The Nation Newspaper

Category: Editorial

  • An elitist sermon

    An elitist sermon

    The NNPC GMD’s call to use gas instead of kerosene  sounds like what triggered the French Revolution

    The wife of Louis XVI, Marie Antoinette, wondered why the protesters on the streets of Paris clamoured for bread when they could have cake. It infuriated them, and led to a rabble that torched the city and the French monarchy.

    Similar language came from the leadership of Nigerian oil. We know that there are advantages in switching from kerosene to Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG). These include the provision of a cleaner and safer fuel option, especially for lower income households, reduction of indoor air pollution that causes significant health problems and a decline in carbon emissions caused by dirty fuels; but the decision of which to use should be for the consumers to make. It should not be imposed on them in a manner akin to the ‘if you can’t find bread, eat cake’ fashion. That is why it is not a befitting sermon from the Group Managing Director of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC), Mr Andrew Yakubu, and the chief executive of the Pipelines and Product Marketing Company (PPMC), Mr. Haruna Momoh, two people who are critical to making kerosene available in the country but have failed to do, to ask Nigerians to switch from kerosene to LPG.

    Messrs Yakubu and Momoh, while testifying before members of the Dakuku Peteside-led House of Representatives Committee on Petroleum (downstream) investigating supply, distribution and subsidy expenditure on kerosene from 2010 – 2013, said the solution to the lingering kerosene scarcity lies in switching over to LPG because this will reduce pressure on kerosene and ultimately lead to a drop in the demand for it. This excuse is full of the usual trappings of public officials who rather than be pragmatic about solutions to our problems sniff for excuses for the easy way out.

    The duo failed to take cognisance of the fact that cooking gas is costly and is beyond the reach of many Nigerians. One reason for this is the absence of a clear-cut policy to drive LPG consumption by the Federal Government. The fact is that deliberate government policies account significantly for the much progress made in countries like Brazil and Morocco, where LPG consumption is high. There is also the fear of gas in our society that would make people prefer kerosene that they perceive as safer and easier to handle. So, unlike Brazil and Morocco, the Federal Government will have to work harder to convince Nigerians to use gas.

    There was nothing new in whatever the duo told the House of Representatives committee members, either from the point of view of economics, or environmental safety. But what they failed to add is that even their own recommendation will come to naught if the same business paradigm they are using in the NNPC, for instance, is transferred to the process of producing the LPG. It is scandalous that Nigeria, a major producer of crude oil imports the bulk of the fuel that is used in the country. And there are reasons for these, including corruption and governmental ineptitude. For these reasons, it will only be a matter of time for the same problems leading to scarcity of kerosene to afflict the production of LPG. This is one ‘Nigerian factor’ that Messrs Yakubu and Momoh, as well as many others who have been making a case for LPG for domestic use in the country appear to be overlooking. If we promote LPG for domestic use, which is the ideal thing to do, a time will come when more Nigerians will demand for it and the question of meeting the demand will surface.

    This is why we think the prescription of the duo is symptomatic of the typical Nigerian public official’s penchant to sidetrack rather than solve problems. Rather than tell Nigerians why kerosene remains scarce, which was the essence of their appearance before the House committee in the first place, they launched into the issue of LPG as solution to the scarcity. How does that explain why kerosene remains scarce despite the humongous amount the government pays as subsidy on the product? Yakubu himself admitted that about N8.49 billion was expended to subsidise a total of 5,015.413.022.06 trillion litres of kerosene in 19 months! So, why is the product still scarce?

    We know as a matter of fact that petroleum products are being smuggled out to neighbouring countries. We are also aware that the activities of pipeline vandals, the state of disrepair of pipelines and depots in the country, and the activities of unscrupulous elements who adulterate kerosene to sell it as automatic gas oil often referred to as diesel, all contribute to the scarcity of the product. All these are issues the government should tackle because they are the reasons why government exists in the first place. For as long as these issues are unresolved, it is immaterial whether Nigerians use kerosene or LPG, there will always be scarcity at some point.

