was offered inducement by the agents of the Federal Government should be investigated, to clear all the grey areas. Unfortunately many reasonable Nigerians out there believe Dr. Abalaka’s story, considering the neglect or lackadaisical attitude of government to research in the country.

•Collaboration among agencies is praise-worthy but there is room for improvement 

We are not in a state of epidemic,” according to the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development, Dr. Akinwunmi Adesina. While his statement may be reassuring, the official report of cases of bird flu in seven states is nevertheless a sufficient cause for alarm.  Adesina, who named Kano, Lagos, Ogun, Delta, Rivers, Edo and Plateau states, said 140,390 birds had been linked with the infection and recorded mortality so far was 22,173.

It is a grim picture indeed, considering the widespread consumption of poultry meat and poultry products across the country. It is hoped that Adesina’s claim that the Federal Government’s efforts to contain the outbreak are guided by “strong determination, purposefulness and aggressiveness” will be demonstrated by result-producing actions. He said: “In all of these states, different levels of interventions, including depopulation, decontamination and quarantine, are currently ongoing.”

The spread of avian influenza, known as bird flu, to five other states beyond  Kano and Lagos states which were initially identified as affected areas calls for a thorough and far-reaching response by the appropriate authorities to prevent a possible further extension of the disease. It is noteworthy that the presence of the virus was detected following unusually high mortality reported in some poultry farms and live bird markets in Kano and Lagos states.

Equally remarkable are the reported statistics that about 103,445 birds have been exposed to infection in Kano State, with 15, 963 mortality recorded, while in Lagos State there were about 31, 195 cases of infection and 3, 347 deaths. Samples taken from the birds were tested at the National Veterinary Research Institute (NVRI), Vom, Plateau State, and showed that the cause of the deaths was the H5 Strain of Avian Influenza Virus. The virus is infectious and can cause serious human infection.

It is thought-provoking that Adesina said: “I wish to assure Nigerians that Nigeria will successfully control the bird flu outbreak. We have successfully controlled it in the past and have activated all the necessary protocols and measures to ensure successful control this time as well.” The questions are: What is responsible for the recurrent outbreak? Is prevention not better than cure?

Apparently, a major contributory factor is lax official surveillance, which is unacceptable because this is a virus that could contaminate foodstuff and expose the public to serious health consequences. It is important to strengthen the formal inspection system, just as greater attention should be paid to the enlightenment of poultry farmers and fowl sellers, especially concerning best practices in biosecurity.

Also, it is helpful to educate the public on how to avoid infection as well as prevent the spread of the virus, which includes ensuring that poultry meat and eggs are properly cooked before consumption and promptly reporting cases of mortality in birds in any area to the appropriate authorities.

The collaboration between the Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development and the relevant ministries in the affected sates is a positive approach. It is also a plus that there is no record of any human infection. In particular, the example of the scope of government response in Lagos State is impressive. Apart from active diseases search by surveillance agents, biosecurity monitoring and sensitisation in poultry farms and markets, disinfection of poultry markets and decontamination of affected farms and sensitisation of poultry farmers and traders on insurance policy issues, the state ministry of agriculture and cooperatives is collaborating with the  ministry of health, the Lagos State branch of the Poultry Association of Nigeria, National Agriculture Insurance Corporation (NAIC) and Lagos State Fowl Sellers Association.

The bird flu challenge must be tackled and urgently contained. Furthermore, it is necessary to comprehensively address the system-related defects that enable such a potentially dangerous outbreak.