The Nation Newspaper

Category: Editorial

  • Burden-some privatisation

    Burden-some privatisation

    •Govt should have sorted out PHCN workers’ entitlements before handing over to the new investors

    We were made to believe that privatisation of the defunct Power Holding Company of Nigeria (PHCN) was not meant to inflict spite on employees of the company but to bring about stable power supply in the country. But it is bad that the country is yet to see any improvement in power supply and even worse is the fact that thousands of former employees of the erstwhile PHCN have not been paid their entitlements months after the Federal Government publicly declared the process closed, by formally handing over to successor companies. Yet, most of these employees have been relieved of their posts, with nothing to show for their years of toil at the public utility company.

    As a measure of last resort, these aggrieved employees, under the aegis of the National Union of Electricity Employees, NUEE, have embarked on spontaneous protests across the federation. The employees have justifiably embraced the best option of bringing their debilitating plight to the public domain. In Ibadan, about 150 ex-workers and some of those retained by the Ibadan Electricity Distribution Company reportedly marched from the NUEE secretariat on Ring Road to the company’s office on the same road.  In Bauchi, over 50 per cent of the PHCN workers that were sacked by the new owners of the successor companies trooped to the streets. At the Jebba Power Station, no less than 250 members of the union staged a peaceful protest. Quite surprisingly too, most of the more than 60 per cent of the workers that have not been paid their entitlements in Lagos were at the headquarters of the Ikeja Electricity Distribution Company and other district offices of the power station across the state, to express their disenchantment.

    We consider as sad the fact that about 25,000 workers reportedly could not access the pension component of their entitlements while families of about 1,000 deceased employees of the defunct power firm that died in active service are yet to receive their entitlements. Equally more dumbfounding is the revelation that over 5,000 workers who retired statutorily are yet to be paid their gratuities. Yet, it was reported with fanfare last year that the Accountant-General of the Federation had sent money to the various banks to pay those entitlements; but allegations in public domain show that some of the banks are withholding the money for inexplicable reasons.

    Mr. Wisdom Nwachukwu, Chairman, NUEE, Abuja chapter, captures the alleged notoriety of the banks: “We had learnt of what they (banks) were doing…We have cases of people that have been paid with wrong account numbers. We gave them the real account details, they paid with the wrong account details of which the money will not go and the money goes back to them.” When all these problems have not been sorted out, why the haste by the Federal Government to hand over PHCN to the investors? The commonsensical thing to do would have been for the government to create a time-lag for the payments of entitlements and hearing of complaints there-from before handing over to those that bought the different components of the company. Those investors have now compounded the problems by sacking these employees before final payment of their severance entitlements.

    The investors too, not only the government, should be highly bothered because they could not just be collecting money from consumers without providing service for which the company was sold to them. At a period when the electricity situation in the country is worsening, the investors/government cannot afford to further incur the wrath of these denied employees that know the nitty- gritty of operations of ex-PHCN. Further delay of their entitlements is nothing but indirect invitation to avoidable sabotage. To us, this electricity privatisation transition is becoming a burden.

     

  • China and Japan scramble for Africa

    China and Japan scramble for Africa

    China and Japan have sparred over disputed islands in the East China Sea. They have clashed over visits to a shrine in Tokyo and they have locked rhetorical horns in the editorial pages of a British newspaper, in which their respective ambassadors compared each other’s country to the dark forces of Harry Potter’s Voldemort. Now their travelling dispute has journeyed yet further afield: to Africa.

    Last week, Shinzo Abe, Japan’s prime minister, visited three African countries in an effort to drum up business and goodwill. The first Japanese prime minister to spend time on the continent in eight years, he visited Côte d’Ivoire, Mozambique and Ethiopia in what he said was a “new frontier of Japanese diplomacy”. Japan has been a long-time aid donor to Africa, though it cannot match the huge amounts China is pouring into the continent. Still, in June, Tokyo hosted nearly 40 African leaders, pledging to step up commercial engagement as well as offering $14bn in assistance over five years.

