The Nation Newspaper

Category: Editorial

  • Examples from Italy

    Examples from Italy

    •Nigeria has not been able to tame corruption because the will is lacking

    Corruption is no doubt a global scourge that is not limited to any country. Yet, some countries have substantially curtailed its prevalence to such an extent that it does not pose a formidable obstacle on the path of development. The existence in such countries of stringent anti-corruption laws that are strictly and impartially enforced serves as a deterrent against a thriving culture of graft. An example of such uncompromising stance against corruption was the recent conviction and sentencing to three years in prison of the Chief Executive of the Italian energy giant, Eni, Paolo Scaroni, by a court in the north-eastern town of Rovigo.

    Interestingly, Scaroni did not face legal sanction for financial fraud. Rather, he was found guilty of failing to uphold adequate environmental standards at the Porto Tolle power plant when he was Chief Executive Officer at the Italian utility company, Enel. His negligence was responsible for air pollution at the coal-burning plant in violation of Italian law. As a result of his conviction, hopes of Scaroni’s re-nomination by the government for a third term as Eni’s Chief Executive in May this year have been dashed. He also stands banned for holding public office for five years. The fact that he is described as one of Italy’s most powerful businessmen did not insulate Scaroni from justice.

    In a bid to fight corruption and improve the country’s corporate accountability, the Italian government has directed state-controlled companies to dismiss any director found guilty or indicted for certain crimes. Silvio Berlusconi, who served as Italian Prime Minister at various times for nine years, was on August 1, 2013, convicted of tax-fraud by the final appeal instance, Court of Cassation, and sentenced to four years imprisonment and a public office ban for two years. True, three of the four-year sentence is pardoned and Berlusconi will do unpaid social community work rather than face direct imprisonment since he is over 70 years old. That does not mitigate the damage done to his reputation. This is because he has been banned from the Senate and barred from serving any legislative office for six years.

    These examples from Italy show that it is indeed possible to effectively fight corruption where there is the requisite will. The necessary conditions to achieve this objective include the requisite water-tight legislation, strong anti-corruption agencies with the institutional autonomy to discharge their functions as well as an efficient and transparent legal/judicial system. The absence of all these ingredients in the Nigerian context has made her much trumpeted anti-graft war little more than a farce.

    In Nigeria, the anti-graft agencies are too feeble and are most times constrained from taking decisive action against corruption for political reasons. Even when suspects are charged to court for corruption, it is all too easy for clever lawyers to find technical loopholes in our laws to get their clients off the hook. Aside from the pervasive corruption that characterises the judiciary, the process of prosecution can be so complicated and cumbersome. The consequence is that cases are needlessly prolonged with frequent adjournments as well as endless appeals and cross appeals from one judicial level to the other.

    This situation encourages brazen corruption since perpetrators of such acts are confident that they can enjoy political protection and that, even if discovered, they can exploit the loopholes of the legal process to escape justice. Thus, corrupt bank chief executives as well as those charged with embezzling humongous amounts through pension fund and fuel subsidy frauds, for instance, are all walking free despite on-going theatrical court trials. The bottom-line is lack of the political will, particularly on the part of President Goodluck Jonathan to fight corruption despite his frequent affirmations to the contrary.

     

  • Culpable buck passing

    Culpable buck passing

    •Jonathan’s Boko Haram blame game in Bauchi is a presidential disgrace.  But it was a counter to gubernatorial recklessness 
    President Goodluck Jonathan’s March 29 charge in Bauchi, that North East governors should take the blame for the Boko Haram insurrection, is culpable presidential buck passing.

    But being a riposte to Adamawa State Governor, Murtala Nyako’s allegation that the president was incapable of, or uninterested in tackling Boko Haram, in a paper he presented at a Washington DC, USA symposium, it was a reaction to gubernatorial recklessness.

    It is well and truly condemnable when the president and governors engage in mutual buck passing, over a serious security issue as Boko Haram, when they should closely cooperate to solve the problem.

