The Nation Newspaper

Category: Editorial

  • Too little, too late

    Too little, too late

    •Sack of four ministers by president is motion without movement

     

    It came too late, it was utterly anti-climactic and hardly of any effect whatsoever. This is the most apt way to describe the ouster of four ministers from the Federal Executive Council (FEC), last week. President Goodluck Jonathan had dropped the powerful and controversial aviation minister, Ms Stella Oduah. Also gone are: Mr. Godsday Orubebe, Minister of Niger-Delta Affairs; Navy-Capt. Caleb Olubolade, Minister of Police Affairs and Dr. Yerima Ngama, Minister of State for Finance.

    Recall that last September, President Jonathan sacked nine members of his cabinet and none of them has been replaced till date. Indeed, it has been suggested that President Jonathan’s tinkering with his cabinet is more a gambit aimed at the 2015 presidential election than an attempt to rescue the country’s faltering socio-economic conditions.

    The need for a total overhaul of the current FEC had been long overdue as the president’s team has been long jaded, corruption ridden and lackluster. Many of the ministers have been caught with hands in the pie while some had lost any drive or initiative whatsoever.

    The case of Ms. Oduah was spectacularly scandalous. Apart from embarking on a whirlwind of airports renovation which has turned out to be of poor quality, she was involved in the purchase of two bulletproof cars for N255 million found to be grossly over-valued and shorn of due process. It was a scam that shook the entire nation and smeared the country’s image. The House of Representatives committee which investigated the matter found her culpable and recommended a review of her appointment. But the Presidency had dithered, refusing to take any action since last year over an affair that the world came to know as Oduahgate.

    In spite of her firing, the issue of due process and corruption hovers like a gaping bird of prey over the Jonathan administration. He indicated the files were on his desk. Did he fire her because of the scandal? No records show an answer, and until a verdict on the matter comes out of the presidency, Mr. Jonathan is deemed to have papered over this big, scandalous crack.

    Though Mr. Orubebe claimed he was not sacked but quit to pursue his political ambition, he however, proved to be utterly inefficient on his beat as the manner and quality of work on the East-West Road has shown. His ministry, being in charge of this major artery linking the restive Niger-Delta zone to the rest of the country, has been unable to make much headway on this important project more than two years after. Akinbolade and Ngama deny they were axed but their ministries did not epitomise any remarkable service or notable performance.

    Beyond being a run around the roundabout, the entire cabinet makeover remains ineffectual as ministers who ought to have been given a public reprimand through an express pronouncement of sack are being afforded a face-saving exit. In clarifying their exit status, the Minister of Information and Communication, Mr. Labaran Maku, noted that, “The president said he had asked them to go because they indicated interest in playing deeper roles in the politics of the country.” Jonathan’s method of governance has left many Nigerians wondering whether he is serious about setting aright his floundering administration. If ministers found to have brazenly compromised their offices are simply asked to go, then there seems to be no hope for any redemption.

    Apart from those ‘asked to go’, there are still many in the cabinet who have been found wanting, either in keeping proper account of their activities or what is clearly inefficient performance of their duties. The Minister of Petroleum and Natural Resources, Mrs. Diezani Alison-Madueke has been in the heart of mind-boggling scandals in the last two years, yet she sits pretty in the cabinet as if she were an untouchable. Under the watch of Mrs. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala who heads the finance ministry and who also wears the appellation of coordinating minister of the economy (CME), the economy has been in the doldrums and the annual budget mere routines with no value-added whatsoever. But she has remained at her desk, inured to the cries of the populace and unmoved to make any change.

  • Banks’ biometric

    Banks’ biometric

    •It is an example of technology coming to the service of integrity and efficiency

     We consider as a good tiding the move for restoration of banking credibility by stakeholders in the country. The concerned, including the Bankers’ Committee, Nigeria Inter-bank Settlement System (NIBSS)  and the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), have come up with the Biometric solution initiative that will allow for collation of a central database where all bank customers’ information will be collected and stored. The idea, according to Sanusi Lamido Sanusi, governor of CBN, in his speech during the Standard Bank West African Investors’ Conference was launched in Lagos State on February14 and is expected to: “…in 18 months, fix the problems faced in the banking system.”

