Category: Editorial

  • Jacob Festus Ade Ajayi

    Jacob Festus Ade Ajayi

    •Foremost Historian at 85

    Nigeria’s pre-eminent historian and scholar of global renown, Jacob Festus Ade Ajayi, University of Ibadan Emeritus Professor, turned 85 on May 26. Associates, collaborators, former students, friends and admirers joined his family to celebrate the milestone in ceremonies that accorded with his life-long devotion to matters intellectual and with his characteristic modesty.

    First, his professional colleagues held a symposium on African historiography and his immense contributions to that field. In Nigeria, Dr Kenneth Dike had blazed the trail with his seminal doctoral dissertation for the University of London, later published as Trade and Politics in the Niger Delta. But it was under Ade Ajayi’s leadership as chair of History in Ibadan that the field reached full flowering

    The enduring legacy of his leadership is what came to be known as the Ibadan School of History. Noted for its nationalist undertones, the Ibadan School was a direct response to European scholars who claimed that Africa had no history worth studying beyond the activities of European colonialists and adventurers on the continent.

    Ajayi dismissed that imperialist claim in a phrase that would be hard to match for its majestic simplicity and profound poignancy. The colonial intrusion, he wrote, was nothing more than “an episode” in the history of Africa. The absence of written records by which Western historians set great store was no barrier to the reconstruction of the African past, he argued. He insisted on the validity of oral sources subjected to the established standards of verification, and on a multi-disciplinary approach to the study of History.

    His own prodigious output of books, book chapters, monographs, journal articles, most of them published after he was appointed a professor at the relatively young age of 35, was replicated in the comprehensiveness of the seminal works that came out of the Ibadan School.  Leading universities and research institutions across the world sought his services and piled him with their highest honours.

    Then symposium was followed the next day by a public lecture that prefaced the presentation of a book on Ade Ajayi’s life and career, edited by two of his former students who have gone on to distinguish themselves in scholarship and public service, Professor Akinjide  Osuntokun and Professor Michael Omolewa. Featuring contributions by Ade Ajayi’s fellow academics in Nigeria and abroad, former colleagues, students and members of his family, it is an ennobling study in dedication, humility, grace under pressure, and service.

    Nor has Ade Ajayi’s career been distinguished only by scholarship. He has been an outstanding administrator as well. As vice chancellor, he embarked on construction projects and a staff development programme and curriculum reform that transformed the University of Lagos almost beyond recognition.  His tenure ended on a sad note when he was dismissed, following the death of a student during a demonstration the Federal Military Government said he ought to have pre-empted, as if the university was a military barracks and the vice chancellor a garrison commander.

    Years later, a grateful country conferred him with its highest recognition for distinguished intellectual achievement, the National Order of Merit.  Most fittingly, he was awarded the Centennial Medal, one of 100 Nigerians to be so honoured on the occasion of Centenary of the amalgamation, his preferment being in the category of “Distinguished Academics.”

    Sadly, History, the discipline in which Ade Ajayi made a mark on the world’s stage, is no longer taught in Nigerian schools. It has instead been enfolded in “social science.”  It is doubtful whether Nigeria can produce another Ade Ajayi.  The nation will be the poorer for being deprived of the insights and clarity that he and the Ibadan School brought to bear on significant aspects of our existence.

     

  • Flying too high

    Flying too high

    The rot in Oduah’s handling of the aviation ministry is exposed 

    WHEN the beleaguered Princess Stella Oduah was finally reliev ed of her position as Minister of Aviation in February, some Nigerians thought she was a victim of political harassment by opposition parties who were determined to get rid of one of the Jonathan administration’s more effective performers. However, recent revelations by the aviation ministry’s supervising minister, Dr. Samuel Ortom, show that Oduah’s track record was not all it appeared to be.