    The setting of both blame games is no less condemnable. The president launched his unwise tirade at a Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) zonal rally in Bauchi. Governor Nyako made his provocative presentation in the United States, at a symposium from March 17-19, organised by the US Institute for Peace, which invited all the 19 northern governors.

    It was soulless for President Jonathan to go to Bauchi; and attempt to tar North East governors on Boko Haram — and all of this on the hustings. Yet, the same president could not create time to visit the same North East to condole with the victims’ families, even when Boko Haram slaughtered innocent pupils of Federal Government College, Buni Yadi, in Yobe State. It is the height of presidential folly to deny traumatised locals the needed compassion, yet go back to the same area to brag you would sweep the polls.

    On the other hand, it was culpable lack of statesmanship that made Governor Nyako to frontally attack the president on a foreign soil, suggesting President Jonathan was comfortable with the Boko Haram tragedy. It was a classic example of how not to politicise a living nightmare, in a foreign capital.

    There simply must be a limit to playing politics with Boko Haram, and both the president and governor deserve severe knocks for their indiscretion.

    That said, what should concern every right-thinking Nigerian is how to face down and defeat Boko Haram, and not what political capital anyone could claim from a pestilence that has claimed lives of hundreds of innocent Nigerians. On Boko Haram, what Nigerians expect is close cooperation, not fierce competition, between the president and governors of that affected region. Even then, the president must always show leadership, befitting his office as the highest in the land.

    Still, the buck passing has revealed ugly underbellies, from which the two camps can learn and make amends.

    The president focused on the process leading to Boko Haram, and was spot on, on the allegation that neglect of primary and secondary education in the areas has created a ready and willing pool of Boko Haram recruits. Though there has been a counter-argument that Boko Haram harbours not a few educated cadres, frustrated and angry at the unjust Nigerian system, the neglect of basic education is no less valid.

    The governor, on the other hand, focused on the grotesque final product: the Boko Haram pestilence, to which the Jonathan Presidency seemed to have little clue, until quite recently, when the terror group’s capability appears reduced to soft targets; and its attacks restrained to local areas, as against an earlier period when it bombed, killed and maimed virtually the whole North at will.

    The presidential and gubernatorial camps should take some positives from their mutual macabre dances. The president cannot afford to pass any buck. He is commander-in-chief and has a monopoly of command of the Nigerian state’s security agencies. Passing the buck is a sign of weakness, not of strength — and it is crassly un-presidential.

    The North East governors, on the other hand, must swallow the bitter pill and scale up their commitment to basic education of their citizens. Even if the bulk of the present generation cannot be saved, the future generation of youths must not be beyond redemption.

     

  • Questionable MOU

    Questionable MOU

    • FG/Namibia refinery joint venture is not in Nigeria’s interest

    AT a time that fuel scarcity is biting harder on the home front because of graft in fuel importation chain: Also at a period that the nation’s four refineries’ moribund state is accorded tepid official efforts; it is sad that President Goodluck Jonathan has gone abroad to arrange the construction of jointly-owned petroleum products’ refinery with Namibia. That was the hallmark decision reached through a joint communiqué issued in Windhoek, Namibia at the end of his visit purportedly made at the instance of President Hifikepunye Pohamba. This arrangement, in our view, is economically unsound.

    The visit produced 11 Memoranda of Understanding (MoU) reportedly assented to by the two leaders, which among others, include: training of Namibian diplomats at the Nigerian Foreign Service Academy, provision of volunteer health professionals to Namibia under the Technical Aid Corps Scheme, initiative on youth development, bilateral air service agreement and waiver of visa requirements for citizens holding diplomatic and official passports. Others are extradition treaty, cooperation in the legal field, treaty on mutual legal assistance in criminal matters, understanding in the field of geology, mining, mineral processing and metallurgy, trade, investment and economic cooperation and cooperation in the field of tourism.