    There was a subtext to Mr Abe’s visit. One of his spokesmen could not resist comparing Japan’s modus operandi in Africa with that of China, which he characterised as extractive, exploitative and conducive to corruption. Japan, he said smilingly, “cannot provide African leaders with beautiful houses or beautiful ministerial buildings”. Instead Tokyo’s policy was to “aid the human capital of Africa”. Not surprisingly, Chinese diplomats rose to the bait. One sought to expose the “real Japan” – by holding up photographs depicting Japanese atrocities during the second world war.

    None of this is very edifying. The truth is that China’s interest in African resources – while not being devoid of the characteristics described by Tokyo’s spokesman – has been a net positive for Africa. Chinese engagement has coincided with much better economic prospects for several countries, particularly those endowed with energy or commodities whose prices have risen as a consequence of Chinese demand. True, Chinese companies rely too heavily on Chinese workers. True too, Beijing has been willing to do deals with African leaders without obvious qualms about who benefits from the largesse. Yet Chinese engagement has done much good. Though Beijing has sometimes built white elephants, it has also greatly improved Africa’s infrastructure, indispensable for development. Western engagement with Africa before China came on the scene was hardly a role model: colonialism followed by postcolonial hand-ringing and scant economic progress. Neither has Japan’s record been unblemished. Too often, Japanese aid was tied to the benefit of Japanese companies.

    If the rhetoric could be cooled, however, much good could come of Japan’s renewed push, which matches the diplomatic and commercial effort Mr Abe is making closer to home in the likes of India, Indonesia and Vietnam. Africa can help Tokyo’s quest for friends and commercial opportunity. Japan needs to diversify its sources of energy, particularly after the Fukushima disaster left most of its nuclear power stations idle. Japan also needs a fresh source of rare earths. Africa too could provide a market for Japanese goods – both industrial and consumer. For the latter, Japanese companies will have to get better at tailoring products to less affluent markets. Africa can even be “useful” in Mr Abe’s quest to prove that Japan is a constructive member of the international community, not the military threat China implies. Japan already has 400 troops in South Sudan as part of a UN peacekeeping force.

    Tokyo should continue to engage with Africa on all fronts and to prove that it offers an attractive alternative. Competition with China is inevitable, both ideological and commercial. But it would be better not to shout about it.

     

    – Financial Times

  • Same-sex storm

    Law against same-sex marriage is in tandem with our cultural belief

    The raging global controversy over same-sex marriage has been expanded by a formal Nigerian standpoint with President Goodluck Jonathan signing the Same Sex Marriage Prohibition Bill 2013 into law. Interestingly, it is reflective of the contentious debate that notable Western nations, the United States of America (USA) and Canada, as well as the European Union (EU), have separately criticised the new law, with a common thread alleging a violation of “fundamental human rights.” Indeed, Canada reportedly cancelled Jonathan’s scheduled state visit in February on account of issues related to the law. Instructively, the prominent international rights organisation, Amnesty International, also expressed grave misgivings, and described the law as “discriminatory.”

    It would appear that these negative reactions to an essentially local development mirror the burden of countries in the context of a so-called global village. The line between internal and external affairs seems to have become so blurred that outsiders now take it for granted that they have a say in another country’s domestic issues.

    American Secretary of State, John Kerry, and Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister, John Baird, who issued statements saying that their countries were “deeply concerned”, hinged their positions on the question of rights and freedoms. Kerry argued that the law “dangerously restricts freedom of assembly, association and expression for all Nigerians,” adding that it is “inconsistent with Nigeria’s international legal obligations and undermines the democratic reforms and human rights protections enshrined in its 1999 Constitution.” Also expressing concern about the anti-gay law, the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and Vice President of the Commission, Catherine Ashton, in a statement declared that “The European Union is opposed to discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation.”

    In a significant sense, these voices could be regarded as belonging to interlopers, which was implied by the country’s presidential spokesman Reuben Abati, who said, “We have received enquiries from some foreign embassies on why the bill was signed into law and told them our cultural values do not tolerate same-sex marriage.” He added: “More than 90 per cent of Nigerians are opposed to same-sex marriage. So the law is in line with our culture and religious beliefs as a people. And I think that this law is made for a people and what the government has done is consistent with the preference of its environment.”

