Category: Editorial

•His proposals are largely commendable but execution is the issue 

ON June 4, Godwin Emefiele formally assumed office as the 10th Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN). His coming brings closure to the Sanusi Lamido Sanusi era at the apex bank. For a man who did so much to bring some sanity and stability to the domestic financial market,  an individual who could claim to have fought inflation to a standstill, it is unfortunate that Sanusi’s tenure is now defined by issues largely unrelated to his remit as the chief steward of the apex bank. The controversies, which would also spawn allegations of serial infractions aside culminating in his forced exit, have also eventuated in the re-opening of the old debate about the limits of the apex bank’s independence.

Of course, Nigerians know better than to swallow the Federal Government’s yarn that the exit of Sanusi was for anything other than his trenchant criticisms of the government’s management of the oil receipts, particularly his allegation that a whopping $20 billion was not remitted into the federation account. It is perhaps just as well that the allegation came at a time of mounting concerns about Sanusi’s volubility – a vice ordinarily deemed incompatible with the demands of the traditionally conservative office. Even at that, we are aware that many have argued that Sanusi has done a patriotic duty of raising the alarm, at least to the extent that the issues raised by him are now the subject of a forensic audit. Pertinent here is whether the sin can constitute the ground for removing a CBN governor from office.

We consider this background important if only to underscore the immediate challenge facing Emefiele as he settles down. This is because, no matter how lofty the goals set by his leadership are, the question of whether the number one banker could still claim to retain the ambience of operational independence and integrity to undertake any bold measures after the ‘Sanusi treatment’ is unlikely to go away anytime soon.

This takes us to his vision for the apex bank. At the risk of appearing dismissive, we think that the problems of the financial services sector, like the overall economy in which it is a part, have been largely over-dissected. Under Charles Soludo, it was ‘consolidation’, which saw a total of 89 banks collapsed into 25. Sanusi would come later with his ‘sanitisation’, with its massive purge and further shrinking of the same sector. Unfortunately, none of these has brought the financial services sector anywhere near the larger goal of deepening access to financial services to any appreciable degree.

Access to credit remains difficult just as costs have also remained prohibitively high. While the paradox of excessive liquidity side-by-side critical shortages in credit to the real sector has endured, a stuttering economy – with soar away unemployment – continues to record superlative growth said to be among the highest in the world.

However, that is not where the paradox ends; no thanks to the industrial scale oil theft and the opaque accounting system of the oil sector, a nation which claims to sell its crude way above the annual benchmark price continues to suffer decline in fiscal buffers.

Yes, we welcome Emefiele with his new vision to turn the tide around. If anything, he needs it to run with. Given his core banking background, he seems an unlikely individual to rock the boat – which by the way is neither a virtue nor a vice. We share in his goal of a gradual reduction in interest rates. His point about treasury bills rates creating “a perverse incentive for commercial banks to simply buy virtually risk-free government bonds rather than lend to the real sector” could not have been better made.

So are his proposals to abolish charges on deposits, and his foreclosure on the devaluation of the naira, and of course, his desire to tighten bank supervision; all of these are well-intended. Same is the proposal on Secured Transaction and National Collateral Registry to improve access to information on borrowers and to assist lenders to make good credit decisions; it is long overdue.

However, after nearly 10 years of financial reforms, the nation is wiser than to judge by grand statements of intentions. All said, his performance is what matters most.

•Pot calls the kettle black as Okonjo-Iweala accuses states of financial recklessness

FINANCE minister and coordinating minister for the economy, Dr Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, left the log in the eye of the Federal Government that she is serving and instead, chose to see the speck in the eye of the state governments when she accused the latter of misusing the monthly allocation they get from the federation account. Speaking in a lecture with the theme: “Transforming Nigeria’s Economy: Opportunities and Challenges,” at the 12th convocation of Babcock University, Ilisan Remo, Ogun State, the minister told us what we already know.

According to her, 10 states received the highest revenue monthly in 2013. The states and their allocations are Akwa Ibom, N260 billion; Rivers, N230 billion; Delta, N209 billion; Bayelsa, N173 billion; Lagos, N168 billion; Kano, N140 billion; Katsina, N103 billion; Oyo, N100 billion; Kaduna, N 97billion and Borno, N94 billion. She then wondered why Nigerians continue to blame President Goodluck Jonathan’s government for the poor state of basic public services like education, health and agriculture, all of which fall under the concurrent list, despite the humongous amounts the states receive.