    However, the crux of the agreement is the refinery that is scheduled to be wholly private sector driven. Notwithstanding the fact that the two presidents have urged members of the Organised Private Sector in their respective countries to take advantage of the opportunities arising from the joint venture by making the project a reality, its un-strategic location in the Namibian area of Walvis Bay is of concern.

    We know that no nation is an island, especially in contemporary situation where the world has become a global village. Nonetheless, we believe that a nation, while dealing with other countries must consider that vital principle of comparative advantage. For instance, Nigeria is an oil producing giant and we thought that this reality would have been of paramount consideration whenever the country is reaching an understanding with Namibia or any other country.

    Why would President Jonathan not convince stakeholders in Namibia to consider setting up the refinery in Nigeria? Was the important economic point of proximity to raw materials not of any issue in the two presidents’ deliberations? After all, we are aware that there is no oil in Namibia. The questions now are; what could then be the motivation for Nigerian investors going as far as Namibia to seek partnership before building a refinery? Is it not possible for them to emulate Aliko Dangote whose Greenfield refinery, a private idea, will soon become functional?

    In our view, it makes more economic sense to have the refinery established in the country and the end-products exported to Namibia and other countries that might be in need of them. Being a private sector -driven initiative, the choice of site of such refinery would go a long way in reducing production cost, bring down petroleum products prices, provide readymade market for the country’s high domestic fuel consumption and cushion the effect of current intractable fuel scarcity. Above all, such adroit economic move will also generate more profits for investors from both countries.

    That this obviously rational economic choice was not made has left us wondering about the genuine identities of the powerful forces behind these so-called investors from both countries. Are these ‘investors’ truly out to follow rational economic sense or they are just disguised persons that are merely desirous of protecting the interests of their unseen promoters? The Nigerian public deserves to know.

  • Curious judgment

    Curious judgment

    •What informed the judge’s decision in the PDP’s suit on its defectors?

    THE great jurist, Lord Denning (MR), as far back as 1969 declared: ‘Justice must be rooted in confidence and confidence is destroyed when right minded people go away thinking; the judge is biased.’ This statement formed the bulwark of our scrutiny of the Justice Adeniyi Ademola’s judgment of the Abuja high court that is inflaming passion in the National Assembly and the entire polity. The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) on January 7 instituted a suit seeking to restrain the House of Representatives from altering the composition of its leadership. The action was a consequence of mass defection of its members to the new All Progressives Congress (APC) which nearly made it lose its majority status.

    The court granted PDP’s prayer for perpetual injunction restraining the 37 defecting lawmakers that moved from PDP to APC from effecting any leadership change in the lower house. But rather than limit the court’s scope to the relief sought by the plaintiff, the judge went overboard by declaring that the 37 defectors should resign their positions from the National Assembly.

    To us, the entire hullabaloo would have been averted if the judge had shown sufficient circumspection in his judgment – most especially in his interpretation of section 68 of the 1999 constitution (as amended). Obviously, the court adduced some reasons for arriving at this contentious judgment which included the fact that the expiry date under which the defected lawmakers were elected under the PDP had not been extinguished as provided for by the constitution before they moved to the APC. However, the judge’s overreliance on Justice Elvon Chukwu’s ruling of October 8 last year is suspect. Justice Chukwu, contrary to the impression being given by the new judgment merely said the defectors could not have acted under the then name of ‘New PDP’ that they adopted; he never said there was no division in the PDP.

    The fact is that the plaintiff (PDP) in this matter merely instituted the action as a pre-emptive one. The party was scared stiff that with the high level of defection going on at that period when the opposition APC was about having the majority, the ruling party’s leadership days of the National Assembly were numbered. To forestall that, it approached the court that has now awarded it a bonus by pronouncing that the defected legislators have no moral or legal basis to retain their seats. Yet, we know that the court is not Father Christmas and should not give judgment on what was not canvassed before it. The thrust of the matter before it was to determine whether the APC legislators, with their numerical strength at that period, had the right to change the House leadership in such areas as that of Chief Whip, Majority Leader and their deputies. The judge seemed to have lost focus of this salient point before arriving at his highly litigious judgment.