    The rampant incidents of bank fraud across the federation have taken immense toll on the growth of the sector as well as public trust and perception. The introduction of biometric identifiers that are unique to individuals will no doubt go a long way in authenticating identity of each bank customer from bank to bank. And the thought that the project will erase doubts at Point of Sale (PoS) terminals and Automated Teller Machine (ATM) points is heart-warming at a period when unscrupulous elements perpetrate banking criminality only to vamoose into thin air.

    One interesting feature of this proposed project is that it makes banking transaction easy for both the educated and the uneducated since, of fundamental importance here is the use of thumb-print as a major means of identification in banks and the ATMs. Quite instructive too is the fact that the ease of the method of thumb-printing will encourage the use of ATMs and PoS terminals in business and banking transactions.

    The parties involved in this project must ensure that loose ends and technical grey areas are well knitted so that the initiative will not end up another nightmare to bank customers. We are aware that there could be initial hiccups but such should not get to a magnitude that could make banking transactions so complicated for the people that patronise the banks before being remedied. The German company that was reportedly awarded the contract for the supply and installation of these biometric data capturing machines, should equally be allowed the latitude to maintain the machines and also train indigenous manpower to take over within a reasonable period of time. Being a big project, we also think it imperative that spare parts maintenance outlets of the foreign company should be opened in the country so that the machines would not frustrate activities or become decrepit within a short time.

    Biometric solution has considerably worked in developed countries in helping the tracking of banking and other crimes and we hope that the project will equally work for banks in Nigeria. Getting things right for that sector is the only way through which the nation can redeem her dented international image of being a transit country for money laundering. Once foreign financial institutions no longer worry about whom their customers are and where to find them, credit facility and fraud would become easy to unravel.

    The biometric solution initiative should rather be seen by all as a complement to the National Identity Card project. The plundering of the nation’s resources has been done mainly through the banks with the connivance of top echelon of that sector. This initiative, being an institutional idea that would create a unified identity for the financial system that has avoidably become havens of criminals should be allowed to succeed. We support any effort aimed at making our banks truly the ideal custodians of the people’s toil. In our view, this biometric solution is one important move in this direction.

  • Sanusi’s successor

    Sanusi’s successor

    •The choice must figure in professionalism and the independence of spirit

    IN a few months, the office of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) governor will be vacant, and it is important that Nigerians show interest in who succeeds the incumbent. We shall not assess the performance of Lamido Sanusi until he eventually bows.

    But we want to peer into the post-Sanusi era, with a view to suggesting what we need from the new boss of the apex bank. Since independence, the occupier of the post has often served as a kind of potent fly on the wall. We knew he worked but we were hardly drawn to his doings as the man who regulates the outflow and inflow of money in the financial system.

    The last two heads have stirred emotions in the country, including Charles Chukwuma Soludo and Lamido Sanusi. Their predecessors operated as though below the radar.

    But some explanations can put this in context. Most of our CBN chiefs were appointed by the military and there was little fractious temper because partisan politics was antipodal to the high hand of military rule. The second explanation is that the Nigerian economy has gradually slid into tumultuous times, tossed by inflation, the descent in the value of the Naira, overdependence on oil, diminishing productivity and decaying infrastructure.

    The third reason is the impunity and vainglory that have attended the rebirth of the political elite in this republic. This has engendered the politicisation of the office, and policies have failed to earn the trust of the divides of our politics.

    Hence we witnessed the consolidation move conducted in the Olusegun Obasanjo era under the direction of Soludo, and the gains and losses are still matters of contention. Of course, his attempt to revalue the currency in the guise of saving it fell upon the rock. The Sanusi era has been marked by a wave of policies viewed by some as populist, others as partisan. Some other policies have been seen as anti-establishment and another group saw other actions as servile.

    In Nigeria today, it is difficult to be neutral about money. Yet at no time in our history do we need a steady hand on top of our money flows. That is why whoever takes over from Sanusi must serve the nation with wisdom, professionalism and patriotism.

    This does not call for the jettisoning of what the person meets on ground, especially in an economy where questions have quaked the air over missing trillions of Naira, over what constitutes real and unreal subsidies, over where political interests interlock our paternity.

    The person will winnow the good from the dross, the pure from the meaningless and contentious. The presidency and the National Assembly must be wary of our needs as a country in picking this person. We do want a CBN governor who can speak the truth, even if we recommend that he be more grand than grandiose, less reticent, not servile, and decidedly professional.