Okonjo-Iweala says countries like Liberia, The Gambia and the Republic of Benin are not as richly blessed as these states. “So you see that our top 10 states receive more money than these countries and, therefore, you should be asking what is this money being used for?”, she said.

We are grateful to the finance minister for drawing our attention to this fact that we often forget. It is true many of us hardly remember the state governments, and particularly the local governments when talking about financial impropriety and transparency in governance. Yet there is as much stench in these tiers of government as there is at the federal level.

But what Dr Okonjo-Iweala conveniently forgot to add is the fact that the state governments have only taken a cue from what is happening at the centre when it comes to reckless management of funds and lack of transparency and accountability in government.

A few examples, starting with the minister, will suffice: Dr Okonjo-Iweala would remember that she once told Nigerians that she had granted import waivers to the tune of N171billion between 2011 and 2013 whereas the Customs Department said the total amount of same granted by the minister within the period was N1.4trillion. What we have between the two claims is not just a difference but a gulf, and the minister is yet to clear the air on it.

What of the bullet-proof cars scandal that cost the former Minister of Aviation, Stella Oduah  her job?

Also, the petroleum ministry is bleeding with all manner of allegations of financial recklessness. The president’s response is that the minister has been invited more than 200 times by the House of Representatives to shed light on some of these issues, suggesting that the minister is being victimised. Right now, a simple invitation to the minister by the House has become a subject of litigation. The examples are too numerous to mention.

We congratulate the finance minister for the award of Doctor of Science in Global Economic Development (Honoris Causa) that the university bestowed on her, even as we have noted her admonition that we should demand improved standard of living from the state governments. However, we cannot swallow the addendum that we should stop accusing the Federal Government of insensitivity. And the reason is simple: it is the Federal Government that gets the lion’s share of the monthly allocation (52.68 percent) while the states get 26.72 percent and the 774 local governments share 20.6 percent.

In essence, Dr Okonjo-Iweala’s allegation is akin to the pot calling the kettle black. If she wants to be honest with herself, she should first heal the centre government that she is serving of financial recklessness before attempting to heal the state governments. Indeed, the latter would take a cue when they see the former lead by example.

•The about-turn over the order on protests reignites worries over whether the CP should still be allowed to function in a democracy

The procedural conflict within the police begs for rectification. Otherwise, how could Joseph Mbu, Commissioner of Police for Federal Capital Territory (FCT), have single-handedly banned protests by the ‘Bring Back our Girls’ protesters without direct authorisation from the Inspector-General of Police (IGP)? What has happened to discipline in the force?

We were appalled by reports that Mbu, who came to national consciousness through his notorious mishandling of the Rivers State political crisis, audaciously trampled on people’s rights in the FCT where he currently holds sway. He reportedly banned peaceful protests embarked upon by the pro-Chibok girls’ protesters under the direction of Oby Ezekwesili, former Minister of Education, and Hadiza Bala Usman. The protests in Abuja had been on for over 34 days without hiccups until the latest condemnable but supposedly overruled ban by Mbu.

We are pleased by the timely intervention of the IGP even though with a bit of reservation. Frank Mba, Force Public Relations Officer (FPRO), who held forth for the IGP at a media parley in Abuja disclosed that the “buck stops at the table of the IGP” and that the ‘Police High Command wishes to inform the general public that the force has not issued any order banning peaceful assemblies/protests anywhere in Nigeria.’

Despite this explicit about-face on the Mbu ban, we consider the subsequent clarification that follows as befuddling as Mba further ambivalently stated that “security is a collective responsibility of all and consequently, citizens are strongly advised to reconsider their positions on the issues of rallies and protests in FCT until the existing threats are appropriately neutralised and removed from our midst by relevant security agencies.”

We ask: What constitute the threats in these peaceful protests and how did such intelligence report come about in a country where peaceful protests are always treated by government as a serious crime? We recollect that peaceful protest has been judicially declared to be lawful under the nation’s democracy.