    The country’s criminalisation of homosexuality, which means that anyone in a same-sex marriage or union would face up to 14 years in prison, also makes it illegal for anyone to operate or participate in gay clubs, societies and organisations, or to officiate, witness, abet or aid the solemnisation of same-sex marriage, which attracts a 10-year jail term. In addition, such partnerships concretised overseas are considered void in Nigeria. Fundamentally, the law states that “Only a marriage contract between a man and a woman shall be recognised in Nigeria.”

    At bottom, this disagreement is actually about cultural evolution. It is not only illogical but also domineering for the West, which claims to accept the actuality of human and cultural diversity, to insist that its own cultural perspective must prevail. It goes without saying that even the reality of increasing globalisation must accommodate the idea of cultural sovereignty. What is more, the fact that the law emerged from a democratic process, which the West is always quick to promote, should be a validation.

    It qualifies as meddlesomeness, this apparent disrespect for the country’s own viewpoint on publicised same-sex relationship. It should be pointed out that the world is far from an agreement on this oddity, and no one should assume the authority of forcing it down the throats of people who have different values. It is objectionable that the Canadian spokesman, perhaps speaking the minds of the gay supporters’ circle, went to the extreme of explicitly calling for the repeal of the law.

     

  • Borno bomb blast

    •Time to stop the carnage

    After one year of relative peace, Maiduguri, the Borno State capital was in turmoil again, when a car bomb killed 19 persons and injured about 40 others on January 14. The incident occurred at a commercial area populated by traders in the ancient city. Alhaji Lawan Tanko, the state commissioner of police who confirmed the incident said: “It is true that we had a blast at the GSM market after a suicide bomber driving in a firewood seller’s vehicle detonated his bomb around 1p.m. Security agents rushed to the scene and cordoned off the place to restore normalcy”.

    A survivor, Aisha Hassan, gave a more graphic account of the explosions:”I saw two boys on the ground and their bodies cut into pieces. Two other cars immediately caught fire and I ran away because there was too much blood”.

    Coming on a day that Muslims worldwide were celebrating the birthday of Prophet Mohammed, the question now is: who could have been responsible for the attack, and for what purpose? Could it be another attack by the Boko Haram? These are questions begging for answers.

    But, irrespective of who is responsible for the bombing and the purpose, we condemn the attack on innocent members of the public, who in most cases have no idea what the issues for which they are being killed or traumatised is all about. It is unfortunate that some Nigerians do not believe in the sanctity of lives, and would thus kill at the slightest provocation or even for no just cause.

    We are however particularly worried about the recrudescence of violence in Borno because we do not want it to be a permanent feature of the state that has enjoyed relative peace in about a year. In the first place, it is bad for development which the state badly needs; second, it will heat up the polity, which is equally bad for the state in particular, and the country at large.

    We saw a lot of challenges and deaths that past rancour in the state caused, including the attacks by the Boko Haram sect. That is for the living who still have hope of recovering because they are alive. But nothing can be done to bring the dead back to life. No doubt, the crises in Borno in the past week or thereabout are as unfortunate as they are avoidable. We call on Governor Kashim Shettima and his erstwhile political godfather, Ali Sheriff, to close ranks and call their supporters to order. They should eschew politics with bitterness and be tolerant of one another.

    It is important for us to caution against any form of infighting in the state, especially in view of the statement by the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Prof Attahiru Jega, not to conduct elections in the northeast state if the state of emergency there is not lifted before the 2015 elections. We have joined others to condemn the electoral commission boss for contemplating not to conduct elections in the state due to the emergency when general elections are still more than 13 months away, unless the commission had any other agenda or it was flying a kite. But then, politicians in the state should not play into the commission’s hands or the hands of people who would not want elections to hold in the state, for obvious reasons. The political gladiators must embrace peace and do their politicking with decorum. They should not let Jega’s prediction come to pass.

    Meanwhile, we urge the security agents to investigate the cause of the bomb blast and identify those responsible, with a view to bringing them to book.