    So, we restate: if cooking gas must be substituted for kerosene, it should be by choice and a deliberate policy on the part of government; it does not lie in the mouths of those who should make kerosene available and have failed in that responsibility to seek to impose gas on Nigerians. That looks to us a subterfuge to cover their shortcomings and the general ineptitude in the country. It is cynicism taken too far.

  • Rethinking Boko Haram

    Rethinking Boko Haram

    • The killing of pupils in Yobe State shows the state of emergency is unravelling in the northeast

    The trademark Hobbesian state of anarchy of the Boko Haram was let loose on pupils of the Federal Government College, Buni Yadi, Yobe State, on Tuesday. Not less than 43 pupils were slaughtered like goats by the insurgents. The religious rebels reportedly bearing rifles and other instruments of violence stormed the school and left gory tales which Nigerians are still talking about. Adamu Garba, a teacher who escaped the gory attacks puts it succinctly to the Associated Press: “Students that were trying to climb out of the windows were slaughtered like sheep by the terrorists who slit their throats while others who ran were gunned down.” In a sadly well-orchestrated plot, the attacks came in the wee hours when pupils were sleeping. The wicked sect members left after setting ablaze the school’s administrative block and 39 other buildings within the premises.

    Captain Eli Lazarus, a military spokesman, confirmed that the gory spectre is the fourth on schools in Yobe State even though countless other schools have been affected in other northeast states of neighbouring Borno, Bauchi, Gombe and Adamawa. More scandalous are revelations that Boko Haram attacks this year alone have claimed 300 lives of civilians with countless others not captured by official records. These deaths do not even include military casualties that were kept away from public glare.

    Yobe is one of three north eastern states alongside Borno and Adamawa that have been put under emergency rule since last May by President Goodluck Jonathan as the military battles to quell the insurgency in the areas. We found quite disturbing the fact that these unscrupulous elements reportedly arrived at the scene of the incident by 2am and did not leave until very early in the morning. And we wonder how a state under an emergency rule could witness such horrendous attacks without any iota of security response from the standing joint military task force reportedly patrolling the state round the clock? Again, how could the sect’s members have invaded Buni Yadi, some 70 kilometres from Yobe State capital of Damaturu in several Toyota Hilux trucks and other categories of vehicles without raising suspicion within intelligence circles?

    Expectedly, the barbaric act has garnered global indignation through the United Nations’(UN) Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon who sturdily condemned the sadistic killings by expressing the world body’s  deep apprehension over “…the increasing frequency and brutality of attacks against educational institutions’’ in the northern part of the country which he believes “no objective can justify. What this newspaper and most of the citizenry are demanding from the president is for him to come up with effective solutions to the nearly five years of massive killings and destruction by the Boko Haram Islamic sect.

    It is important to ask what has happened to the billions of naira expended on security by the presidency. During the era of late Lieutenant-General Patrick Owoeye Azazi as Chief Security Office to the president, we recollect that close to N50billion was released for the purchase of security equipment to combat the recurring Boko Haram onslaught. But till date, no report was ever made about their arrival in the country and even if they did, the impact of such important equipment have not been felt in major territories where the devious sect has posed serious threats to lives and property. We consider it shameful that such a monstrous sect could have survived for so long simply because affordable satellite technology have either failed to work or are not deployed. Yet, the satellite equipment when effectively deployed would anticipate the activities for the dedicated hoodlums, unravel their locations and thereby facilitate their routing wherever they might be hiding.

    Since the declaration of emergency, the president has changed the structure of the military, implanting a division, for a focused work on the problem. He also has changed service chiefs. Yet, the problem has remained intractable. While the president has provided emergency as his last card, it has been a febrile failure indeed.

