The Nation Newspaper

Category: Editorial

  • What manner of democracy is this?

    What manner of democracy is this?

    “Each nation gives life to democracy in its own way, and in line with its own traditions” – Barack Obama

    Democracy must be the most sought-after bride in the world. Everyone lays claim to her. Everyone trumpets an undying love for this highly desired bride. Even the meanest form of dictatorship never shies away from showcasing to the world,  elements in its mode of governance, in which it sees any semblance to the tenets of democracy.

    Bernard Crick best captures it. Democracy, he says, is “perhaps the most promiscuous word in the world of public affairs. She is everybody’s mistress and yet somehow retains her magic, even when a lover sees that her favours are being, in his light, illicitly shared by many another.”

    A few months to the Presidential elections, the results are virtually decided. According to INEC guidelines, the period for campaign is not upon us yet. Political parties cannot even conduct primary elections to decide on their candidates until the final quarter of the year. Yet, the sitting President, who already enjoys a massive advantage by virtue of his office, and most likely to run in the elections, is way ahead of everyone else, with a media campaign that has been in our face for almost a year now. Indeed, those behind the campaign are quick to tell us they have not jumped the gun, teasing us that what they have running is not a campaign. Wonder what it would be like when the campaign really starts.

    The advertising campaign by the Transformation Ambassadors of Nigeria and her co-travellers, obviously well-oiled from an abundance of unexplained resources, has been running for over six months now. The government has nothing to do with it, we are told, yet the Secretary to the Government of the Federation always finds time to be at these rallies to receive a pile of signatures. The President has nothing to do with it, yet his ministers, from time to time, abandon their duty posts to partake in this ritual. Even Ministers Adesina and Okonjo-Iweala could not help but leave their busy desks to partake in rallies at Ibadan and Port-Harcourt.

    At whose expense are they making these trips?

    The rally in Port-Harcourt was so urgent that public health risks from the Ebola Virus Disease could not make the Transformation Ambassadors quarantine their desperation over 2015 and shelve it. Not even the advisory from the President for Nigerians to restrain themselves from large gatherings counted for anything with the Transformation Ambassadors. They will rather defy the President’s directive and put lives at risk, in order to convince him to run. To them, all that matters is winning the 2015 elections.

    But do you blame the transformation ambassadors? You will think with rules in place, the umpire will be up and doing with enforcement. INEC will rather pretend that it has not noticed what is going on. When it comes to standing its ground against infractions by the party that has promised to be in power for 60 years, INEC suddenly catches cold.

    But when it comes to bullying other political parties, withholding recognition of one, in clear defiance of valid court pronouncement, INEC finds its voice. It is bad enough that the field is not level for all players within the political space. To make an open show of it, as the case is now, is simply obscene. It is like a case of putting two boxers in the ring, with the hands of one of them, tied behind him.

    To bring impunity to an end, Nigerians will have to take a stand to demand for change. It is not enough to simply desire freedom and true democracy; citizens are expected to possess what Heater calls an ‘educated sense of political responsibility’. This, “entails a positive  interest in public affairs, a sense of responsibility to use one’s political rights for the public good, a certain minimum of education in order to be capable of making a responsible and independent political judgement, and finally, the existence of political debate to stimulate thought”.

    It is time to take the country back from those whose only obsession is winning elections and attaining power for purposes not in tandem with a meaningful developmental agenda for the country. You cannot simply appropriate Nelson Mandela or Martin Luther King as your pals, hoping to fool the people. You cannot keep harassing us with disjointed lies, patched together to con the gullible, and sell that to us, because you have the resources to beat the gun, and expect us to believe you have some altruistic objectives for the country.

    A democracy practised with rigged dice cannot give birth to national transformation.

     

    • Simbo Olorunfemi,

    Lagos

     

     

  • INEC’s new polling units

    INEC’s new polling units

    •To forestall bickering, the electoral umpire must partner with and enlist the electorate

    THE ripple generated by the decision of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to create additional 30,000 polling units is rather unfortunate. Based on distrust of the electoral setting and previous experiences that predispose public officials to act against the general interest, some politicians and non-governmental organisations have alleged that the commission had an undisclosed agenda in allocating more than 21,000 new polling units in the North and 8,000 in the South.

    We agree with those who have called for caution in accepting or rejecting the new units. The commission last week explained in advertorials published by major newspapers that the decision was taken in the overall best interest of managing the electoral process. It also attempted to explain the criteria for the exercise, pointing out that it was based on the need to improve access control and security at the polling units.