    Ortom recently declared that the ministry was in the process of drastically cutting back on the projects embarked upon during Oduah’s tenure because of the financial quagmire that it had found itself in. To fund the construction of four cargo airports, the ministry had entered into loans requiring the payment of billions of naira in interest payments. Many of the other projects necessitated appropriations which far exceeded the Federal Government’s financial capabilities. Work on many projects has been suspended, and contractors are not getting paid. In all, the ministry has run up debts totalling an estimated N174.6 billion. The ministry has embarked upon an all-inclusive review of the projects in an effort to reduce its financial exposure. Some projects which are yet to commence may be halted, while debt-rescheduling negotiations are being proposed for others.

    It is ironic that this is the same Oduah who was touted as the government official whose efforts symbolised the so-called “Transformation Agenda” of the Goodluck Jonathan administration. Her rehabilitation of airport terminals across the nation, the construction of cargo airports and the ambitious policy of creating an aerotropolis or “airport city” were hailed as bold policy initiatives never before attempted in Nigeria.

    Many critics were dismissed as ethnic bigots who were enraged that the ministry had been “taken away” from their region. Respected voices within the aviation industry that raised concerns were shouted down as holding brief for corrupt elements who wanted to continue benefitting from the alleged status quo.

    Now that the truth has finally emerged, it is incumbent upon the Nigerian government and citizenry to reflect on exactly how the nation arrived at this pass. How was the aviation ministry able to enter into so many financial obligations that are cumulatively well beyond its capacity to service? What was the input of the Federal Ministry of Finance? Did the contracts pass through the Budget Management Office and the Debt Management Office?

    At the time these projects were embarked upon, there were criticisms that the rehabilitation of airports should not be Nigeria’s first priority. It was argued that a comprehensive overhaul of all aspects of aviation safety was much more urgent, and evidence for the validity of this argument abounded: pot-holed runways, frequent power outages, the ever-increasing cost of aviation fuel, and the very dubious aircraft-maintenance record of many indigenous airlines.

    As Oduah persisted in the execution of her own agenda, the contradictions became plain. Murtala Muhammed International Airport, Lagos, for example, was undergoing extensive remodelling at a time when its approach roads and parking lots were virtually unusable and power outages were a common occurrence.

    The aviation ministry embarked on the simultaneous construction of multiple cargo airports at a time when many airports in the country were grossly under-utilised, and the associated infrastructure necessary to support them was lacking. Many of the foreign loans taken to finance the projects were obtained under conditions that were never made clear, such as the US $500 million secured from a Chinese company for airport remodelling which is now being reviewed.

    The Oduah debacle plainly shows that there can be no substitute for due process, no matter how glamorous the policies may appear to be. A comprehensive audit of all the other ministries must be undertaken in order to see whether they too have chosen to follow the path of financial recklessness. If they have, those deemed to be responsible for it should be held to account for their actions.

     

     

  • Rehabilitation and rescue

    Rehabilitation and rescue

    •Donations to escaped Chibok girls should spur retrieval of abducted ones

    As efforts continue to find the nearly 300 secondary school girls abducted by the militant Boko Haram sect, it is heartwarming that the Borno State Government has recognised its obligations to the 53 girls who were able to escape the insurgents’ clutches. Speaking in Maiduguri, the governor, Alhaji Kashim Shettima, announced a N150 million programme of rehabilitation for the girls and their families.

    At an average of about N3 million per family, the state government’s assistance is a substantial investment in citizens who have undergone a terrible experience. The girls will receive assistance in overcoming the trauma caused by the abduction and their parents will get help in rebuilding their livelihoods. It is particularly welcome that the state government has not forgotten these citizens even though most of the girls have not yet been found. Such actions are a happy contrast to the usual Nigerian practice of abandoning victims to their fate as soon as the television cameras have departed.

    In the specific case of the escapees and their parents, it is vital that the process of healing and rehabilitation commences as soon as possible. Too much emphasis has been placed on defeating the insurgents to the detriment of restoring the well-being of their victims, when in actual fact both should proceed simultaneously.