    Having an equable temperament does not recommend silence but an understanding of the weight of words to push the economy this way or that. He must be a seasoned economist with a deep grasp of the interplay of the economy and society. He must not be so doctrinaire as not to adapt to the dynamics of a modern economy in a state of flux. He must distinguish – and coalesce – the economic and the financial, which means a nexus must be found between productivity in the real economy and the level of money flows in the system. That way, neither runs away from the other, and crisis is averted.

    Given the charged polity, we hope that whoever emerges strikes a bi-partisan pose and poise, with a strong sense more about how to redeem a dying money than how to satiate a particular interest.

  • Mystery task force

    Mystery task force

    •Why does secrecy surround a strange ‘task force’ doing drills on Lagos roads?

    TO start with, there is no novelty about uniformed agencies devoted to specific functions. Lagos State has its own LASTMA. Ogun has its own TRACE (both are traffic management agencies). Osun has its O’YES volunteer corps, while Oyo’s equivalent of O’YES is YES’O.

    All these uniformed agencies are products of legislation and their entries were well publicised. Indeed, Osun gained so much mileage from its O’YES (Osun Youth Employment Scheme) that it has since moved that other states copy the model. Even at the federal level, the Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps, founded in Lagos in May 1967, at the approach of the Nigerian Civil War (1967-1970), has continued to render service according to its enabling statutes.

    Which is why it is highly surprising that a new para-military unit would hit the streets of Lagos with a loud silence, clothed in a web of secrecy — until alarmed citizens started raising queries.

    Even now, the queries have not been satisfactorily answered. First, the task force was dabbed the Federal Road Maintenance Agency (FERMA) Task Force. But Oladipo Fagbamila, FERMA’s South West 2 coordinator, entered a disclaimer, insisting FERMA had no link with the mystery task force. To reinforce his disavowal, he disclosed that FERMA had written both Lagos State Governor, Babatunde Fashola, as well as the AIG for Zone 2 (comprising Lagos and Ogun states) and Umar Manko, the Lagos State Commissioner of Police, on the matter.

    The closest to identifying the task force’s identity was a reported informal inscription, on the wall of its Lagos office, of “The Presidency’s Subsidy Re-investment and Empowerment Programme, Federal Task Force.” Even then, this was a function of a reporter’s leg work, and not any formal announcement. If media accounts are to be believed, it would appear that Governor Fashola himself was at sea, as to the true identity of this “Federal Task Force”.

    The question is: why all the mystery? Is there anything sinister about a sudden appearance of a body of youths, clad in black and doing drills? Though an unnamed source from the body claimed the Lagos State Police Command was aware of their activities, Ngozi Braide, spokeswoman for the command, claimed ignorance about any such activities but nevertheless promised to further investigate. Why all the mystery?

    It is no bad idea if SURE-P is investing saved fuel subsidy in youth empowerment and jobs. As agency spending the money, it also reserves the right to deploy the beneficiary youths to areas to which it feels they are most needed — in this case, controlling traffic on federal roads nationwide. That may be legitimate, though not a few would question its wisdom, since there is already a Federal Road Safety Commission (FRSC) statutorily charged with such chores.

    But what is absolutely unacceptable is the secrecy that has surrounded the advent. With barely a year to the 2015 general elections, such emergence by ambuscade has led to ugly speculations that the “task force” may be glorified thugs, with the sinister motive of fiddling the polls. Besides, under what legal framework is the new “task force” coming on board? Can a minister just wake up and create any such quasi-security outfit?

    To build confidence that its motive is noble and pure, the Federal Government agency responsible for the task force should come clean and duly inform the public about its existence. That way, it would put paid to suppositions that the basis of the task force’s emergence is sinister; and that it is set to compound, rather than improve, the already parlous security situation nationwide.

  • Mr. Obama’s new tone on Syria

    Mr. Obama’s new tone on Syria

    IS PRESIDENT Obama creeping toward a rethinking of his Syria policy? Some words he spoke Tuesday raised our hopes. At a news conference with French President François Hollande, Mr. Obama described the Syrian conflict, which he dismissed five months ago as “someone else’s civil war,” as “one of our highest national security priorities.” He acknowledged that his diplomatic strategy is “far from achieving” its aim of a political solution, while “we still have a horrendous situation on the ground.”

    In essence, Mr. Obama confirmed what Secretary of State John F. Kerry privately acknowledged to a group of congressmen 10 days ago: U.S. policy is failing even as the threat to U.S. interests grows. “Nobody is going to deny there’s enormous frustration here,” the president said.