    However, INEC’s explanation that all it had tried to do was break down the existing polling units in such a way that no voter in the urban area would travel more than one kilometre to exercise his or her civic right, or two kilometres in the rural area, as well as prune the number of voters to about 300 per unit has not allayed fears expressed by politicians and political activists, especially in the South.

    We are not surprised by the apprehension so generated. Nigeria had, especially in the recent past, been split on all major issues along ethnic, religious and communal lines. The opponents of the scheme are right to query why the exercise is just being conducted when the 2015 general election is at hand. Again, the commission owes the country a duty to carry critical stakeholders as well as the public along.

    It is curious that, in the many engagements of the commission with the civil society before and after the recent elections, no attempt was made to sell the proposal. The era of forcing issues on the people is gone. If INEC is to succeed in the task of sanitising the political landscape by conducting credible elections, it must learn to partner with the people, step up public education and realise that previous experiences dispose the people to be suspicious of new moves.

    The division in the country is so deep that even the ruling party at the federal level could not speak with one voice on the matter. The chairman of the South East Governors’ Forum, Chief Theodore Orji, has queried the motive, just as the party’s national publicity secretary, Chief Olisa Metuh, who is from Anambra State in the South. They do not see the justification for the move. Other chieftains of the party in the South West and South East have equally called to question the judgment of INEC in allocating about the same number of the additional polling units to the North West as in the entire South.

    The INEC timing could be queried as anything at this point would attract critical comments. We hasten, however, to point out that what should matter to all now is the credibility of the next set of elections. We need to take more active interest in the credibility of the electoral register, training of polling officials, conquest of the logistics nightmare and generally building up the confidence of the voting public in the commission and the electoral process.

  • Suspicious pension

    Suspicious pension

    • While justifying the idea of paying ex-Biafrans, we call for transparency

    The news by the Military Pensions Board that Nigerian soldiers, who defected and fought on the side of the rebellious Biafra during the Nigerian Civil War from 1967 to 1970, have been enlisted on the military pension payroll for their monthly pension is commendable. Chairman of the board, Air Commodore Mohammed Dabo, who confirmed the development during the visit of the Minister of State for Defence, Musliu Obanikoro, to the board, said it was sequel to the state pardon granted the soldiers by former President Olusegun Obasanjo in 2000. The chairman claimed that, so far, 160 of the ex-Biafran soldiers have been enlisted, and noted that more names are being released on the Federal Government gazette.

    We hope however that the information is not a political gimmick by President Goodluck Jonathan’s administration which has shown no scruples in its determination to curry the favour of as many geo-political zones as possible towards a successful re-election. Our apprehension is based on the fact that the administration chooses the twilight of its current tenure to implement a decision reached by the Federal Government since 2000. So, we hope it is not one of such unrealisable promises that the Jonathan government has made to the Igbos, in the regime’s quest to gain their confidence and votes, as the 2015 general elections approach.

    It is also important that relevant agencies engage in proper scrutiny of the list of 160 soldiers that the government has reportedly released to the board. Our worry is based on the fact that the Nigerian Civil War ended 44 years ago, and it is possible that those on the list may never have participated in the unfortunate war. We note that the military has over the years had difficulty to determine the proper identification of its pensioners, who retired in more recent years, because of the tardiness in record keeping. So, if it is difficult for it to keep more recent records, we are doubtful that those on the list are actually ex-Biafran soldiers whose records of service to Nigeria before the war may be difficult to trace.

    We are also worried that the list may include ghost ex-soldiers, considering that every now and then, the Federal Government agencies regale us with the information that ghost workers have been discovered in one ministry or another. So, if we are confronted by ghost names from Federal Government agencies and institutions that are currently there for all to see, we shudder at the possibility that all manner of names could be put on that gazette, while the so called ex-Biafran pensions are paid for the benefit of those in charge of the process. Accordingly, it is important that the names of the soldiers and their particulars be published in national dailies, in the hope that the civil society would help to ascertain the authenticity of the entire exercise.

    From recent experience, we note that nothing is beyond those who are hell bent on ensuring the success of President Jonathan in the 2015 elections. We therefore worry whether the process is not one of such ways to raise slush funds for the re-election campaign of the administration. If, as the chairman of the board claims, more names are being thrown up in the federal gazette, it is just possible that even the board may not have control over the supply side of this new venture. It is therefore important that federal legislators should oversight the names that are released, and proper checks put in place to avoid, those in charge, using the opportunity to rip the federal purse, in the name of healing our scarred nation.