    We are happy that the defendants in the case have gone on appeal to challenge the validity of that judgment. We have implicit confident that the appellate court will do justice by determining whether the judge in this case sincerely adverted his mind to the provisions of the constitution and if indeed he applied them to his actions. In our view, a lawmaker who has crossed over to another political party could not legally be compelled to resign his seat, if his action was a consequence of division within his party. It is incontestable that PDP was enmeshed in serious crisis that led to the emergence of another faction within the fold which led to the defections that followed.

    As we said earlier, Justice Chikwu actually stopped the breakaway faction from using the name ‘new PDP’ because, at that point, the defection saga was unstoppable. In our view, the court erred by saying that those lawmakers have no right to leave the party. The move is constitutional. Justice Ademola’s observation that the lawmakers should vacate their seats should be taken as an obiter dictum (just an aside) and not the ratio decidendi (thrust) of the judgment. It was his opinion and therefore cannot stand.

  • On Syria, U.S. and U.N. are all talk and no action

    On Syria, U.S. and U.N. are all talk and no action

    FIVE MONTHS have passed since Secretary of State John F. Kerry declared that “the world must act quickly” to stop a “war of starvation” being waged by the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad against “huge proportions of the population.” It’s been nearly six weeks since the U.N. Security Council passed Resolution 2139, which ordered the regime and rebels to “promptly allow unhindered humanitarian access” and threatened “further steps” in the case of noncompliance.

    Since then, according to U.N. humanitarian coordinator Valerie Amos, the war of starvation has worsened. The number of Syrians cut off from international aid has grown since January by 1 million, to 3.5 million. At least 180,000 people are in areas directly blockaded by government troops, which refuse to allow in supplies of food or medicine. In direct contravention of the U.N. resolution, the Assad regime has authorized aid convoys to cross only one of eight border posts identified by U.N. relief coordinators.

    Ms. Amos reported to the Security Council on Friday that only 6 percent of the population living in besieged areas had received relief since the resolution passed. Meanwhile, she said, crimes against the population had escalated: Since Feb, 22, there had been 300 instances of sexual assault in and around Damascus. “The humanitarian situation,” she said, “remains bleak.”

    The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Samantha Power, called Ms. Amos’s report “harrowing.” She said the Assad government “is the sole reason for the lack of progress in cross-border assistance” that “would allow the U.N. and its partners access to almost 4 million people.” She said: “The Assad regime’s murderous appetite for deploying artillery, ‘barrel bombs’ and airstrikes against civilians . . . is the No. 1 factor driving displacement and the broader humanitarian ­crisis.”

    Naturally, reporters asked Ms. Power what she was proposing for the “next steps” cited in the resolution. That’s when the ambassador’s robust rhetoric suddenly went limp. “There’s nothing I can do and that we can do unilaterally to make the council do what we want,” she said. “So I can’t make any commitments.”

    No, the United States can’t force action by the Security Council, where Russia, Assad’s ally, has a veto. But the Obama administration is not lacking in options to stop the ongoing, horrific crimes against humanity in Syria. What it lacks is the will to act. It could order the Assad regime to authorize border crossings by aid convoys — something Ms. Power said would require only “a stroke of the pen” — or face the same airstrikes Mr. Obama threatened last summer. It could target blockade points with drone or missile strikes. It could provide rebels with the air defense weapons they need to stop helicopters from dropping barrel bombs on civilian housing, hospitals and schools. It could disable the bases used by regime aircraft.

    Ms. Power and her administration colleagues instead appear content to listen to “harrowing” reports from U.N. monitors, deliver angry statements and then throw up their hands because of their inability to win the cooperation of Vladi­mir Putin. It’s not a performance that will be judged well when historians consider why the world’s foremost power failed to stop this mass slaughter.