     

  • Laudable judgment

    Laudable judgment

    • FG should comply with judgment on fiscal autonomy for judiciary

    The recent judgment of the Federal High Court, Abuja, which ruled in favour of fiscal autonomy for the judiciary, is in tandem with the provision of the 1999 constitution. The judgment was delivered in a suit brought by the Judicial Staff Union of Nigeria (JUSUN). In his judgment, Justice Ademola Adeniyi ordered that the funds in the revenue account of the federation, due to the judiciary, should be paid to the heads of court, as envisaged by section 81(3) of the 1999 constitution. We add that other funds due to important organs of state, like the Independent National Electoral Commission, (INEC), should also be paid directly to them.

    It is absolutely in the common interest of our democracy that the provisions and intent of our constitution should be manifestly obeyed. A situation where the executive, with the connivance of the legislature, abuse the rights and prerogatives of the judiciary with respect to their constitutionally guaranteed independence must stop. Unfortunately, this flagrant abuse of our constitution is experienced at the federal and state levels of government. At the state, most governors view the judiciary as an appendage of their executive powers, and sometimes treat the courts as mere irritants. This too must stop.

    The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) and the senior lawyers, who have thrown their weight in favour of the ruling of the court, must walk their talk. They can do this by defending the judgment if appealed against, up to the Supreme Court. We also urge the courts not to shy away from asserting their constitutionally guaranteed independence. The heads of courts must stand up to the abuse from the executive, and insist that monies approved in the budget for them, should be released in tandem with the country’s constitution.

    The Attorney-General of the Federation and the states’ attorney-generals must also show interest in this matter. After all, they were first admitted as lawyers before they were appointed as attorney generals by the executive authority; so they have a responsibility to espouse the provisions of the constitution and vehemently defend it. Part of their responsibility to the profession should include standing up for the rule of law and defending the independence and integrity of the judiciary. Indeed, the constitution expressly regards attorney-generals as the Chief Law Officers, and it is only fair to live up their titles.

    It is also expected that a financially autonomous judiciary will rise up to defend her integrity, by being uncompromisingly independent in its judgments. As Nigerians witnessed in recent past, there has been accusations of corrupt influence, within the judiciary; especially with respect to judgments on electoral matters. Our hope, and we believe that of many Nigerians, is that if the judiciary exercises its financial independence, it would be less influenced by the executive, and its judgments will help heal our political process.

    For financial autonomy to be really meaningful, the judiciary must also purge itself of corruption, both of the judicial process and fund management. After all, financial autonomy would mean that the judges and other judicial workers will be better paid, and unless that transforms to comprehensive integrity of the whole process; then it will be of little value.

    Again, financial autonomy should come with prudent management of resources by the heads of the court; as it would be tragic if the heads see such a development as opportunity to help themselves to the commonwealth of their constituency, as we see in the executive and legislative arms. In all, it is heart-warming that JUSUN has prodded a match to constitutionalism.

  • Ariel Sharon (1928-2014)

    Ariel Sharon (1928-2014)

    •The former Israeli Prime Minister, who started as a hawk, ended a campaigner for peace

    The death, on January 11, of former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, marked the end of an era in the 65-year history of Israel. In military pursuits and political engagement, Sharon probably stood taller than any other figure in the country.

    Starting with the War of Independence of 1948, to the Suez Crisis in 1956, the Six-Day War of 1967, the Yom Kippur War of 1973 and the 1982 Lebanon War, Sharon was the hawk behind the push not just for the defence of the Jewish state, but its expansionist bid. He sought for domination of the region and contributed immensely to the famed military strength of his country.

    He was different things to different people, though. To the Jews and the military establishment, he was the perfect commander and patriot. But, to the international human rights movement, he was guilty of crimes against humanity. The Palestinians considered him a criminal and murderer who must be brought to justice even after death.

    It is difficult for anyone to forget the role the late Sharon played in 1982 when the Israeli military invaded Lebanon and attacked refugee camps in Sabra and Shatila. Even moderates in Israel denounced the unilateral decision taken by the defence minister and this was further established by the Kahan Commission. The commission said Sharon should bear “personal responsibility” for the avoidable bloodshed of the innocent in that needless expedition. He had to resign.