  • Imperfect impeachment

    Imperfect impeachment

    •Constitutional provision becomes political tool

    One of the least-attractive features of Nigeria’s return to democratic rule in May 1999 is the repeated refusal of politicians to play the game by its established rules. The most egregious manifestation of this tendency is the use to which the constitutional provision of impeachment has been put. Instead of being utilised as a last resort to be employed when all other options have been tried and failed, impeachment has become a crude weapon for the achievement of crassly partisan political ends.

    The recent impeachment of the Deputy Governor of Enugu State, Mr. Sunday Onyebuchi, must rank among the most gratuitous examples of this grossly-misused constitutional provision. The speed of the process, its glaring lac k of transparency, and the sheer ludicrousness of the charges against him all combine to show that getting rid of a perceived nuisance was the real aim, rather than serving the interests of due process and fair play.

    Onyebuchi was accused of gross misconduct and flagrant disobedience to the directives of Governor Sullivan Chime, but the crimes alleged against him were underwhelming in their pettiness. The deputy governor was said to have failed to represent the governor at ceremonies launching the construction of the Second Niger Bridge, and to have operated a poultry farm in defiance of a resolution of the Enugu State House of Assembly. In a nation where financial impropriety, gross incompetence and the use of violence and intimidation as instruments of state policy are rife, it is truly incomprehensible that these would constitute the “grave violation or breach of the provisions” referred to in Section 188 (11) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).

    If Onyebuchi’s offences amount to no more than these allegations, then there can be little doubt that his impeachment was more a means to a dishonourable end, as opposed to an end in itself. The fact that the panel appointed by the Enugu State House of Assembly was unable to find truly serious charges to level against him, as well as its refusal to sit in public is a clear demonstration of the fact that the impeachment provision had been abused by politicians whose personal ambitions took precedence over constitutional propriety and natural justice.

    When it is recalled that the deputy governor held the fort during Chime’s well-publicised extended absence from the state in 2012, the injustice to which he has been subjected becomes even more apparent.

    The main reason why the impeachment weapon can be deployed so recklessly is the loosely-worded nature of the relevant sections. While it is accepted that the provisions dealing with impeachment cannot be defined too narrowly and cannot specify every imaginable offence, it is disturbing that the references to “gross misconduct” are so vague. To make matters worse, the Constitution characterises it as “a misconduct of such nature as amounts in the opinion in the House of Assembly to gross misconduct.” Given the pliancy of so many state houses of assembly in the hands of state governors, it is no surprise that impeachment has been repeatedly misused in Nigeria over the years.

    The consequences have not been beneficial to the country: violence, political instability, the entrenchment of money politics and godfatherism have been the most obvious repercussions. The long-term implications are not positive either, as politicians will seek to rely less on competence and service as they increasingly realise that controlling the impeachment weapon is the most profitable strategy to longevity in office.

    Onyebuchi has promised to seek redress in court. It is hoped that he makes good his intention, as it will enable the propriety or otherwise of his impeachment to be subject to the due process of law. The removal of governors and their deputies from office is a profoundly serious undertaking; it can no longer be subject to the whims of over-ambitious politicians and craven state houses of assembly.

     

  • Journey abuse

    Journey abuse

    •President and other top government officials must distinguish private and public trips

    We cannot but wonder why public officials in Nigeria have failed to realise the demarcation between public and private endeavours. As if the nation is one big jungle without rules and regulations on rights and privileges of office, top government officials have deliberately snubbed the need to distinguish between the two. One recent incident reignited our concerns in this regard. And that was President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan’s recent officially designated ‘private visit’ abroad.

    The news went viral that the president was seriously ill and flown abroad, precisely to Germany for medical treatment. In what has become an embarrassing routine of official denials of the state of health of government officials, and especially that of the president and governors usually shrewd in secrecy, Reuben Abati, the President’s Special Adviser on Media and Publicity expectedly denied the widely reported purpose of the trip. Abati’s reported elucidation: ‘Before leaving Nigeria, I issued a statement that the President will be embarking on a private visit to Germany with a few of his aides. The President is hale and hearty. In fact, he is treating files in his hotel room. Are these not enough proofs that Mr. President is not sick as they want Nigerians to believe?’