    The nation cannot continue to groan under the senseless attack of Boko Haram when the impact of scarce public funds expended on the Joint Military Task Force is not effectively felt. Could this be a consequence of institutional corruption of the military hierarchy that is prolonging this violence or the fact that some people are sabotaging the system from the civilian public? The president reportedly had to change service chiefs because they were at each other’s throat over control of the booty released to fight the Boko Haram cankerworm. This says a lot about the fragile commitment of the military institution to the battle against these religious miscreants. More shameful is the fact that the sect’s members during one of its criminal incursions in Maiduguri, Borno State capital, caused a major national embarrassment when it grounded the military fleet at the airport. The irony lies in the fact that intelligence anticipated the attack. Yet the sect members operated as though by surprise. At the moment, it is curious to realise that the sect’s tempo of attacks picked up in coincidence with the chief of defence staff’s declaration of April as deadline to finally eliminate the scourge.

    President Jonathan needs to change his body language to reflect the sober mood of the nation by displaying unwavering commitment to the onerous task of eliminating the Boko Haram’s injurious activities rather than his needless stepping up of unpresidential visits to churches and traditional rulers. Borno State governor’s statement that the sect is better armed than the nation’s military should not be waved aside because there is need for change in official approach to the Boko Haram quagmire since the current approach seems to have failed. The president should realise by now that throwing money into an endless pit of highly placed military and government officials that see the Boko Haram problem as a business venture will aggravate the challenges at hand.

     

  • A Second front in the privacy wars

    A Second front in the privacy wars

    More than a year before Edward Snowden exposed the vast reach of government surveillance, President Obama proposed a Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights to protect Americans from the prying eyes of Internet companies, advertisers and other businesses. In a February 2012 report, his administration offered a well-reasoned argument for giving consumers more control over how much and what kind of data companies can collect about them and what businesses can do with that information.

    “American consumers can’t wait any longer for clear rules of the road that ensure their personal information is safe online,” Mr. Obama said in a statement at the time. But few members of Congress expressed interest in his proposal and the administration did not push it aggressively, which is why the bill of rights idea faded into obscurity — until now.  Last month, Mr. Obama tapped his special adviser, John Podesta, to take another look at privacy and big data (the millions of records that businesses are collecting and using to increase sales and improve operations) and produce a fresh report in 90 days.

    With the Internet evolving fast, few consumers can adequately guard against losing control of their personal data. A recent report by the majority staff of the Senate Commerce Committee, for example, found that companies known as data brokers have assembled extensive dossiers on millions of individuals and families. Those files include information like web browsing histories, what consumers bought in physical and online stores, and what medical conditions people have.

    Data brokers organize and sell that information to retailers, lenders and other businesses that pitch their products to people grouped in categories like “rural and barely making it” and “ethnic second-city strugglers.” Some of the information is highly personal, if clearly irrelevant to any marketing campaign. A Chicago-area man recently received a marketing offer from OfficeMax that included the line “Daughter Killed in Car Crash” between his name and address, a reference to an accident that took place a year earlier. The company says that the phrase was included in error, but it offers a clue into the kind of data being collected. The Senate report also notes that hackers and identity thieves have stolen or even purchased information from data brokers.

    While businesses have a legitimate need for customer information and want new ways to market what they have to offer, they need to operate transparently. And no less important, consumers should have the ability to protect information they consider sensitive.

    A Pew Research survey released last September reported that a majority of Americans worry about their privacy. About 86 percent said they took some steps to “remove or mask their digital footprints” when they were online. But these efforts are often insufficient because companies have multiple ways to monitor people, some of which are very hard to evade. And 68 percent believed current laws are not strong enough to protect them.

    The technology and advertising industries have argued that self-regulation is the best approach to dealing with such concerns. But industry efforts have failed to produce easy-to-use protections. That’s why it is important that the president’s latest initiative not produce another report that goes nowhere.  The president and the public need from Mr. Podesta and his team not only a thorough description of how businesses are collecting private data but also specific legislative proposals to give consumers more control of that information.

    New York Times,

     

     

  • Presidential chatter

    Presidential chatter

    •Time is now to revamp the Presidential media chat if it must continue

    The last Presidential media chat held Monday evening was everything but that elevated platform it was designed to be. The idea of the forum is for a panel of senior and seasoned journalists to take on the number one citizen in a live question-and-answer chat that would challenge the president and elicit vital information on current national issues. This live intervention programme which has become popular all over the world has become a tool by presidents and government leaders everywhere to make major pronouncements, correct misconceptions, address major national issues and even fly kites to their populace.