So, this latter statement by Mba is ambiguous and capable of mischievous interpretations. The IGP cannot be approbating and reprobating on this same issue at the same time. After all, the police have not adduced any clear-cut evidence showing that there were indeed plans by miscreants to hijack the Abuja protests on the Chibok girls’ abduction. If there were any, it is, in our view, the duty of the police to prevent such from happening. This is why we agree with Ezekwesili and Usman when they declared that the protest “movement is legitimate and lawful and cannot be arrested by the police whose responsibility is to enforce, not betray the law.”

The point is that advocacy for the safe rescue of the Chibok girls should not be seen by the police as an affront to government’s authority but rather a welcome development. Such protests should be encouraged for they serve as daily reminder to the authorities of the need not to rest on their oars until the girls are rescued. This should be encouraged especially in a country like ours where serious state matters easily get relegated to the backburner of national discourse.

Mbu unleashed subversive disorder as CP in Rivers State. He has extended that patent in Abuja. We call on the IGP to rein in CP Mbu before he does further damage to the police as an institution. He went too far this time, which shows the contempt he has for the gravity of the Chibok abductions, the parents and the nation in general, despite the latest damage control. His conduct over time is incompatible with democratic tenets. Perhaps it is time for him to go.

•Supreme Court’s penalty against Ogboru’s lawyer over case against Gov. Uduaghan for wasting the court’s time is good for the judicial process

For abusing the judicial process and wasting the time of the Supreme Court, a lawyer, Dr Dickson Osuala, is to pay N8million as cost to Governor Emmanuel Uduaghan, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), and the Attorney General of the Federation. Each will get N2million according to the court.

Dr Osuala was counsel to the Democratic Peoples Party (DPP) candidate in the 2007 governorship election in Delta State, Chief Great Ogboru. Chief Ogboru was dissatisfied with the result of the governorship election in the state, as announced by INEC, and decided to challenge it in court.

We have nothing against aggrieved persons taking full advantage of the judicial process. Indeed, it is the normal thing to do in election cases, especially in our kind of country where elections are hardly won or lost at the ballot. Indeed, what irked us is not that the issue has become a subject of protracted legal battles but Chief Ogboru’s attempt to rubbish the maxim that ’there should be an end to litigation’. The matter had traversed several courts, from the election petition tribunal to the Supreme Court.

In the course of the litigation, both parties have had to contest certain aspects of the various court rulings by way of appeals. But what is significant is that the matter eventually got to the Supreme Court, with the apex court ruling in favour of Governor Uduaghan on three occasions.

Chief Ogboru at a time urged the apex court to set aside its judgment of March 2, 2012 and hear some consolidated appeals on the merit. But when the matter came up for hearing on October 15, 2012, his counsel applied to withdraw the application and same was accordingly struck out.

Then, Dr. Osuala filed a similar application dated November 19, 2012, urging the Supreme Court to set aside its decision and hear the consolidated appeals on the merit. The court again dismissed the application as an abuse of judicial process on June 21, 2013. Still not satisfied with the decision of the apex court, Ogboru, again through Dr. Osuala, filed a similar application on August 21, 2013. It was at this stage that the justices at the apex court got angry and slammed the N8million costs on Dr Osuala, after dismissing the application.

We agree with the apex court that penalising counsel for such frivolous cases will go a long way in dissuading other lawyers who might want to toe similar line, when all they need do is to advise their client against such judicial voyage that only makes a mockery of the judicial process. If the clients are ignorant of the law, the counsel, as the learned people that they are supposed to be, should know better. How could a lawyer take a matter on which the apex court had ruled twice to it a third time? We know the court could make mistakes, in which case it could reverse itself, Chief Ogboru’s case did not fall within such circumstances. There must be a cogent reason to warrant such a review.

Dr Osuala is not the only lawyer involved in such abuse of the judicial process. There have been many other instances of lawyers seeking frivolous injunctions and wasting valuable time in the process. Their tribe will go into extinction when the courts not only refuse to cooperate with them but make them pay heavily for their irresponsible actions. It is such behaviour that causes congestion in our courts as well as delay justice, which in a sense, is justice denied. We need more of the apex court sanction on erring lawyers if truly cases must end.