    We are happy to know that the President is hale and hearty. And even if he is ill, no human is above the toll of nature, no matter his status. Nobody can cheat nature; so, to once in a while attend to nature’s needs is understandable. But the curious dimension is Abati’s intervention which shows that the President went on ‘a private visit’. The government owes it a duty to tell Nigerians who paid the bills of that trip. Such an expense can only be borne by Nigerians when the President is on leave or when he is on official trip abroad.

    Despite the avalanche of challenges facing the nation, it is surprising that the President still had time to embark on such personal trips with all paraphernalia of office. We even consider as diplomatically unsafe for the President to find solace in treating the country’s confidential files in a vulnerable foreign hotel.

    But this detrimental trend of public officials embarking on private visits abroad at the slightest opportunity is not peculiar to the president. Others, including governors, ministers, local government chairmen and other highly-placed public functionaries routinely travel abroad for personal causes at public expense. This is not too good for transparency and accountability. This condemnable act is nothing but an abuse of privilege and an undue show of ostentation in the face of rampant poverty that is currently ravaging the country. This wasteful spending of public funds is unjustifiable in a country where pensioners are owed arrears of pension; where power is epileptic; where public stealing has become routine and where the education and health sectors are in a shambles.

    In the case of the President, what is the haste in his rushing to Germany after reportedly receiving the report of the recently-concluded National Conference? Vividly too, we recollect that President Jonathan paid his last private visit to Germany when Patience, his wife, was hospitalised there for an undisclosed ailment. Even if the President wanted to relax after perceived hectic schedule, does it mean that there are no interesting places in the country that can compare with similar status anywhere in the world? Obudu Cattle Ranch in Calabar, Cross River State readily comes to mind, among several other illuminating places of relaxation scattered across the country.

    We call on President Jonathan to lead by example. He should not be seen to be leading others in frivolous spending of government funds on personal causes without recourse to laid down regulations and bureaucratic decency. It is illegal for the public to bear the cost of not only the President’s private junketing but that of other public officials engaging in such act.

     

  • The big scam from TAN!

    The big scam from TAN!

    Few months ago, a non-governmental organization under the aegis of Transformation Ambassadors of Nigeria (TAN) circulated a message all over the internet urging youths to register their bio-data for job opportunities through TAN. Millions of Nigerians, employed and unemployed, rushed into cybercafés to purchase network-browsing time while those who have smart phones and other ICT gadgets with subscriptions made do with it and registered duly and happily. Nigerians were asked to fill in their phone numbers, permanent home address, and local government areas among other sensitive information.

    Few weeks later, TAN began an endorsement rally in support of President Jonathan’s re-election bid throughout the various geo-political zones in Nigeria. To the dismay of Nigerians, the bio-data which they naively gave to TAN with the expectation that they would be provided jobs were carefully collated and presented at the various TAN rallies to the representatives of President Jonathan, Secretary to the Federal government, Chief Anyim Pius Anyim, as the Nigerians who are happy with the President’s transformation agenda in the creation of jobs, good healthcare delivery system, improved national security etc and have happily and willingly endorsed President Jonathan for another term of office come 2015!

    The use of bio-data of young Nigerians to score cheap, shameless and ridiculous political points without their consent is not only criminal and offensive, it is unfortunate and an insult on the sensibility of these young Nigerians, it is an embarrassment to this country and its image as it is a dent not only the credibility of the conveners of TAN but also on the presidency.

    The youths of this country should not be cowed or tricked into endorsing President Jonathan for another term in office. TAN should have come out open and allow these young Nigerians to freely express their opinions on whether they wish to do so or not. Nigerian youths have been taken for a ride and for fools. TAN should as a matter of urgency render and unreserved apology in all the national dailies, national radio stations and television stations to Nigerians on their heinous crime and atrocity against the people.

    Failure to do this would be met with legal consequences, as various youths fora would have no other choice than to proceed to a law court for a legal battle. The sensibility of any people have never been this insulted in the history of this country.. if you can’t help us out of unemployment, poverty and poor standard of living imposed on us by corruption and lack of ideas of our leaders, at least, don’t insult us or take us for fools.

    Enough is enough.