    -Washington Post

     

  • Mysterious $1 billion

    Mysterious $1 billion

    In the light of uproar over alleged missing $20 billion, all governors failed the Nigerian people for not asking the Jonathan administration to explain how $1 billion appeared in our federation account

    For the body of Nigerian governors, the news of recent payment of $1 billion into the excess crude account (ECA) by the federal government must have come both as shock and surprise.

    Shock because the “windfall” came in spite of the industrial scale oil theft said to have gone on unabated in the last nine months. And, if we may add, the shady accounting practices that have left the federation account at the mercy of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation NNPC).

    Surprise because the payment came days before the meeting of the National Economic Council (NEC) – a body, which by statute is supposed to meet monthly but which last met nine months ago. The body had Vice President Namadi Sambo as chairman with the governors and other members of the President’s economic team as members.

    For state governments that have borne the brunt of the NNPC’s, and by extension, the President Jonathan’s federal government’s irresponsible book-keeping of the nation’s oil revenue account, it is rather unfortunate that the governors opted to gloss over the question of how the federal government came by the $1 billion it paid into the ECA, or even the more fundamental question of how the federal pool could have shrunk by more than 20 percent over the last few months when the nation is not officially at war, as soon as the money came into their account.

    But even more worrisome is that they failed to see the latest gambit for what it is: a well-timed manoeuvre to stave off further questions on the $20 billion which the NNPC is accused of failing to remit into the federation account.

    The governors not only let the citizens down; they are by their act of indifference just as complicit in abetting the crime of impunity. While it seems understandable that the states, long cash-starved would latch on to anything to keep governance in their domains going, we certainly do not consider it right that they would so soon ignore the fundamental issues involved in the management of the oil proceeds – at least not with the latest rounds of questions about sleaze in the oil sector still hanging.

    The point bears reiteration: it is hard to imagine the entire 36 state governors suddenly becoming tongue-tied only because there is now a prospect of enhanced revenue. Many of the governors are even reported as wishing that they take whatever the federal government deems fit to give them so that they can move on! That cannot be right.

    For how long will state governments be content with living on the federal government charity? Is this latest cynical act not akin to throwing a piece of bone to a hungry dog?

    How can a governor ever imagine that the succour from the sudden improvement in monthly revenue would obviate the fundamental demand for openness and transparency from the federal government and the NNPC? Why should a state governor worth his salt not be interested in the volume of crude pumped, and the price it is sold? What is so secretive in all of these that the federal government cannot make them public to every Nigerian? Isn’t democracy about getting the government to respond to well-meaning enquiries from the governed? And why should Nigerians settle for less?

    Now, the point remains that between last week’s payment and the time when the Governor Rotimi Amaechi-led Nigeria Governors’ Forum (NGF) accused the federal government of deliberately stalling the NEC meeting to prevent a discussion of the issues surrounding the alleged missing $20bn, nothing has changed. For sure, the federal government has neither shown willingness to toe the path of transparency in the management of accruals into the distributable pool, nor the NNPC more disposed to come clean on what it did with the $20 billion. Rather, both the federal government and the governors have gone ahead to forge an unholy alliance on another front with their new resolve to hive off subsidy on fuel in their bid to shore up their dwindling revenues.

    Contrary to what some state governors are reported to have feared, we do not see anything adversarial in the states demanding from the federal government the source of the payment. Aside being their right, the answers, if given, may in fact help resolve some of the lingering mysteries dogging the oil industry.

    The path of honour for the governors would have been to temporarily hold off receiving the money until full accounting of its source. By not doing that, the governors of whatever stripe fell into the same moral squalor of which they have accused the president. It is sad, and it potentially compromises the search for integrity of our financial patrimony. It paralyses any call for transparency, and heaps the slur of hypocrisy on the political class.

    The point bears repeating: the federal government has an obligation to inform Nigerians about the source of the $1 billion paid into the ECA. Is it part of the $20 billion, or $12 billion, or $10.8 billion? We need to know. On their part, Nigerians must consider their abiding interest the question of the alleged missing $20 billion. Rather than faking Father Christmas with our patrimony; it is what the integrity of governance demands.