    Despite Borno State’s commendable measures, it should not be forgotten that the whole Boko Haram crisis demands a more holistic approach necessarily incorporating a variety of approaches. These include coming to grips with the widespread poverty and exclusion that provide terrorist groups with foot soldiers and ostensibly justifies their activities. The creation and deployment of armed thugs by politicians must also be curtailed; public office holders who use them must be identified and prosecuted. The porous borders which have made it so easy for insurgents to conduct cross-border attacks with impunity must be tightened up.

    Perhaps the most urgent requirement is that of stepping up the fight against the terrorist activity that has continued to plague the country’s north-east. The most immediate need is for proper coordination. The clash of accusation and counter-accusation going on between the federal and Borno State governments must stop. Not only does it waste time and energy, these quarrels poison the atmosphere, thereby creating resentment, hardening attitudes and inhibiting cooperation between all parties. It also presents an extremely unflattering picture of the country to the world.

    There is also the obvious fact that most of the girls abducted from Chibok are yet to be rescued. Four more students are reported to have escaped from their captors; the military high command claims to now know where they are hidden. In practical terms, however, the girls are no closer to freedom than they were when they were first taken from their school.

    International assistance has come in from the United States, the United Kingdom, Israel and China, and their resources have been deployed in trying to discover the location of the abductors. President Goodluck Jonathan seems to have finally grasped the full dimensions of the kidnap saga, as evidenced in his tough-talking Democracy Day speech in which he declared total war on all forms of terrorism and insurgency. What is now needed is for these positive steps to be translated into results.

    The recovery of the abducted girls is the most immediate priority. Everyone involved in the rescue operation must unite around the achievement of this aim, regardless of party affiliation, national interest or any other consideration. When they are found and restored to their families, it is to be hoped that the Borno State Government and other bodies will ensure that they are reintegrated into society as quickly as possible.

     

  • Untenable alibi

    Untenable alibi

    •Oil minister’s position leaves much to be desired

    We have always admired the presidential system of government for many reasons, but more importantly for its clear-cut demarcations through the principle of separation of powers and the doctrine of checks and balances among the three arms of government. This is meant to discourage arbitrary deployment of powers. But these laudable provisions were made mincemeat of by Diezani Alison-Madueke, Minister of Petroleum Resources and the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC), through a new case filed in court by them seeking for perpetual injunction to restrain the National Assembly from probing her/NNPC without first obtaining the consent of President Goodluck Jonathan.

    The law firm of Chief Mike Ozekhome (SAN) is curiously handling this matter for the minister through Dominic Ezerioha, one of its reported counsel. Alison-Madueke’s judicial resistance is geared towards preventing the House of Representatives’ Committee on Public Accounts from probing her over the scandalous allegation that she spent N10billion on chartered aircraft in a country where poverty is on the high scale and the monthly minimum wage is a paltry N18, 000. The new suit is reportedly marked FHC/ABJ/CS/346/2014 at an Abuja Federal High Court.

    We are aware that previous attempts by the National Assembly to probe activities in the oil sector since 1999 have faced serious rebuff from both NNPC and the minister. But it is a thing of joy to know that the national legislature, through the latest summon, has shown  unwavering resolve to go ahead this time by asking especially the minister to appear before it to answer questions relating to the aircraft charter scandal on June 17, 2014.

    Sadly too, the quick but easy resort to the court by the applicants is nothing but a condemnable attempt at distracting and preventing the House from performing its constitutional duty; and the curious Nigerian people from knowing the truth and extent of rot in the oil sector. More disheartening is our observation that Chief Ozekhome (SAN), a constitutional lawyer/activist with renowned pedigree and known hitherto for clamouring for due process, is anchoring this aberration/circumvention of constitutional process, for whatever reason. This is out of character with such a distinguished constitutional lawyer.