    Hussain Obaro,

    Ilorin, Kwara State                

  • Waiver bonanza goes on

    Waiver bonanza goes on

    •List of latest beneficiaries shows nothing has changed

    IF Nigerians needed proof that the import duty racket was alive and well, the latest report showing the Federal Government as granting N25.8 billion in waivers over a five-month period this year should be proof enough. Indeed, if it seems any consolation that this may not come close to the preceding three-year (2011-13) an average of N478 billion yearly, the return appearance of some companies on the beneficiaries’ list would seem a measure of how very little has changed in terms of the attitudes which underlie the administration of the waiver regime.

    Obviously, old habits die hard. For, how else can one explain the case of Globe Motors said to have got a waiver of N991 million for the import of the 290 cars used for the World Economic Forum in Africa? In 2012, it was Coscharis Motors securing the same largesse for the 200 exotic cars it supplied for the 7th African First Ladies Peace Mission (AFLPM) summit in Abuja.

    Another incongruity on the list was the FCT administration said to have received waivers to import “specialised items such as customs made carpets, timber dining chairs” for the presidential banquet hall. Compare this with Borno State government said to have got N984.79 million waivers for agricultural machineries. With such notable examples, Nigerians cannot but wonder if indeed anything has changed.

    The examples highlighted above obviously illustrate what is oftentimes the disjunction between objectives as advertised by government and the specific application of the policy.  But then, there is even a more worrisome dimension which the government continues to act as if to wish it away either because it is too embarrassed to admit, or it has no defence to offer – the discrepancy between the Nigeria Customs Service cumulative waivers record of N1.4 trillion for the period 2011-13 and the finance minister’s version of N170 billion for the same period.

    That discrepancy, till date, has not been satisfactorily explained. Indeed, the suggestion is that the minister has since moved on, hence her boast in her ‘new’ regime of “a sector-wide waiver to provide specific incentives for some strategic and job-creating sectors” as against the ancien regime “when waivers were granted to individual businesses, which resulted in rent-seeking behaviours and an uneven playing field for other businesses”.

    We do not accept that the best way to drive public policy is to ignore the past or simply dismiss it as gone forever. And who says that same ignoble past would not be repeated at great costs to the economy? Nigerians obviously deserve the benefit of knowing the factors responsible for the discrepancy and who the beneficiaries are.

    At a more fundamental level, we believe the challenge goes beyond merely stating that the waivers would serve the public cause.  We have no doubt that it could, if and when strategically applied. Just as we understand that there would never be shortage of good intentions behind every public policy; the challenge is how to measure their specific impacts in terms of employment generation and the various linkages to the economy.

    This is where the Federal Government has more work to do. It goes beyond the routine of making the names of beneficiaries of the duty waivers public. As important as that is, it is also our view that the process is best served when the beneficiaries are challenged to demonstrate how the waivers they enjoyed have impacted on the economy in specific areas of capacity enhancement, employment creation, and in equitable pricing as against being another line item on the company’s bottom-line.

  • Degrading desertion

    Degrading desertion

    •Nigerians are yet to be told the true story of our soldiers’ ‘tactical manoeuvre’ in Cameroon

    BOKO Haram, the terroristic Islamist guerrilla force that has tormented the country since 2009, may have finally succeeded in exposing the underbelly of the military in the long-running counter-terrorism campaign. A British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) report of the defection of 480 Nigerian soldiers to Cameroon, a neighbouring country in the West African sub-region, made a laughingstock of the military, and it will take a comprehensive effort to redeem its battered image.

    It is a telling testimony to the complete embarrassment of the military that it tried to give a spin to the outrageous incident. This is how the Director of Defence Information, Major-Gen. Chris Olubolade, explained the inexplicable move, which observers have perhaps correctly described as “desertion”:  ”The Nigerian troops that were found in Cameroon was as a result of a sustained battle between the troops and the terrorists around the borders with Cameroon, which saw the Nigerian troops charging through the borders in a tactical manoeuvre.”

    It is instructive that Olubolade’s statement was perhaps believably contradicted by an eye-witness account presented by Agence France Presse (AFP). The news agency quoted Basuma Mohammed, a civilian resident of Gamboru-Ngala in Borno State, as saying: “But hours after the attack, a bigger number of the Boko Haram gunmen arrived from the other side of the town and engaged the soldiers who could not stand their superior force and had to join us in running into Cameroon.”

    Although a statement by the Defence Headquarters said the soldiers have returned from Cameroon, and that “they are in high spirits with all their weapons and equipment intact,” this cannot constitute a closure to the disgraceful episode. It is appropriate to thoroughly probe and deal with the paradoxical flight of soldiers from a theatre of war, particularly because of the wrong signals this may send to other members of the military machine, which should literally be a war machine.