  • NJC vs. Rivers

    NJC vs. Rivers

    •Judicial council should appeal judgment instead of throwing its weight around

    The National Judicial Council (NJC) appears determined to resort to self-help in its disagreement with the Government of Rivers State, over the choice of the chief judge of that state. That road, in our view, is undemocratic and against the principles of rule of law. While the Rivers State Government went to court to challenge the extent of powers of the NJC to choose the chief judge for the state, which case was determined in its (Rivers State) favour at a Federal High Court, the NJC has administratively resisted the appointment of Justice Peter Agumagu, as the new chief judge, instead of appealing the judgment by Justice Lambo Akanbi, which the state government relied on to clear and swear in Justice Agumagu.

    The crux of the disagreement is who has the powers to choose the chief judge of a state, between a state judicial service commission, legislature and executive government on one side, and the NJC, a federal executive body, on the other side. While section 271(1) of the 1999 constitution as amended provides that: “the appointment of a person to the office of Chief Judge of a state shall be made by the Governor of State on the recommendation of the National Judicial Council subject to the confirmation of the appointment by the House of Assembly of the State”; Paragraph 21(c) of Part 1(i) of the Third Schedule provides: “the NJC shall have power to recommend to the Governors from among the list of persons submitted to it by the state Judicial Service Commissions persons for appointments to the offices of the Chief Judges of the States…”

    We view the disagreement as a crisis bordering on the abnormality of our peculiar federal constitution. As applicable in other countries, federalism is defined by world acclaimed Professor K. C. Wheare as “the method of dividing powers so that the general and regional governments are each within a sphere co-ordinate and independent”. While ordinarily the appointment of a state chief judge should be within the sphere of a state government, the relevant provision of our constitution strangely puts a federal executive agency, the NJC, in a pole position. The disagreement in Rivers State is over the extent of powers and influence of the NJC, and the institutions of the state, in the appointment of a state chief judge.

    And where such a disagreement arises, the constitution in section 6(6)(b) clearly vests the judiciary with the authority to provide a solution, when it opines, “the judicial powers vested in accordance with the foregoing provision of this section, shall extend to all matters between persons, or between government or authority and to any person in Nigeria, and to all actions and proceedings relating thereto, for the determination of any question as to the civil rights and obligations of that person.” With such a provision, we are worried that the NJC, instead of appealing the judgment of Justice Akanbi, which ruled against its executive prerogatives in the dispute, opted to disregard or subjugate the judgment to its administrative powers.

    This constitutional crisis once again raises questions on the difficult choice between institutional bulwark and rational choice of men who preside over the institutions, in our match to a functional society. For, while there is the letter of the law, there is also the spirit of the law. Even with the challenges in the provisions of our constitution on the appointment of a chief judge, a rational choice that will not defeat the essential letter and the spirit of the law can still be reached. In pursuit of that, we urge the NJC to resist the temptation to throw its weight around.

  • Return of Super Stores

    Return of Super Stores

    •Handled right, its glorious past could point the way to a promising future for Nigerian club football

    It probably boasts more monikers than any other club in Nigeria: Stationery Stores, Super Stores, Flaming Flamingoes, Adebajo Babes and Pooku lowo e (Figuratively, Yoruba for “cheap players, great performers”), after it had fallen on a dry patch: a patrician club, constrained to plebeian means, to make ends meet.

    That is the gripping story of Stationery Stores Football Club of Lagos, founded in 1958 by the late business tycoon, Israel Adebajo, as a sporting public relations arm of the Nigerian Office and Stationery Stores (NOSS), a firm that deals in stationery and allied matters.

    At the peak of its glory, when it corralled two consecutive Nigerian Challenge Cup (FA Cup, now formally known as Federation Cup) titles (1967 and 1968), it had no less than nine players in the Green Eagles, then the nickname of the Nigerian national team.

    Indeed, in the Eagles’ 1968 tour of Mexico, Stores had iconic names like Sam Opone and Peter Fregene, the enduring Nigerian international goalkeeper, who even made the Eagles first 11 in the African Nations Cup, as late as 1982, in Benghazi, Libya.