    Indeed, savvy leaders have deployed it to project themselves and even change the course of the history of countries. Such is the power and importance of a live presidential media chat.

    But in the Goodluck Jonathan presidency, the entire idea seems to have come a cropper. Jonathan no doubt, is not a television animal, he is not a gifted speaker and he is not quick with it. But practice ought to count for something even if it does not make some things perfect. Last Monday during the chat, not much seems to have changed with President Jonathan – well he may have grown a bit more comfortable and confident before the cameras, and that seems to be about all. Answers still lacked the depth, insight and perspectives that would be expected from one who bestrides the polity.

    The president’s voice all through the session rang flat and monotonous like a weak machine; lacking in the vigour and conviction that are imbued by power, authority and superior information. Further, his handlers did him no favours by assembling a weak panel that never challenged him. None of such tricky questions that would make an interviewee agitated and shift in his seat. The questions came across too rehearsed and scripted to be impromptu. Follow-ups were rare.

    Did Nigerians get better informed and more enlightened in the face of a whirl of contentious issues in the public space today begging for some elucidation? Not quite. Two examples will suffice. One, on the Sanusi Lamido Sanusi suspension, here is what the president said: “Forget it, whether you like Jonathan or not, … the president has absolute power to suspend the CBN governor or anybody. Sanusi is still the governor of the CBN; he can come back tomorrow to continue his work…

    “If somebody says the CBN is a different country, it is not true. Can the CBN wake up today and change the colour of the naira without consulting the president?” But the point here is that the suspension is coming at a time when Sanusi is presumed to be a whistle-blower in an alleged financial indiscretion against the government. Why are the other government officials in the vortex of his allegations not suspended?

    The other example concerns his response to the Boko Haram insurgency in the north east state of Borno and the comment by the exasperated Governor Kashim Shettima to the effect that the terrorists were better equipped than the Nigerian Armed Forces. The president responded thus: “I don’t expect a governor to make that kind of statement. If the governor of Borno State felt that the Nigerian Armed Forces are not useful, we can pull them out of the state for one month and see whether he will stay in that his Government House …” Surely this answer is starkly un-presidential to say the least, and comes lower than the offending comment in question.

    Yes, Governor Shettima may have spoken out of extreme frustration in the face of the unbridled mayhem being wreaked in his state, the president needed to have shown better understanding. Besides, the governor’s comment ought to move the president to take a closer look at the military operation in the north east; there is so much amiss, if he must be told.

    We urge that the presidential chat be vastly improved upon so that it would serve its purpose and not lapse into a mere chatter.

  • Phobia for used vehicles

    Phobia for used vehicles

    •Are we criminalising the poor?

    The National Automotive Council’s (NAC) order to prohibit the issuance of number plates by Federal Road Safety Commission(FRSC) and vehicle licenses by states registration offices, for used vehicles(commonly referred to as Tokunbo), is potentially controversial. We loathe smuggling in whatever form because of its negative implications for the economy. However, we find this order quite laughable.

    Luqman Mamudu, NAC’s Director of Policy and Planning reportedly said that: “Smuggled vehicles will sooner or later become unattractive because those who buy them will certainly no longer be able to obtain plate numbers from Federal Road Safety Commission (FRSC) nor Vehicle License from various state vehicle registration offices …”

    NAC’s position was in response to fears by Freight Forwarders Association of Nigeria that the new National Automotive Industry Development would not only promote smuggling but also lead to hike in prices of existing vehicles in Nigeria and the lay-off of its members. We believe that the country ought to have produced her first indigenous car. Thus, the haste with which the new policy was planned for introduction does not take into cognisance the fact that the existing feeble local automotive plants’ capacity, including the new additions, may fall short of demands.