    Sadly and deserving of sober reflection, the latest aberrancy represents yet another departure from normalcy in a chain of scandalous manifestations in the anti-terror war. In connection with the battle against Boko Haram, the country has already witnessed a mutiny; and more recently, it experienced the spectacular absurdity of protests by soldiers’ wives who threatened to stop their husbands from performing official counter-terrorism duties because they were allegedly ill-equipped and ill-motivated.

    There is no doubt that this unhelpful backdrop cannot positively contribute to crushing the Boko Haram insurgency. On the contrary, the conditions are such that will more likely undermine the desired objective of achieving victory over the insurgents. In the light of the highlighted flaws in the conduct of the campaign, it is logical and useful to ask fundamental questions, especially relating to the funding of the military operation and the implications for combat-readiness as well as for welfare and morale issues. The question must be asked and addressed: How was the $14 billion allegedly voted for security, defence and the police between 2010 and 2014 spent?

    Regrettably, allegations of corruption and diversion of official funds into private pockets may explain how things got to this pass. It is, therefore, reasonable to locate the sorry demonstration of unprofessionalism by the deserters in the context of the uninspiring leadership of the military authorities and the government. It may well be that poor leadership has not only created alienation in the military, but has also encouraged a self-defeating lack of self-belief among the soldiers.

    Furthermore, and this is equally important even if not directly connected with counter-terrorism, it is undeniable  that the military has been unjustifiably and counterproductively exposed to politically motivated non-military operations, such as performing police duties during elections; and the result is a critical and disturbing distraction from military essence.

    It cannot be overemphasised that the military needs to learn the right lessons from this degrading experience and get its act together in the greater interest of the country.

  • From ‘YEAA’ to ‘TAN’

    From ‘YEAA’ to ‘TAN’

    Many years ago it was YEAA ( Youths Earnestly Ask for Abacha (YEAA) chaperoned by one Daniel Kanu. Today, there is a Transformation Ambassadors of Nigeria. Whilst the former tried to give a pseudo-veneer of pressure by youths for the late maximum ruler to change from military head of state to civilian president, the latter is organising rallies with the intent of getting 10 million signatures from youths to convince the current president to run for election in 2015. The latest of the nation-wide rallies was held in the Port Harcourt Liberation Stadium on Saturday August 30.

    The losers in these charade are the real youths; certainly not the ‘pseudo youths’ who ride on the crest of youth platforms to make cash and fame.

    It is also clear that the pseudo-youth groups do not understand the basic indices for measuring performance. It is not surprising to hear them say that the president is “such a nice man”, even when leaders the world over are judged by their actions and not by their intentions or friendly mien.

    This development is not surprising— what we practice in Nigeria is a crony democracy. Presidential aspirants and others hardly barnstorm the country (in the ideal sense) to listen to challenges . They give Nigerians the impression of being goaded to serve.

    Why is it that when the time comes to choose a candidate, most party members follow the ‘herd instinct’ to endorse one candidate without ideological opposition? Is this what democracy all about or could it be that they were persuaded by backhanders or coercions?

    Michel Platini the EUFA President recently submitted that he  won’t fight Sepp Blatter for the FIFA presidency, in an election next May, though he still hopes somebody will.

    “Now is not my time, not yet, I hope that somebody will oppose Mr. Blatter …To bring ideas and want to change things and not just be sheep who always say yes,” Platini said.,

    Where are the ‘somebodies’ in our political parties, ready to take up the challenge to push us towards real democracy, egalitarianism bereft of bigotry?

    Real democracy gives validity, trustworthiness and establishes the strength of the chosen. The opposite shows that they are out of favour, weak and terrified of their challengers.

    TAN’s senior manager submitted before the rally on a  feature radio programme that governments in times gone by have not been as attentive to the needs of Nigerians  like the current one even when underprivileged Nigerians are suffering, as never before from power failures, to unsafe streets and neighborhoods, to many ills (ad infinitum) that space won’t allow.

    We hope TAN will be all over the place many years from now unlike YEAA with no relevance today to support candidates from  other sections  of the country with impressive  programmes: a difficult proposition for loyalty in Nigeria is not a stable commodity to be counted on for ever.”