    Other iconic names that passed through its great portals included the incomparable Haruna Ilerika (of blessed memory), he of silky skills and one of the most skilful Nigerian football players ever, Yakubu Mambo who was in the Eagles squad that won gold in the 1972 2nd All Africa Games in Lagos, and of course Muda Atanda (nee Yomi Peters), the stormy long-serving captain of Stores, now the club’s team manager, under the chairmanship of Adetilewa Adebajo, son of the late founder.

    Israel Adebajo was perhaps the first of an illustrious line Nigerian business royals that invested in sports, among others being MKO Abiola, the late ‘Pillar of Sports in Africa’ and proprietor of the defunct Abiola Babes, based in Abeokuta, and Alhaji Yusuf Salami (also late), founder of Alyufsalam Rocks, based in Ilorin. Adebajo, the Noforija-Epe, Lagos State-born tycoon, inspired an entertaining and captivating style of football that matched substance with style, and made the club the toast of Nigerians of its generation.

    The return of Stores is a toast to the irrepressible human spirit. It is also a rekindling of hope for the revitalisation of the Nigerian local league, now that contemporary Nigerians, patrician and plebeian, are hooked to the sweet poison of foreign leagues: Arsenal, Chelsea, Manchester United, Barcelona, Real Madrid, Bayern Munich, etc.

    Not too long ago, the passion in the sporting scene was the famous derbies between Stores and ECN (later NEPA) FC in Lagos, and the crowd-pulling contests between Stores and IICC, Stores and Rangers; and even along the West African coast, Stores Vs Ashanti Kotoko, or Stores Vs Accra Hearts of Oak, both of Ghana. Now, all that is but gone!

    Stores is a club of great history and character. Like the present-day Arsenal of London, England, it boasted great developmental policies, such that even players that cost virtual peanuts wear the club’s famous white, gold and maroon jerseys, and they suddenly become great performers.

    Stores is back in the National League ranks by buying Union Bank FC’s slot in that league. But the directors must be conscious of the sibling “civil war”, between Princess Gloria Adebajo-Fraser and Adetilewa (the current chairman) that nearly consigned the club to history. They should therefore broaden the ownership base of the club, and perhaps invite its supporters to co-own the club, as it is done in many European leagues.

    The Stores of 1958 to 1998 (a 40-year period) was a humongous brand, and could yet re-enact its old glory. For Lagos ball fans, starved for too long of a team of high calibre to identify with, Stores might just fill that vacuum.

    More than that: A re-enacted Stores, if well run, might just hold the tantalising promise of returning the big crowd to stadia stands. That would provide more jobs for talented local youth, and offer welcome relief from this era of stifling foreign leagues.

     

  • When Shepherds Go Deluxe

    When Shepherds Go Deluxe

    Any Roman Catholic prelate who missed the message from Pope Francis that he wanted “a church which is poor and for the poor” certainly had to pay attention last month when the Vatican forced the resignation of the bishop of Limburg, Germany, because of his taste for opulent housing worthy of the Holy Roman Empire.

    Scandal arose when Bishop Franz-Peter Tebartz-van Elst was discovered spending at least 31 million euros, or nearly $43 million, to renovate his princely home, right down to a new €15,000 bathtub. The Vatican found that the bishop had tried to hide the true costs from his flock, and he was unceremoniously forced to resign for some humbler station.

    Though the verdict is still out on Francis’ impact on the hidebound Vatican bureaucracy, which he hopes to reform, he is obviously galvanizing the church laity to complain about the double standards and hypocrisy in the lush lifestyles of their shepherds. In the United States, Wilton Gregory, the archbishop of Atlanta, apologetically announced this week that he would not be moving in to a new $2.2 million, 6,000-square-foot mansion he had custom built. Archbishop Gregory conceded that he had second thoughts after being rebuked by lay Catholics “struggling to pay their mortgages” even as they faithfully heeded his pleas for church donations.