    By sheer common economic sense and the general knowledge about our porous borders, the new high custom duty and levy may force importers of these used vehicles to neighbouring Benin Republic where the custom duty is more affordable. The plan will have perverse implications for the job of freight forwarders, yielding, in the process, considerable revenue to a foreign country. We believe that once a vehicle enters the nation’s territory, it is not the job of FRSC or any state licensing office to start determining whether it is smuggled or not by denying registration. The job is that of the Customs.

    We have no grudge against the National Automotive Industry Development Plan (NAIDP) but demand to know why the Original Equipment Manufacturing (OEM) would not, ab initio, invest in Nigeria before requesting for protection of their business interests. The government has said that used vehicles imported into the country will be valued as new ones and depreciated by 10 per cent annually for cars and 20 per cent annually for commercial vehicles. The residual value will be subjected to 35 per cent duty and 35 per cent levy.

    Both new and used vehicles will also reportedly continue to flow into Nigeria in the form of Semi Knocked Down (SKD) and Completely Knocked Down (CKD) with the freight forwarders still saddled with clearing them at entry points because the favoured new local vehicle assemblers will still import these ‘broken vehicle parts’ produced from abroad.

    Yet, this new automotive initiative dubiously allows the new vehicle assemblers to import New Fully Built Units (FBUs) vehicles at concessionary import duty rates while common Nigerians are slammed with prohibitive custom duty/levy when importing such vehicles. The right thing is to officially create a level-playing ground pending when the plants would be ready to service prospective car buyers. To us, this initiative is another avenue for creating undue advantage and opportunity for a few select businessmen to get richer under the erroneous guise of creating jobs for impoverished Nigerians.

  • Locked Away in Immigration Jails

    Locked Away in Immigration Jails

    You can find examples of federal detainees held inexplicably for years without criminal charges or bond hearings much closer to home than Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.  In Southern Florida, five Sri Lankan men were held without bond for more than three years as they sought asylum, saying they had been promised leniency in return for aiding a federal investigation of the smuggling ring that brought them into the country illegally. As The Times reported recently, the average stay for an immigrant in federal custody is a month.

    In Springfield, Mass., a federal district judge in January ordered a bond hearing for a Jamaican immigrant and military veteran who had been held in Massachusetts jails, fighting deportation, for more than 15 months without ever receiving a bond hearing. The judge, Michael Ponsor, this month granted class-action status to all immigration detainees in Massachusetts who have been held without bond hearings for six months or more.

    Last April, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in California, upheld a lower court’s order requiring the government to grant bond hearings to immigrants who have been held six months without such a hearing. The American Civil Liberties Union, which had brought that class-action lawsuit, said the decision would potentially allow thousands of people to get a day in court across the Ninth Circuit, where an estimated one-fourth of all immigration detainees are held each year.

    These rulings reflect the growing understanding — in the federal courts, if not at Immigration and Customs Enforcement — that the constitutional guarantee of due process demands that a detainee have a hearing within a “reasonable” time and that more than six months is not reasonable by any definition.

    The Obama administration, in expanding the surge of immigration enforcement begun under President George W. Bush, has detained and deported nearly two million people. The overwhelming majority are dealt with swiftly and summarily, without ever receiving a hearing before an immigration judge. Others who challenge their deportation, like the Sri Lankans, wait for years to get a resolution of their cases. Still others, lacking aggressive lawyers, languish forgotten in federal lockups across the country.

    Automatically granting bond hearings to immigration detainees, many of whom pose no threat, is the least the government can do. This does not mean their release is inevitable or even likely. And it doesn’t mean that dangerous criminals would be let loose on the streets.  President Obama, who has repeatedly promised to do more to fix the broken immigration laws on his own if necessary, can ensure that the six-month rule is adopted in immigration courts nationwide. Beyond granting bond hearings, the government should use more humane and cost-effective alternatives to detention, like ankle bracelets and home monitoring. Locking people up indefinitely is not a path to a more rational immigration system.