    The National Assembly is not subservient to the presidency in the discharge of its lawful duty. So is the judiciary or even the executive arm, but any of them can only moderate one another in case of an overreach. As such, we view the current judicial attempt by the applicants as an abuse of court process. We are persuaded, in our position, by the 1999 Constitution where it provides in section 88 (1b) that each House of the National Assembly shall have power over ‘the conduct of affairs of any person, authority, ministry or government department charged, or intended to be charged, with the duty of or responsibility for’ –  (ii) ‘disbursing or administering moneys appropriated or to be appropriated by the National Assembly.’

    According to its subsequent provisions in section 88(2b), such powers are to enable it – ‘expose corruption, inefficiency or waste in the execution or administration of laws within its legislative competence and in the disbursement or administration of funds appropriated by it.’  Above all, section 89 (1(a) (c) gives the Senate or the House of Representatives or a committee appointed in accordance with section 62 of the constitution powers to procure evidence, whether written or oral, as it may think necessary, and to summon any person in Nigeria. We ask: Despite these unambiguous constitutional provisions, why are Alison-Madueke and the NNPC still running away from their shadows? We believe that under no circumstances should the constitutional process be undermined since no executive privilege is applicable in this instance.

     

  • No, thanks

    No, thanks

    •Tariff obsession by NERC is wrong; Nigerians shouldn’t pay more for electricity now

    THE latest review of the Multi-Year Tariff Order (MYTO) by the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC) must have come as a disappointment to the electricity consumer. There is, clearly, a lot to say against retaining a tariff structure which appears to reward the inefficiency of the operator, while doing nothing about the lingering frustrations of the electricity consumer.

    It isn’t that we do not understand the rules of the MYTO which provide that where the aggregate of the variables of rate of inflation, the exchange rate, gas price and available generation capacity change by plus or minus 5 percent of the MYTO figures, the changes would necessitate a tariff review. Our bone of contention is not just the perverse incentive it seems to confer on the inept operator, but the armour it has since provided for doing nothing.

    We recognise two legs to the review expected to have taken off yesterday, June 1 – one barely good; the other hopelessly bad.

    The first or rather the good part is the retention of the fixed charge component of the electricity tariff at N750 rather than N1,500 per month as projected under the MYTO. Although the electricity consumer would rather that the fixed charge be abolished completely, it is nonetheless a smart move. Clearly, the elements would seem in favour of the reduction. The MYTO had projected an inflation rate of 13 percent; the rate as at March 30, cut-off date for the review, was 7.8 percent, that is, 5.2 percent less than projected. Exchange rate was also projected at N178 to the dollar; whereas the March 30, data from the Central Bank of Nigeria was N157.30 to $1, which is 11.6 percent less than projected. The review, under those prevailing macro-economic variables obviously makes sense.

    However, in the reasoning of NERC, this should not suffice to earn the electricity consumer significant respite since, according to it, the other two components of transmission and distribution leave the gross available capacity short by a whopping 52 percent. Whereas the total electricity generation output as of March 31 review date was 4,306 MW, this was far les than the 9,061 MW projected by NERC.  The effect of the loss, according to NERC, “completely outweighs the benefits that were gained from the positive macroeconomic indices”. In effect, residential consumers will have to pay one naira more per unit.

    We understand the need for NERC to follow its own rules scrupulously; unfortunately, in this instance, the rules are not only skewed against the electricity consumer; they have somewhat amplified the unfair practices which typified the old order.

    This has again brought to the fore an issue that was a subject of an earlier editorial, which is the obsession with tariff hikes at the expense of delivery of quality service. Obviously, both NERC and the Distribution Companies (DISCOs) have chosen to remain unfazed by the growing frustration of the electricity consumer with the epileptic power supply situation, hence their elevation of tariff issues over and above the responsibility to deliver quality service. The point is that their prerogative to align their tariffs with the dictates of the market should not detract from their responsibility to ensure that the consumer is availed full value for his money.

    Much as we do not deny that the transition in the power sector has been something of a learning curve for the operators and the regulator alike, the current one-sided obsession with tariff issues at the expense of qualitative service can only breed consumer resistance in the long run. In short, we understand that the operators will need all the revenue they can get to deliver quality service; this however cannot be at the expense of the goodwill of the electricity consumer.