    The atrocities committed daily by the Syrian regime, even as peace talks in Geneva sputter, may be influencing Mr. Obama’s thinking. So, too, may the failure of efforts at the United Nations to alleviate the dire humanitarian crisis. Mr. Obama’s strategy has counted on Russian cooperation, but Tuesday the president acknowledged that Russia is obstructing U.N. Security Council action to open aid corridors for starving civilians.

    Above all, he can hardly ignore warnings delivered by his top intelligence aides, Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr. and CIA Director John Brennan, who in the past two weeks said in public testimony to Congress that al-Qaeda is developing a refuge in eastern Syria that could be used to launch attacks against the United States. Having previously belittled the Syrian al-Qaeda branch as “JV,” Mr. Obama sounded more sober Tuesday in saying that “there are extremists who have moved into the vacuum in certain portions of Syria in a way that could threaten us over the long term.” Talks in Geneva won’t address that threat, nor can a president with three years left in office necessarily expect that “the long term” will arrive afterward.

    What action is possible? Mr. Obama and his aides have often argued that the only alternative to their present policy is an Iraq-style invasion. So it was refreshing to hear Mr. Obama hint at other options. He said his administration would “continue to strengthen the moderate opposition”; we hope that means a return to a plan for stepped-up training that the president embraced and then abandoned last year.

    Correctly, Mr. Obama cited the deal on Syria’s chemical weapons — in which a U.S. threat to carry out air strikes quickly produced a regime commitment to hand over its arsenal — as “an example of the judicious, wise use of military action.” He went on to ask “whether we can duplicate that kind of process when it comes to the larger resolution of the problem.” Maybe not, if “resolution” means a quick end to this terrible war. But the threat of force could help open humanitarian corridors and stop atrocities such as the dropping of shrapnel-filled “barrel bombs” on civilian targets.

    Mr. Obama said: “Right now we don’t think there’s a military solution per se . . . but the situation is fluid and we are continuing to explore every possible avenue to solve this problem.” That is good news. The president has taken an important step in recognizing the gravity of developments in Syria. Now he needs to act on that analysis.

    –Washington Post

     

  • Whose industrial revolution?

    Whose industrial revolution?

    Government should commit to fixing  infrastructure, not grandiose launches

    President Goodluck Jonathan’s recent launch of the Nigeria Industrial Revolution Plan (NIRP) and the National Enterprise Development Programme (NEDP) has once again demonstrated the dilemma of continual talk without a commensurate commitment to decisive action.

    Taken together, NIRP and NEDP are ostensibly designed to resuscitate the country’s comatose industrial sector by promoting industrial growth and employment-generation on the basis of expanded manufacturing, the development of local technologies, the exploitation of comparative advantage and the institution of relevant local patronage programmes. These ambitious schemes are aimed at helping Nigeria to achieve the central goal of the so-called ‘Vision 2020’ project, namely the emergence of the country as one of the world’s 20 largest economies.

    These are obviously laudable aims. What is suspect, however, is the worrying way in which the Jonathan administration has come to take words as viable substitutes for deeds. Nigerian history is littered with industrial development plans which never got off the ground, even after billions were spent to bring them to life.

    This is not the first flamboyant plan of action launched by this government. The president launched the Power Sector Reform Roadmap in August 2010; in October 2011, he launched YouWin to tackle youth unemployment; in April 2012, he launched a new national tax policy; in May 2012, he launched the cassava bread initiative; in March 2013, a N3 billion Nollywood grant was launched.

    Where have all these previous schemes that were announced with so much fanfare taken the country? The power road-map initiated a privatisation process that was so riddled with underhand practices that it resulted in the removal of the minister in charge. The Nollywood grant has been mired in a bureaucratic quagmire, as the financial institution in charge of disbursing the grant has imposed stiff conditions that very few of the supposed beneficiaries can meet.

    The major reason why these projects fail is because they do not address the fundamental issues confronting the country. No industrial revolution plan can survive in a nation where the basic infrastructure is decrepit. In the absence of power, water, roads and security, most businesses are compelled to provide their own; this strategy naturally increases overheads exponentially. The International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) Doing Business report in 2013 ranked Nigeria 147th out of 189 countries in ease of doing business. It came 122nd in the list of best places to start a business. In the “Getting Electricity” parameter, the country came 185th.