    The early part of his political career saw him pushing in the same direction. Between 1977 and 1999, as a leader and participant in Likud governments, he continued to advocate the establishment of illegal Israeli settlements in Gaza and the West Bank. In the process, extremist Palestinian resistance movements like the Hamas stood up to their stronger neighbours who were backed by the West. The result was constant spill of blood.

    However, it also put the Israeli on edge; they had to be on red alert all the time. All these took a toll on the small state and the Arab world constantly drew the attention of the world to the alleged crimes against humanity being committed by Israel.

    As prime minister, Sharon attempted to correct his mistakes. Realising the futility of fighting all the time, he began a series of unilateral withdrawal of forces and people from the Gaza and West Bank. He also became a convert to negotiations.

    This provoked crisis in his party and, by 2005, he established the Kadima Party that would have been his platform to fight the next election. By January 4, 2006, he was incapacitated by stroke and he remained in that state for eight years before succumbing to death about six weeks to his 86th birthday.

    Whatever might be said of the late general, there is no doubt that he loved his country and would do anything, including laying down his life, for its survival. Ariel Sharon fought on the battle field for Israel; he worked on the political field for the country and, when it appeared to him that the country had gained stability, he embraced the option of peace.

    African leaders could borrow a leaf from his single-minded devotion to his country. At his death, and when on the political scene, corruption was never an issue in all the responsibilities he bore for his country.

    It behooves other Israeli leaders to advance the cause of justice, fairness, unity, good-neighbourliness, diplomacy and peace. This is the option to a settled Israeli nation.

     

  • Elusive power

    Elusive power

    • For the umpteenth time, Presidency shifts the goal-post

    WHEN will Nigerians enjoy stable power supply? This salient question becomes imperative in view of the new twist introduced by the Federal Government. The Presidency, through Professor Chinedu Nebo, Minister of Power, at a workshop on the inauguration of the 29th President of the Nigerian Society of Engineers (NSE), in Abuja, declared: “We are not saying constant power supply by June this year is an error. We are saying there will be improved power supply. If you were getting eight hours and you now get 10 or 12 hours, it is improved; that is what we are shouting for. But the ultimate uninterrupted power supply, which is Mr. President’s goal, has to come much later.’

    This means that the government can only assure of improved power supply and not the hitherto mantra of stable electricity in the country by the middle of this year. To the Presidency, visible power supply translates to 10 or 12 hours of intervallic electricity to consumers, who are reportedly getting less than 10 hours of interrupted power supply at the moment.

    The government now seems helpless about the poor state of power when it admitted defeat that the ‘goal of stable electricity in the country would take some time to achieve.’ This was not the official position when the Power Holding Company of Nigeria (PHCN) was about to be sold, surprisingly to mostly cronies of powerful elements in the corridors of power.

    We are however not surprised that the private sector investors in the power generation and distribution companies are already complaining that the President’s ultimatum for improved power could be threatened by the inefficiency of the Transmission Company of Nigeria and inadequate supply of gas to thermal power generation plants.

    Beyond these complaints is the issue of funds constraint and porous financial status of the procured power company. The distribution companies (DISCOs) have been vociferous in their complaints of what they met on ground. The question now is: Was due diligence not done on PHCN before the company was procured? Obvious from the complaints is the fact that they were all so much in haste to buy up the place from their powerful friends in power that due diligence was at that period of little consequence to them. Thus, rudimentary problems that ought to have informed their decision during the process of purchase are now impeding the operations of the investors that may very soon get more confused with the operations of their priced possessions.

    It is ludicrous that a government that cannot guarantee stable electricity supply in urban and city centres across the country is planning another ambitious project of Operation Light-up Rural Nigeria targeted at providing power to individuals in rural areas that were hitherto not connected to the national grid. The Operation Light-up Rural Nigeria that was inaugurated by President Goodluck Jonathan in Durumi, a community in Mpape, Abuja, is reportedly 100 per cent solar-driven and is expected to provide relief to medium and small scale enterprises. We hope that this will not end up as another case of an ill thought-out initiative.