    – New York Times

     

  • Something to cheer

    Something to cheer

    • As Nigerian-British Ejiofor wins prestigious film award

    In February 16, Nigeria co-shared with Britain a starring role in global limelight as a Nigerian-British son, Chiwetel Ejiofor, was pronounced the best actor for 2013 in Britain. It was at the British Academy Film and Television Award, (BAFTA) held at the Royal Opera House, Covent Garden, London. Ejiofor’s starring role in the riveting drama, 12 Years a slave, earned him the prestigious BAFTA prize over such world renowned and talented actors as Leonardo Dicaprio and Matthew McConaughey.

    It is indeed something to cheer for a country like Nigeria which the world has come to associate with odious headlines about scams and down-the-ladder positions in global human development indices. But the BAFTA comes particularly now, as a significant testimony to what might have been had the country been able to harness her potentials.

    Ejiofor was born in 1977 in Forest Gate, London, England, to Nigerian parents. He attended Dulwich College in South East London and later the London Academy of Music and Dramatic Arts. By age 13, his talent as a thespian was already noticeable as he was appearing in numerous school and national youth theatre productions. What may be his big break came in 1997 when ace producer, Steven Spielberg, cast him in Amistad alongside great actors like Morgan Freeman and Anthony Hopkins.

    Though BAFTA is his biggest haul so far, he is noted and highly regarded for his versatility in film, theatre and television productions and he has won numerous awards in the three genres in over 15 years of practice, with more than three dozen works. Some of his notable stage productions include title roles in Romeo and Juliet and Twelfth Night, or What You will. In 2008 he got five Golden Globe Award nominations and the Laurence Olivier Award for Best Actor for Othello. Same year, he was presented with an Order of the British Empire (OBE), by Queen Elizabeth 11 for services to the arts.

    Focused and hard-working, Ejiofor has just played a lead role in Half of a Yellow Moon, an adaptation of Chimamanda Adichie’s Nigeria civil war novel and he currently works on Z for Zachariah, a post-apocalyptic drama. Receiving his biggest award, Ejiofor enthused about his producer Steve McQueen: “I am so deeply honoured and privileged. Thank you for your work, your artistry and your passion in this project … to make it of such value and worth. This is yours by the way – I’m going to keep it… but it is yours.”

    This Nigerian honour, though a bit far removed, and Ejiofor’s evocation about artistry, worth, value and passion in a project are ingredients we want to commend to the Nigerian movie and entertainment industry. His story is a proof that even talent is brewed in the cauldron of proper education, patience, tenacity of purpose, focus and hard work. Ejiofor’s Nigerian counterpart in Nollywood must learn that their one-act wonder and flesh-bearing celebrity syndrome are ephemeral and of no lasting value. This explains why 20 years after, Nollywood is still in the woods, inundated with slap-dash productions. Nigerian practitioners of the make-believe must imbibe the culture of quality technical productions, artistic scripting, well-researched and deep thematic narratives.

    Chiwetel Ejiofor’s moment in the sun is as well Nigeria’s moment. It is our little victory, our reminder that even in our current political and socio-economic morass, there is a torch somewhere we can hold to the world. We salute Ejiofor and his clan for helping us to hold up that light in spite of ourselves.

     

  • Don’t mob gays

    Don’t mob gays

    •Gays should be punished, but not outside the court of law

    The issue of giving legal sanction to same sex marriages has in recent times shown the divergent cultural values and orientations between African and western societies. Several western countries, including the United States, Britain and France, among others, have legitimised same sex marriage. However, most African countries have refused to sanction the practice. The latter have stoutly rebuffed pressure from some western countries to grant so-called gay rights, which they see as a feature of a truly democratic society. For most African societies, same sex marriage is unnatural, abnormal, perverse and immoral. It is an abuse of freedom that is harmful to the health of society.

    Nigeria is one country that has taken decisive action to curtail gay rights and promulgated a law that makes same sex marriage criminal and illegal. The Same Sex Marriage (prohibition) Act was in January signed into law by President Goodluck Jonathan. The law imposes a 14 -year jail sentence for engaging in gay marriage. It makes it a crime for anyone, straight or homosexual, to hold a meeting of gays or to advocate human rights for gays. Those who are convicted for engaging in these acts can be jailed for up to 10 years.