    So herculean is the task of running a business in Nigeria that the country has witnessed a steady de-industrialisation, as manufacturers have left the country for places with a more conducive environment. The textile industry has been decimated, in spite of the infusion of stimulus funds. Several enterprises have given up manufacturing for the less-arduous business of wholesale trade. A good number of factories have become places of worship. Those firms which have somehow managed to soldier on are battling competition from cheap imports and contraband goods, while contending with inequitable taxation policies and the difficulties of obtaining equipment and spare parts.

    The basic principle of sustainable development is that it is the small things that count. Rather than ostentatious launching ceremonies and flamboyant policy statements, the Jonathan administration ought to quietly identify the main obstacles to the country’s growth and seek to comprehensively rectify them. There is, for example, the country’s educational policies which do not address the requirements of manufacturers; the over-emphasis on university degrees has resulted in a dearth of the technicians and artisans that are the lifeblood of manufacturing. There is also the very discouraging nature of industrial policy in Nigeria which appears to offer very little to local manufacturers, either in the way of tariff walls, research and development or financing.

    Even though crude oil accounts for over 80 per cent of the country’s foreign receipts, the National Assembly is yet to pass the critically-important Petroleum Industry Bill. While countries like India have identified the emerging global digital economy as a viable area of future growth, Nigeria is still thinking almost exclusively of industry and machinery. Nigeria is steadily retreating from former areas of strength like mining and agriculture, and has failed to use them as the basis for a value-added strategy of industrial growth. The country’s vibrant entertainment industry is yet to become a major foreign revenue-earner, despite its enormous continental popularity.

    Bitter experience has shown that talk alone is not enough. Nigeria must begin to walk the talk if it wishes to realise its ambitious dreams of industrial pre-eminence and sustained economic growth.

  • Ogbeni’s intervention

    Ogbeni’s intervention

    • With his recent step, we hope the religious stir will give way to educational dividends in Osun State

    The issue seemed innocuous at first. The Osun State governor, Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola, started a programme to restructure and reclassify schools in an effort to redeem an educational system long lost in a rut. It was a massive affair involving close to 2,000 schools.

    The project proceeded noiselessly until rumbles began in a few schools, about three, and the contention set the distinction between state and religion to the front burner. It first began as an accusation that the governor had instructed students to wear hijab, a Muslim wear, for all students, including Christian wards. It turned out a distortion, as the matter is litigation by a non-government body.

    But the matter persisted and while it was quiet in virtually all the state, the rumpus became identified with Iwo town and not the whole town, but the Baptist High School.

    What was the issue? It was that some parents did not want their children to abide in a school with children of other faiths – a school of interfaith. Some commentators fulminated that the governor was turning a forbidden issue into a tinderbox, and they had insisted that the governor reverse his programme because students of different faiths could not be forced to learn secular matters under the same roof.

    The counter-argument was that the religious bodies that insisted ownership of the school’s lifestyle had not, since the takeover in 1976, contributed to the school equipment, curricula or infrastructure all these years. They did not also enlist when the governor introduced the free feeding to the students as part of the nourishment for education. Why were they waking up this late with a proprietary air because the schools, all Osun State schools, were undergoing perhaps the biggest wave of transformation any school system has witnessed in this country on a tab of about N30 billion?

    It was clear that the matter of faith was no easy one when recently the students of differing faiths contested for sartorial supremacy. The governor intervened by visiting the school in his drama of sartorial solidarity. His was a peace mission, and it was highlighted by a six-man committee he set up to look into the matter with a view to putting the crisis behind. The committee included Gbadegesin Adedeji – its chairman. The others are T.A. Oni – who is secretary-, Israel Ajao, former assistant inspector-general of police, and Alhaji Bola Asafa.

    Calm has reportedly returned to the schools and community, and what the governor has done chimes in with the highest tenets of all religions – harmony and peace among all people.

    Ironically, Yorubaland is that last place we expect such scents of dissent based on faith. Historically the Yorubas have always lived peacefully in an ambience of Islam, Christianity and Ifa, and such distinction of syncretism has set them apart from other ethnic groups in West Africa.

    It is also a tragedy that in contextualising the Iwo drama, commentators have failed to see that in all the close to 2,000 schools in the state, only a few see this as a matter of spilling bad blood. Even though the governor had said that he did not authorise a wear, why did the commentators not point out that he specifically introduced a uniform that bore no distinct religious vintage? He showcased this fact by wearing it to the school.