  • Good judgment

    Good judgment

    •We hail court’s decision on financial autonomy for judiciary, but the issue now is good faith 

    WILL the judgment of the Federal High Court, sitting in Abuja, in the budgetary process as it concerns the national judiciary, bring that disconcerting national debacle to a close? We are afraid that this can only happen, if all the parties concerned show good faith. In the judgment of Justice Ahmed Mohammed, in a suit brought against the Attorney-General of the Federation, the National Judicial Council (NJC) and the National Assembly as Defendants, by the former President of the Nigeria Bar Association, Olisa Agbakoba (SAN), the court declared as unconstitutional the process of sending the judiciary’s annual budget to the budget office, which is under the executive arm of government.

    In arriving at this important judgment, the court relied on the relevant provisions of sections 81(2) and 84(1)(2)(3)(4) and (7) of the 1999 constitution, as amended. As reported in the press, among other decisions, the court granted a perpetual injunction against the Defendants from all practices on the funding of the judiciary that offend the provisions of the constitution. The court also ordered that the budget of the judiciary, being a ‘charge upon the consolidated revenue fund of the federation’, should be sent directly to the National Assembly, instead of the budget office, to be included in the appropriation act, as it offends section 81(2). These are fair decisions and should not pose any problem.

    The challenge however will be in the implementation of the order of the court, with respect to the constitutional provision in section 81(3) that “any amount standing to the credit of the judiciary in the consolidated revenue fund of the federation shall be paid directly to the National Judicial Council for disbursement to the heads of the courts established for the federation and the state under section 6 of this constitution”. That is where the need for good faith comes in; for, while it is impracticable to release all the money due to the judiciary at a go to the NJC, considering that the national income comes in bits, it is possible to make the releases as the income comes, without the executive seeking to exert undue influence.

    The act of bad faith, which the provisions of the 1999 constitution sought to cure, and now reiterated by this judgment, is the executive impudence, of using budgetary allocations to exert undue influence on the independence of the judiciary. We have no doubt, as we believe many Nigerians do, that we all desire a fearless and independent judiciary for the sake of our democracy. That is why we have consistently canvassed for a well funded judiciary, and have always condemned the penchant by the executive, and even the legislature, to whimsically cut down on the budgetary requirements of the judiciary.

    While hailing the judgment of the court as a good intervention against the tyranny of the executive against the judiciary, we doubt if it is a cure-all measure. This is because section 84(7) of the 1999 constitution, only provides that “the recurrent expenditure of judicial offices in the federation (in addition to salaries and allowances of the judicial officers mentioned in subsection 4 of this section) shall be a charge upon the consolidated revenue fund of the federation”. So what happens to the capital expenditure part of the budget? Will that also form part of the charge against the consolidated revenue fund of the federation?

    If it will not, can the executive not use that essential need to exert the feared undue influence on the judiciary? Again, that is why we believe that good faith on the part of relevant authorities, is the ultimate antidote to an endangered judiciary.

  • As measles cases increase, a sharp call for vaccinations

    As measles cases increase, a sharp call for vaccinations

    EVEN WHEN there are significant gains against infectious diseases, there can be reversals. In 2000, measles was considered all but eliminated in the United States. For a while, there were only about 60 cases a year, mostly brought in from overseas. Now, the number of cases and outbreaks in the United States is rising again. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported Thursday that there have already been more cases this year, 288, than in any full year this century.

    Measles is a highly infectious respiratory disease caused by a virus that affects young children, with fever, runny nose, cough and a distinctive rash. Infrequently, it leads to more serious complications. There have been no deaths in the United States for a while, but in 2012 measles caused an estimated 122,000 deaths worldwide. That’s far fewer than in the past, thanks to a global campaign to vaccinate more than a billion children in high-risk countries.