    Leaders of a half-dozen other American dioceses have moved to plainer surroundings as Francis keeps up the pressure, urging simple runabouts, not limousines, as preferable transportation for priests and nuns.

    How far will the pope go in his refreshing demand for an unpretentious lifestyle for the global church? By coincidence, the centuries-old church of St. Francis at Ripa, in a less elegant part of Rome, is in a state of impoverished disrepair, forced to appeal for support on the crowdfunding website Kickstarter as tourists begin showing up by the busloads because the new pope chose the name of Francis. The saint stayed there in a cell that contains a stone he is said to have used as his sleeping pillow.

    No word yet on whether Pope Francis thinks it is time to prescribe stone sleeping pillows for dedicated church workers.

     

    – New York Times

     

  • Malaysian mystery

    Malaysian mystery

    • The bitter lessons of Flight MH370

    In the last few weeks, the entire world has been horrified by the tragic disappearance of the Malaysian Airlines Boeing 777-200ER aircraft with 239 passengers and crew. The way in which Flight MH370 has apparently vanished without a trace is a sobering experience for a world that has become complacent in the face of unrelenting technological progress.

    The aircraft was on a scheduled flight from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing on March 8 when it lost contact after about an hour. It had not sent any distress calls, nor had it reported difficulties of any kind. The ensuing search-and-rescue effort was initially directed at the area within Flight MH370’s flight path, namely, the Gulf of Thailand and the South China Sea.

    It was later widened to include the Strait of Malacca, the Andaman Sea and the Indian Ocean. One week later, the focus of the search was radically altered, as evidence began to emerge that the aircraft had in fact not followed the assumed north-easterly route, but had headed west over the Malay Peninsula, then continued either north or south for approximately seven hours.

    On March 16, the first of many ostensible sightings of debris from the aircraft were reported, but so far none has been discovered to be the remains of Flight MH370. The Malaysian government eventually announced the loss of the aircraft, with everyone aboard, on March 24.

    Perhaps the greatest shock centres upon the fact that an aircraft equipped with the latest in modern location and positioning technology could vanish from the face of the earth and successfully defy concerted attempts to find it. The search-and-rescue effort that was launched is the largest in history; it has involved 22 countries, including Malaysia, the United States, the United Kingdom, China, Brunei, Cambodia, France, Indonesia, Bangladesh, Australia, New Zealand and India. Cutting-edge technology has been deployed, including satellites, infra-red and thermal imaging, and radar. Dozens of ships and aircraft have been utilised; huge amounts of data analysed; diplomatic pressure applied. The plane has not been found.

    This failure shows that a good deal of the world remains unmapped, in spite of the deployment of the Global Positioning System (GPS) and other satellite navigation systems. It also shows that all the technology in the world cannot compensate for human malevolence: the aircraft’s sophisticated navigation systems were deliberately switched off by someone who knew what he was doing.

    In addition, the tragedy of Flight MH370 demonstrates the vital necessity of international cooperation as the norm, rather than something to be called upon only in emergencies. It was obvious that the search was complicated by pre-existing regional and other rivalries, as vital time was wasted by the reluctance to share information and intelligence. Malaysia’s seeming slowness to act and to release information roused the anger of China, which has the largest number of passengers on the flight. The way in which different countries threw considerable effort into the search is a demonstration of what can be achieved when the artificial barriers of race, ideology and nationality are ignored.

    The world is staggered by the truly horrifying nature of a tragedy such as this, but the grief of the relatives and friends of those on the doomed flight can only be imagined. Their anguish is worsened by the absence of any real closure; the lack of certainty as to exactly what happened will haunt their imaginations forever.

    Although Flight MH370 has officially been declared lost, it is hoped that investigations into what occurred will continue, albeit at a less-intensive pace. As the days go by, the life-span of the transmitter of the aircraft’s black box will diminish; locating it would provide vital clues regarding the plane’s fate. May the souls of the departed passengers and crew rest in perfect peace.