    He said: “We are a product of the rule of law and this has guided all our actions. As we said in the past, we have not approved the use of hijab. I repeat it again for the hearing of mischief makers, who have been working tirelessly to bring religious war to our state. This government did not approve the use of hijab in any school before the matter went to court. It is the court’s position that the status quo be maintained until the case is determined.”

    The governor had said this several times before February 10 when he visited Baptist High School. We hope that the committee will put paid to the stir and allow attention to turn to the massive school transformation in progress.

     

     

  • Soldiers’ unpaid allowances

    Soldiers’ unpaid allowances

    •We want to know the true position of the money because we don’t want a repeat of the 2008 scenario

    After the experience of the 28 soldiers, who on July 4, 2008 protested non-payment of their foreign mission allowances by blocking Ondo-Akure Road for several hours, we would have thought that would be the last time we would be witnessing such incident. It ended up in a celebrated case that attracted the attention of Nigerians to the plight of the soldiers. Unfortunately, more than five years after, we are back to square one, with another batch of soldiers on foreign mission accusing the military authorities of the same infraction.

    This time, about 800 soldiers under the Nigerian Army Battalion from Zuru, Kebbi State, that participated in the United Nations Peacekeeping Mission in Sudan last year are unhappy over the delay in releasing their allowances. They say their compulsory savings for five of the six months they spent in Sudan are missing. “We were entitled to N180,000 equivalent of Nigeria’s currency; out of which they gave us one hundred dollars, which is about N17,000. The authorities were supposed to keep the rest N163,000 in a compulsory account for us. But when we went to the bank, we realised that they had paid only one month, out of six that were spent there,” a source said.

    We do not know what informed the idea of the compulsory savings for the soldiers. But it would seem to us a well-meaning initiative to ensure that they do not embark on a spending spree during their assignment so that they could have something to fall back on after. Unfortunately, the impression is being created that it could have become another avenue for corrupt enrichment. According to the soldiers, the money had been paid by the UN even before they left the country. If this is true, then it contradicts what the Director of Defence Information, Maj.-Gen. Chris Olukolade said. “The money is not missing; they should have patience. The authorities are working round the clock to secure the funds from the appropriate quarters and the relevant agencies and sponsors of the mission”, Olukolade was quoted as saying.

    Now, who are the “appropriate quarters and the relevant agencies” that Gen. Olukolade is talking about? Has the UN paid the money into the appropriate agency’s account in Nigeria? We need to know. If the money had been fully released to the appropriate agency in Nigeria, why were the accounts of the soldiers only credited with one month allowance?

    What is involved is hefty; with each soldier being owed about N163,000 monthly, the amount for the five months is said to be about N652m for all of them. We are concerned for two reasons: one, we know that in many government establishments, workers’ salaries are appropriated by some top executives who place such monies in fixed accounts, with a view to creaming off the interest, which is usually substantial. This is the reason why salaries are delayed in many government establishments. We hope this is not the case with the soldiers’ allowances.

    Second, the labourer is entitled to his wage, and promptly too. It is dangerous to deny people who are trained to handle arms and ammunition their legitimate entitlements. We saw the embarrassment that only 28 soldiers caused the entire military establishment in the 2008 incident. We can only imagine what the situation would be like if about 800 of them now protest over unpaid entitlements. We don’t want a repeat of such a protest which would make the military authorities accuse the soldiers of mutiny again, without addressing the cause. The Nigerian Army owes Nigerians more explanation on the matter; we want to know what exactly the situation is and where specifically the money is hanging. Fair is fair.

     

  • Demonizing Gays in Africa

    Demonizing Gays in Africa

    As acceptance of gays and lesbians has grown in the United States and Europe, intolerance and persecution has been rising in other parts of the world. African nations are leaders in this cruel and dehumanizing trend.

    The latest alarms were triggered by a ban in Nigeria on same-sex relationships that was passed by Parliament in May and signed by President Goodluck Jonathan on Jan. 7. Nigeria is a leading oil producer and Africa’s most populous country, and the ban is considered the most significant setback yet to gay rights on the continent.