    In the United States, a vigorous effort at immunization in recent years brought measles almost to a standstill. After an epidemic from 1989 to 1991 resulted in 55,000 cases and more than 100 deaths, largely because of lack of immunization among poor and uninsured children, a federal program approved in 1994, Vaccines for Children, resulted in much wider coverage. More than 90 percent of the children in the United States are immunized.

    Most of the recent measles cases in the United States arrived with travelers. For example, California reported 58 cases from January through April 18 this year, the highest number for that period in 19 years. According to the CDC, 93 percent of the California cases are linked to importation of the disease. The Philippines has seen an ongoing outbreak.

    Sometimes a single traveler can ignite a wildfire of infections. In 2013, a 17-year-old who had not been vaccinated returned to an orthodox Jewish community in Brooklyn from the United Kingdom, leading to an outbreak that affected 58 people; most were in three extended families that had declined the measles vaccine. This year, an outbreak in Ohio has reached 68 cases, apparently sparked by Amish missionaries, unvaccinated, who had visited the Philippines.

    The measles vaccine has been in use for half a century and is safe, inexpensive and effective. Some parents suspicious of vaccines have decided against immunization; in other cases, people are simply ignorant of the risks of inaction. Not all 50 states have the toughest immunization laws and standards. Thus, in some vulnerable pockets of the United States, a single person can touch off an outbreak. A nation’s borders provide no ironclad defense against viruses and bacteria. But measles can be stopped with comprehensive and proper immunization.

    – Washington Post

     

     

     

  • Infant mortality

    Infant mortality

    Despite the grim and glaring reality of human mortality, the latest figures on newborn deaths released by the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) are alarmingly revealing and signify a call for urgent action to arrest the death rate. Findings of a survey of 51 countries with the highest burden of newborn deaths showed that as many as nearly three million newborn babies die worldwide every year. India tops the list in South Asia and globally with 779,000 newborn deaths per year, while Nigeria leads in sub-Saharan Africa with 267,000, which is certainly a thought-provoking and unwelcome record for the country.

    According to UNICEF, newborn deaths account for 44 percent of total mortality among children under five, and represent a larger percentage of under-five deaths than they did in 1990, which suggests a disturbing deterioration in the quality of care infants receive in various countries these days, particularly given the organisation’s detail that 2.9 million babies die within their first 28 days. Further information that an additional 2.6 million babies are stillborn and 1.2 million die because their hearts stop during labour is little comfort and does not redeem the sad situation of such a heavy loss of infant lives in today’s world, with all the advantages of highly developed health equipment, advanced scientific know-how and improved child health care knowledge.

    The grave picture is especially striking against the background of clear identification of the problem, which the organisation expressed in informed terms, saying, “The first 24 hours after birth are the most dangerous for both child and mother – almost half of maternal and newborn deaths occur then.”  Instructively, UNICEF’s head of global health programmes, Dr. Mickey Chopra, said, “We have seen tremendous progress in saving children under five, but where the world has stumbled is with the very youngest, most vulnerable children.” He added, “This group of children needs attention and resources. Focusing on the crucial period between labour and the first hours of life can exponentially increase the chances of survival for both mother and child.”

    Perhaps it is pertinent to point out that, related to the UNICEF release, Nigeria is ranked 2nd among the top 10 countries with the most first-day of life deaths, according to a 2013 State of the World’s Mothers Report. At least 89,700 (nine per cent) babies die on their first day of life every year in Nigeria, said the report which compared first-day death rates for 186 countries. In addition, Nigeria was 169th on the Mothers’ Index out of the 186 countries assessed in critical areas such as mother’s health, education and economic status, as well as key child indicators of health and nutrition.

    Of course, situation recognition will not suffice, and the UNICEF statement expectedly recommended solutions that hopefully will be practicalised in the interest of humanity in general. Notably, the identified most effective interventions in saving newborns include breastfeeding; newborn resuscitation; ‘kangaroo care’ for premature babies – that is, prolonged skin-to-skin contact with the mother; and preventing and treating infections.