    At the centre of Nigeria’s economic/industrial survival lies stable electricity and a well managed power sector. Unfortunately, these two cannot be guaranteed while the hope of constant electricity supply looks forlorn, especially now that the Presidency has publicly admitted that it cannot guarantee stable power supply for the nation. Initially, we thought that with the privatisation of the power sector, the expected results will come, but events have shown that the policy was not well thought-out. Nebo’s argument is neither here nor there; though he was able to indict this administration as one that cannot keep its promise, which is why it still erroneously provides monetary guarantee, upon demand, to power sector investors, after the sale of the PHCN.

    It is sad that the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has been taking Nigerians for granted, especially on the issue of power supply, with every administration shifting the goal post as it pleases, on when Nigerians should expect stable electricity supply.

  • Express see-saw

    Express see-saw

    •Jonathan flip-flops on Lagos-Ibadan Expressway

    FROM the Lagos-Ibadan Expressway, it is a tale of presidential flip-flop, driving a concession see-saw. It is an unflattering badge of an unthinking presidency. Yet, that artery is the most vital gateway into the country: for nobody gets into, or out of the country via Lagos, without traversing it.

    The July 2013 re-launch, by President Goodluck Jonathan, of the project now to cost N167 billion, to be completed in four years, was a laudable triumph over Bi-Courtney, a willing but failed concessionaire, that took the job for N89.53 billion. Though that re-launch came with full media glory, it also came with the unmitigated pains of travellers, stranded on the road for hours.

    Six months later, however, the President, pleading cash crunch, appears back in the cold embrace of a seeming concession Concert of the Unwilling; to which the Federal Government is desperately trying to sell the project, not to talk of a possible legal backlash. Jonathan’s back-door concession is a clear contravention of the government’s Public-Private Participation processes. Presidential incompetence never loomed so large!

    By the law, any PPP project ought to be advertised by the Infrastructure Concession Regulatory Commission (ICRC), after initiation by the relevant government body. This advert is to shop for competitive bidding. Pre-advertisement, the initiating agency too ought to have synergised the project with the government’s grand infrastructure investment strategy; and secure its procurement under the federal budget for the years the project would be executed.

    But what the President is planning now is going to ICRC, with the Infrastructure Bank (IB) and the two contractors, Julius Berger Plc and Reynolds Construction Company Ltd (RCC) in tow, to seek approval in arrears, for the new proposals. The Federal Government and IB would work in concert to guarantee the government’s N50 billion counterpart funding, while Julius Berger and RCC, the two contractors now turned PPP partners, would raise the remaining N117 billion.

    It is not known if the two are willing or unwilling partners. What is known is, so far, road concession is no core business of the duo. It is however clear that the two are nervous about committing funds to a government project, without legal guarantees that they would recoup their investments. That perhaps has triggered the new PPP proposals, even if the whole thing is enveloped in opacity.

    Though the proposal inevitably includes tolling for investors to recoup their money, nobody, for now, knows how long the tolling would last. In the aborted Bi-Courtney deal, the tolling was for 25 years.

    On tolling, however, the spectre of litigation is likely. Tolling, during the Olusegun Obasanjo Presidency, fell to the charge of double taxation, since the government could not possibly integrate road taxation in fuel pump prizes, and continue to charge tolls on the same roads. To save the new tax then, Obasanjo, post-haste, demolished the toll plazas. It is possible, therefore, that Organised Labour and the human rights community might go to court to contest the tolling, therefore increasing the cloud of uncertainty on this very important artery.

    Besides, what really is happening to the federation’s treasury? It is bad enough that a President announced his commitment to a project with a public launch, only to jerk awake months later to realise he did not have the cash to back his bluff!

    It is also the eve of a major election — so, could some smart alecs be emptying the till and the administration playing none the wiser? With the country yet to recover from how Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) explained away how it spent the “missing” US$ 10.8 billion, President Jonathan has presented citizens with another quandary: no money for projects already approved. Linked to that, revenue for December 2013 came 20% short.

    What is happening: systemic stealing to fund election ala 2012 subsidy scam, or just plain incompetence by a distracted President and his overblown economic managers?

    The National Assembly should probe the Federal Government finances. If we are in genuine trouble, it should help with legislations to save the situation. If there is hanky-panky, its probe should help bring to book those responsible for it.