    Although gay sex has been illegal in Nigeria since British colonial rule, the draconian new law criminalizes homosexuality, banning same-sex marriage and prescribing years in prison to anyone who makes a “public show” of same-sex relationships or participates in gay organizations. Even people who simply support gays are subject to criminal arrest and penalties.

    Before the new law was enacted, convictions for gay sex were rare in the southern part of Nigeria and occasional in the mostly Muslim north. But since the law went into effect, as Adam Nossiter has reported in The Times, arrests of gays have multiplied and some people have sought asylum overseas. According to Amnesty International, homosexuality is illegal in 38 of 54 countries in Africa. It carries the death penalty in Mauritania, Sudan and Somalia; in northern Nigeria, where Islamic law is practiced, the penalty can be death by stoning. In Senegal, the press regularly “outs” gays and same-sex relations carry a penalty of five years in prison. Another severe law has been passed by Uganda’s Legislature, but President Yoweri Museveni has not and should not sign it.

    Such laws violate commitments made by United Nations members in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other human rights documents.

    If these nations cannot do the humane thing, they should at least consider their self-interest. For any leader who values stability, it makes no sense to promote new laws that foment greater hostility among people, like in Nigeria, where there is already ethnic tension.

    Even in countries where antigay laws are not enforced, they provide an excuse for abuse — including blackmail and extortion — by police, Amnesty International said. It is unlikely that any of these countries can reach their full economic potential because many foreign entities may find it too risky to invest in such hostile environments. These governments, in abusing their citizens, are moving in dangerous and destructive directions.

    – New York Times

     

  • Triumph of reason

    Triumph of reason

    •The redeployment of Joseph Mbu marks victory of national interest over parochial concerns

    IT last, controversial Commissioner of Police Joseph Mbu has been redeployed from Rivers State. This, in a way, marks the triumph of the campaign against impunity. Many Nigerians and groups had wondered why the police authority dithered in getting him moved despite heavy allegations that he acted in ways considered blatantly partisan and contrary to the ethics of the force. He was seen as an antagonist of Governor Rotimi Amaechi who is constitutionally regarded as the state’s Chief Security Officer. Rather than complement the state government and take instructions from the governor, as provided in the constitution, he became a law unto himself. Prior to his redeployment, Mbu’s conduct had threatened the peace of the state on many occasions. At a point, he blocked the road leading to the Government House and turned back the governor and his entourage; he prevented rallies by those considered loyal to the governor; he got the House of Assembly sealed off and generally got the police perceived as an unfriendly force. It is curious that, days after the Police Service Commission declared that it could not redeploy the commissioner owing to a case in court, the man was eventually removed. That was after the All Progressives Congress (APC) had brought the matter to the front burner of high politics by instructing its members in the National Assembly to block consideration and passage of all executive bills, especially the 2014 Appropriation Bill. The redeployment is a vindication of the extraordinary step taken by the political party and an indication that the opposition could actually serve as watchdog for public interest. We are however surprised that all CP Mbu got as punishment for nearly plunging the state into anarchy was a redeployment. The allegations against him ought to have been thoroughly investigated and, if found guilty, he deserved full punishment from the police authority. If, too, he was cleared of the charges, the report should be made public. Until a full report on what transpired in the state is presented, Mbu should not be taken to another state. The Nigerian people deserve the best; the very best. The redeployment is a soft-landing that tends to confirm the suggestion that he was on a mission at the behest of some political interest. At the heart of this is President Goodluck Jonathan who is both the Commander- in-Chief of the Armed Forces and leader of the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). Those who find themselves occupying sensitive offices like the presidency should place the national interest above narrow partisan concerns. Otherwise, peace and tranquility cannot be guaranteed in the land. We call on Mbu’s successor in Rivers State to learn from the experience of his predecessor. He must see himself as a servant of the people, subordinate himself to civil authorities and work with the state government in ensuring that the best interest of the people is served. The task before him is daunting as he now has to sanitise the system and boost confidence in the force. For no reason must the state be allowed to degenerate once again to the den of kidnappers and armed robbers. Rivers State is so important to the national economy that law and order must be promoted there at all times. The drive for foreign investment would fail unless those being invited see the system as fair, and the environment tranquil. In the next one year, the political theatre all over the country would be agog with activities and Rivers State is one of the likely flash-points. The tension can only be doused by a force deemed fair and firm. It takes a police force that could rise above petty local interests to draw the necessary support from the citizens. The force should be seen as an impartial arbiter in conflicts, not an interested party.