    However, perhaps more critically, the organisation called for more funding and adequate equipment, which cannot reasonably be divorced from politics and governance; consequently, the political will and performance is essential. It is significant to note that UNICEF argued that if the quality of care received by the richest were to become universal, this would result in a phenomenal reduction in newborn deaths, specifically, 600,000 fewer deaths per year.

    It may be wishful thinking on the part of the organisation to imagine that the day would come when access to health care would be a function of egalitarianism. However, the underlying lesson of its argument should not be trivialised, which is that a more socially responsive health care system is a desideratum in many countries.

    Such advocacy cannot be truer for Nigeria in particular, especially considering the fact its oil wealth should ordinarily ensure a health care system that is vastly superior to the dysfunctional one which many Nigerians have sadly got used to, even if regretfully. It is a fact that the country’s public health sector continues to attract widespread criticism for lamentably poor services due largely to funding issues. Indeed, it is noteworthy that the country’s proposed N262.74 billion budget for the health sector in 2014 represented a 6.7 percent decrease compared with the 2013 allocation which was N273 billion.

    Not surprisingly, experts rubbished the proposal for this year mainly on account of the figure earmarked for recurrent expenditure, which was about 80 percent of the financial plan and meant that there would be little or no funds left for infrastructural development, expansion and upgrade of medical facilities, research and development, and human capital development, the very essentials needed to improve the infant survival rate.

    Regrettably, a major implication of the UNICEF release is the high possibility that the Millennium Development Goal of reducing child mortality by two-thirds by 2015 may prove to be a pipe dream. Perhaps even more unfortunate is the likelihood that Nigeria will count among the failures.

  • Season of anomie

    Season of anomie

    •That vandals challenge the police to gun duels, over petroleum pipelines, is bad for the integrity of the Nigerian state

    When felons challenge the police to a gun duel over a petroleum pipeline they are bent on breaking, what are they doing — staking their divine right to crime?

    That is the worrisome question emanating from the reported police, suspected vandals gun face-off of August 24 through the night of August 25, in Arepo, an Ogun-Lagos border town and community in the Obafemi Owode Local Government of Ogun State.

    According to news reports, the suspected vandals drove towards the oil pipelines in the community, sighted the  police Task Force guarding the facility and opened fire.  The police returned the fire, and an all-night long battle ensued, resulting in a huge fire from exploded pipelines.  When the dust cleared, no less than three suspected vandals lay dead.  But four policemen involved in the operations were also declared missing.

    “While four of them have returned to base,” a newspaper reported, “four others are still missing.  We have yet to ascertain their fates,” it quoted an unnamed security source.

    What has the country turned into? The security arms of the state (which ought to boast supreme, if not monopoly of force) engaging rogue groups, and suffering higher casualties, even if yet no definitive account is available on the fate of the four missing police personnel?

    Kashim Shettima, governor of Borno State, in the vortex of the Boko Haram murderous campaign, caused a stir when he claimed Boko Haram insurgents boast superior arms than the security agencies.  President Goodluck Jonathan, in an emotive response, issued a veiled threat to withdraw the armed forces from the area; and see how the governor would fare.  The governor also came under severe flak.

    A few weeks later however, even the military high command has admitted what the army faces in the North East emergency areas are not the ragtag Boko Haram militia but a ferocious war by Al Qaeda, the global terrorist group — somewhat lending credence to the group’s sophisticated weaponry, which appears to easily compete, if not superior, to the Army’s arsenal.

    The Arepo shootout is again a grim reminder that, North, Middle Belt or South, felons now openly dare the might of the Nigerian state.  That is no good news, since the most basic function of the state is to secure life and property.  That fundament of the state is being threatened.  The authorities must rise to stop it forthwith.  Failure to do so is creeping anarchy.

    Of course, there is a lot to be decried in blind greed that makes felons take to heinous crime.  There is much to be decried in mass poverty that leads to murderous desperation and anger.  There is also much to be said for jolting the government to sit up to its responsibilities on the economic front: more jobs and ample opportunities; and ensuring a fair, equitable and equal-opportunity society.