    The anti-same sex marriage law reflects the will of the vast majority of the Nigerian people and their communal values. Law cannot be divorced from the cultural mores of a people. No country has a right to impose its own values on others. The freedom guaranteed by democracy must not be allowed to degenerate to license just anything so that society does not descend to anarchy. The west has the right to believe that gay rights are an expression of democratic values and human rights. But it must also respect the right of other societies to hold a different view.

    However, the Same Sex (prohibition) Act must not be allowed to become an excuse for the perpetration of impunity and lawlessness. This was what, regrettably, happened when a mob of about 40 people reportedly invaded a shanty town in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja, penultimate Thursday, with the purported aim of ‘cleansing’ the neighbourhood of gay people. Armed with wooden clubs and iron bars, the mob was said to have dragged 14 young men from their beds and brutally assaulted them. The purported gays were threatened with death if they came back to the community. Houses were said to have been painted with graffiti declaring “homosexuals pack and leave”.

    Even more shockingly, four of the victims who were marched to a police station received no protection from those who were supposed to uphold the law. According to Ifeanyi Orazulike of the International Centre on Advocacy for the Right to Health, they were kicked and punched by police officers who hurled abuses at them. Luckily, the men were ordered to be released by a senior police officer because there was no evidence that they were gay since they were not caught having sex. Even then, the injured men had to be treated at the organisation’s clinic.

    It is thus not surprising that the United States Embassy, reacting to the incident, reiterated its concern that the anti-same sex law “might be used by some to justify violence against Nigerians based on their sexual orientation”. This kind of impunity and mob action is indefensible. Any law must be enforced in accordance with due process. Those suspected of violating the anti-same sex law must be prosecuted in court, not persecuted by a mindless mob. They remain innocent until proven guilty.

  • A forgotten source

    A forgotten source

    •Oloibiri’s neglect is part of the neglect of history, including in schools

    It is possible that not many Nigerians have heard of Oloibiri before; even of those who have, not many know its historical or economic importance. Curiously, in Nigeria, that is not new. A few years ago, some pupils in a primary school in Ikenne, Ogun State, the birthplace of the late sage, Chief Obafemi Awolowo, knew next-to-nothing about the man, Obafemi Awolowo. When they were asked whether they knew anyone by that name, they said no.

    The only Obafemi they know is the football star, Obafemi Martins! The fault is not in them, it is in our warped educational curriculum that has relegated such persons and places of rich historical value in the country to the background. It is also because we no longer teach history to our children in primary and secondary schools.

    Oloibiri, in Ogbia Local Government Area (LGA) of Bayelsa State; came into prominence with the discovery of crude oil in commercial quantities in the place in 1956. This discovery ended a 50-year fruitless search for oil in Nigeria and launched the country into the limelight of oil-producing nations, with the attendant petro-dollars.

    An appreciative country ought to accord Oloibiri the attention befitting such a community. Unfortunately, Oloibiri’s tale is like that of other oil-bearing communities in the country. At least that is the impression one gets if Chief Amangi Daniel’s claim is anything to go by. Daniel had regretted that in spite of the community’s peaceful nature that made oil production uninterrupted for years, development has eluded it. He told the visiting Mr Jay Naidoo, a former Minister of Development in South Africa in Ogbia that it was regrettable that “the area has nothing to show for its historic role in the nation’s economy’’.

    Naidoo said that he was in Nigeria to see and feel the pulse of the Niger Delta communities as well as assess the level of development in the region. Like most other visitors to the Niger Delta region of Nigeria, he too was disappointed not just by what he was told but also by what he saw. Even the renowned environmentalist, Mr Nnimmo Bassey and the Country Director of Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition, Mr Larry Umunna, who accompanied Mr Naidoo must have been equally flabbergasted by the eye saw that the community has become.