    •Simon Abah

      Port-Harcourt

     

  • Confab as farce

    Confab as farce

    The recently concluded conference ended as a waste of a dire nation’s resources

    It began in controversy, and it ended an anti-climax. The opposition asserted the point, which was nothing new, that what Nigerians wanted was a sovereign national conference. Such a conference, which should trigger a fiery frankness from the conferees, would have no limits, including the necessity to renegotiate Nigeria’s existence, or its structure of today.

    Those who supported it said any opportunity to confer should be welcomed, and the Federal Government, under the leadership of President Goodluck Jonathan, was offering a rare platform to put behind us a rancour of a generation.

    There was a great ritual wrapped around it. As a prologue, an exploratory body toured the country to collate views, and its members seemed to bask in a certain democratic glow as though they had a mandate to renew Nigeria. The body known as the Committee on National Conference under Femi Okunrounmu, betrayed a blend of stately humility and vain bluster, in carrying out their duties. The dress rehearsal was seen as grand by a stand point and farcical by the other. A sense of a dual mandate racked the country, one mandate from the top and another from below. But it was not clear, since there was no poll, what the mandate from below wanted.

    Once the stage was set, many politicians, civil rights personas, professionals, ethnic advocates and even clerics, jostled to partake in a drama of inclusion. Suddenly, ethnic masters started to coalesce their troops behind position papers and polemical postures justifying the value of the conference. They even pitched it as an invaluable watershed in history. Some opposition politicians veered out of their partisan togas and scrambled for spots as delegates. At certain junctures, the lines blurred between the opposition and the so-called establishment. It became accepted by a big part of the civil society as a legitimate effort not only to develop the country, but also to unify a fractious people.

    Sober questions were raised. One, how could such a conference be called legitimate when the attendees emerged from the ranks and caprices of tired and recycled elite? Two, under what law was this claptrap jamboree going to be legitimated? Three, how could we reconcile its work and fruit with the existence of a bicameral legislature, the National Assembly, which enjoyed the backing of the constitution? Four, after the dust of deliberations settled, what shall we make of the report since it did not enjoy the stirrings of the law.

    Under the questionable halo of patriots and the overhang of princely four-million-Naira-a-month allowance, the conference kicked off under the leadership of former Chief Justice Idris Kutigi, a respected personage.

    The conference had, in its several sessions, a motley dose of comedy, tragedy, sobriety, rumination, frivolities and even subversion. At the end of the deliberations, a number of facts emerged. One, it was able, in spite of sceptics, to collate and unify its position in one document, however ponderous. Two, none of its positions was groundbreaking. Rather, it rehashed old conclusions already canvassed, and popular but also contained in reports submitted by several other committees to the president since the dawn of this republic. Ironically though, one of the issues was so contentious that the confab abdicated decision to the wisdom of the president.

    Three, the president has foreclosed the possibility of a referendum, and therefore leaves the matter in the hands of the National Assembly, an institution that has looked askance at the feverous deliberations of the confab for about four months.

    The third point made the whole affair an anticlimax. What it means is that there will be no referendum because it was not supposed to be a document of mass assent. It was an elite gathering with the bogus veneer of inclusiveness. Apart from a few sober attendees, it raked in professionals, ethnic champions, expired politicians, cronies, court jesters, buffoons, intellectual salesmen and political fuddy-duddies who parade themselves as icons.

    With this motley crowd of opportunists, some of them making a vain show of quixotic patriotism by donating their allowances to nebulous charities, nothing great was expected by this newspaper from this conference. Nothing, it has turned out, is coming out of it. Some of the self-proclaimed progressives looked desperate after the confab as they started agitating in the media as though they wanted to force the hands of the president to implement the contents of a conference they knew was destined to a paralytic bin. They are undergoing a post-conference remorse and shame.

    President Goodluck Jonathan, in a spurt of ill grace, launched broadsides at the critics of the confab by saying they have been proved wrong. Not so, mister president. The confab would be deemed successful if he can implement the contents of the report within the ambit of the law.

    Some of the recommendations like the two-tier system of federalism, the separation of the position of accountant-general of the federation and accountant- general of the Federal Government, among others lacked originality. The issue of revenue formula and the principles of derivation were deadlocked and left with the president to set a committee to resolve. When existing states are famished for funds, the confab called for more states, up to 18.

    An affair that cost billions of taxpayers’ money should not have ended up like this. But it did. That shows that it was a conference of futility, a burlesque rigmarole to squander the time and resources of a poor nation.