    But what must not be tolerated is brazen crime and utter paralysis.  What is even worse is a systems collapse that appears to be creeping on the country.  If the present anomie is not arrested and fast, it is only a matter of time before anarchy creeps in — with disastrous consequences.

    That is why Nigerians must never surrender to the current situation but continue to ask questions of, and demand service from their governments at all level.  But Nigerians too must play the civic citizens that avail the authorities with quality intelligence, to help the government face down and defeat these noxious forces.

    In return, the government has no choice but to act its name: invest in the economic wellbeing of the greatest number and secure the environment for all.  As things stand, it is a race against time, to fend off state failure.

  • Of Farzana and Meriam

    Of Farzana and Meriam

    • The very humanity of these two women –  a Pakistani and Sudanese – challenges the humanity of every man and woman today

    Their stories are stranger than fiction. Their narratives defy the essence of humanity in a 21st century world in their sheer barbarity and indignity to the human person. Here are short synopses:

    Coming out of Pakistan just last Tuesday, a father, two brothers and a former fiancé had led a mob to pounce on daughter, Farzana Iqbal. They had stoned her to death in broad daylight right on the premises of a Pakistani civil court. Farzana’s killing is a punishment known as ‘honour’ killing for marrying a man she loved and chose and rejecting one chosen for her by her family.

    Farzana, 25, had been engaged to marry her cousin but she settled for another man of her choice. Her family had registered a kidnapping case against her husband. But on this fateful day, she was at the High Court in the eastern city of Lahore to defend her husband. As she waited the court to resume she was attacked by the mob of about a dozen men, led by her father, who stoned her with bricks. Farzana suffered severe head injuries and was pronounced dead in the hospital.

    All the suspects, according to police, escaped except her father who admitted killing his daughter saying that it was a matter of ‘honour’. It is believed that many Pakistani families think a woman marrying her own choice of man brings dishonour on the family. No fewer than 1000 women reportedly met this horrific fate in Pakistan every year in the hands of their close families in ‘honour’ killing according to rights groups.

    Out of Sudan also last Tuesday, 27-year-old Meriam Yehya Ibrahim who is awaiting the death penalty for   allegedly abandoning her religious faith, gave birth in jail near the capital, Khartoum. Meriam married a Christian man and was sentenced to hang for apostasy after refusing to renounce Christianity. Meriam was convicted of adultery on the grounds that her marriage to a Christian man from South Sudan was void under Sudan’s version of Islamic law which bars Muslim women from marrying non-Muslims.

    Though these two cases are admittedly matters of tradition and faith which sometimes defy logic and common sense, these specific instances of Farzana and Meriam are clear examples of criminal human rights abuses. The stoning to death of Farzana by her family members apart from being a case of extra-judicial termination of life, is barbaric and a negation of the tenets of the UN’s universal declaration of human rights.

    Article 16 specifically speaks to the families of Farzan concerning the prerogative of  “men and women of full age without the limitations due to race, nationality or religion, to have the right to marry and found a family.” It states further, the inalienable right of intending spouses to enter into marriage only with their own free and full consent.

    While Article 18 addresses Meriam and his family in stating that “everyone has a right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, which includes freedom to change religion or belief.”

    Both Pakistan and Sudan are signatories to this UN charter on human rights and therefore owe a duty to the rest of the world and to humanity to uphold it. The so-called ‘honour’ killing and other inhuman practices and tenets such as apostasy must neither be condoned nor have a place in any country’s statues. In fact, every state under the human system has an obligation to protect her citizenry against such indignities as meted to Farzan and Meriam, using the instrumentality of the rule of law.

    We call on the UN, all other world bodies and the entire human community to rise against all such barbarity as consumed  Farzan in broad daylight under the watch of the whole world last Tuesday. We also call on the world community to ensure that Ms. Meriam is not killed on account of her religious belief as her death will represent our collective death.