    Indeed, Naido was so disappointed that he recommended that “the communities should organise and seek further assistance from the United Nations as well as draw the attention of shareholders of oil multinational firms to the negative impact of their operations on the people.” We agree with this view even as we also support the position of Mr Basssey that it is imperative that not just Oloibiri but the entire Niger Delta region must be cleared of the relics and pollution associated with oil exploration that are evident in the communities. However, unlike his view that the government integrates environmental issues into political discourse, we want to suggest, based on experience, that it should not be left to the government alone.

    As Chief Daniel told the visitors, our governments are usually tall in speaking but miserably short in action. Most of the promises that successive governments made to better the lot of Oloibiri community have remained largely unfulfilled. Therefore, it is the civil society and the communities themselves that should ensure that their plight is brought to the front burner of national discourse. They should even externalise it if necessary. If successive governments had been responsible and fair to the oil-bearing communities, things should have improved in those areas since the days of Isaac Boro and the late Ken Saro-Wiwa.

    In the particular case of Oloibiri, it should not just be developed; the community should be made a tourist attraction to serve as eternal reminder of its importance to the country’s development. If we got so much from Oloibiri, the least we can do is to give back to it part of what we took from it. That is what corporate social responsibility is all about.

  • Electoral Offences Tribunal

    Electoral Offences Tribunal

    •US’ timely reminder of the Uwais panel’s recommendation

    The clamour for a law to establish Electoral Offences Tribunal, in Nigeria, before the 2015 general elections, got a boost last week. The latest support came from the United States Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, Mrs. Linda Thomas-Greenfield, who led a 23-man team to the third meeting of the Nigeria-US Bi-National Commission, in Abuja. According to the under-secretary, her interactions with Nigerians show that many of them are in support of such a tribunal. She promised that the commission is working to make the 2015 election ‘the most peaceful, free, fair and credible election’ in Nigeria’s history.

    This is one intervention by a foreign official that we identify with. So, we urge the National Assembly to hearken to the umpteenth call for the passage of the law, to establish this important tribunal. To ignore the urgency for the tribunal will amount to playing the ostrich, considering the tension in the polity. Indeed, in the country’s history, electoral malfeasance has never been as worse as in the current democratic dispensation, particularly during the 2007 general elections. We recall that it was the condemnation that greeted that electoral fraud that led late President c, to establish the Justice Muhammad Uwais panel, which among other recommendations, suggested the need for an electoral offences tribunal.

    Regrettably, the government of President Goodluck Jonathan, which is a direct beneficiary of the electoral malfeasance of the 2007 elections, has shown lukewarm interest in the creation of this body. Also, members of the National Assembly, some of whom benefitted from that electoral brigandage to climb to national prominence, appear uninterested in ensuring that the recommendations of the Uwais panel become law. This joint interest in the benefits of electoral philandering, is perhaps why we needed a reminder from a foreign diplomat, of the importance of such a piece of legislation.

    It must be borne in mind that when partisans threaten violence against electoral brigandage, it is an indication of frustration with the absence of justice in the electoral process. So, while condemning threats of post-election violence, we believe the best antidote is to allow the will of the people to prevail. This will be achieved by ensuring that elections are transparently conducted, and where there are infractions, that the culprits are effectively brought to justice. No doubt, the persistent failure to bring past election riggers to justice over the years helps to embolden potential riggers.

    Indeed, if the National Assembly is determined to give Nigerians a free, fair and credible election, the bill can be given a top priority to ensure its expeditious passage, before this year’s Ekiti and Osun elections. We consider the two elections a prelude to the 2015 general elections. We are also worried that if the two elections are tainted by rigging, the political parties, and the electorates will become distraught of the process going into next year’s election. The consequences will be that the loser may be unwilling to accept defeat, and that could lead to violence.

    With the seething security crisis that has engulfed the north eastern part of the country; every effort must be made by the executive and legislative authorities, to ensure that election- induced crisis is not added to the combustible mix. So, we expect that President Jonathan and the leadership of the National Assembly will find wisdom in the need to urgently pass the electoral offences tribunal law, in the interest of our nation. They must realise that there is no gaming on this score, unless of course they do not care about the country.