  • Mixed results for Mideast democracy

    Mixed results for Mideast democracy

    A constitution is supposed to be a set of governing principles around which citizens can unite and peacefully build a democratic state. Tunisia is providing a constructive path to this goal. Egypt is not. Sadly, Egypt is on the verge of enacting a Constitution that would effectively legitimize last year’s coup and further enable the kind of authoritarian system that the 2011 revolution was intended to displace.

    Egypt’s Constitution gives power and immunity to the military and is widely seen as an opening for the country’s defense minister and top general, Abdul-Fattah el-Sisi, to run for president. Tunisia’s constituent assembly, meanwhile, is expected to approve soon one of the most liberal constitutions in the Arab world.

    Tunisia’s prospects for a democratic outcome — after the ouster of the strongman, President Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali in 2011 — have always been better. With a population eight times smaller than Egypt and close ties to Europe, it has largely avoided political score-settling against its former elite and kept its military under civilian control.

    Tunisia, too, has had its dark days, including political assassinations, an economic crisis, threats from Islamists and deadlock over an elected, moderate-but-ineffective Islamic government. But last month, the government and the secular opposition reached an accommodation that provided for a caretaker prime minister and allowed work on the charter to proceed. The Islamists won wording in the Constitution stating that Islam is Tunisia’s religion but gave up any reference to Islamic law. The more liberal parties secured guarantees that Tunisia would remain a civil state with separation of powers and freedoms and rights normally associated with a democracy.

    Egypt is a different story. Although thousands of Egyptians turned out for the constitutional referendum on Tuesday and Wednesday, the process was anything but free or fair.

    The vote came after the military, with popular backing, ousted Mohamed Morsi, the country’s first freely elected president in July, then proceeded to carry out a series of crackdowns on protesters that killed more than 1,000 people and effectively seized control. The government has crushed the Muslim Brotherhood’s party, arrested its leaders, seized its assets and criminalized membership. It shut down Egyptian news media sympathetic to the Brotherhood and arrested secular activists merely for trying to hang signs or stickers opposing the new charter.

    As in any democratic evolution, there are certain to be plenty of stumbles ahead in Tunisia. On Wednesday, for instance, hundreds of lawyers and judges demonstrated outside the constituent assembly building in Tunis to condemn the draft Constitution, which they say does not guarantee the independence of the judiciary. Still, the process, and the text of the charter so far, offers hope that Tunisians are figuring out a reasonable way to move forward.

    That is not the case in Egypt where many of the activists who risked their lives to overthrow President Hosni Mubarak in 2011 in favor of greater political freedoms have either given up or bought into the military’s promise that only it can restore stability and move the country forward. General Sisi’s election as president may well bring stability, but only at the cost of democracy.

    – New York Times

     

  • Polio paralysis

    Polio paralysis

    Ending Nigeria’s global shame

    Nigeria’s status as one of only three countries where poliomyelitis is still prevalent is a sobering affirmation of the monstrous paradoxes that bedevil it. The fact that India with 1.2 billion people has just been declared polio-free makes the Nigerian predicament truly lamentable indeed.

    India’s achievement cannot be underestimated. Determined efforts were made to confront the polio scourge in the early 80s, involving prodigious logistics and organisational efforts, and resulting in enormous vaccination rounds in which 2.4 million volunteers immunised 170 million children during each exercise. From 741 polio cases in 2009, the number fell to just one in 2011, and the country was removed from the list of polio-endemic countries a year later. The three-year absence of infections has enabled the country to be declared officially free of polio. In that regard, it will be joining countries like Nepal and Gambia, not to mention the world’s developed and middle-income countries.

    Nigeria’s polio problem is a characteristic combination of several interlocking factors. They include the failure of successive administrations to treat the issue with the seriousness that it deserves; widespread suspicions of the anti-polio campaign in parts of northern Nigeria; and the outbreak of unrest in the country’s north-east.

    The decline in national immunisation policy is a particularly significant shortcoming. After launching vigorous campaigns against communicable childhood diseases during the tenure of the late Professor Olikoye Ransome-Kuti during the late 80s, Nigeria took its foot off the pedal, thereby allowing diseases like polio to make a comeback. Matters were made worse by the relatively low allocations to health in national budgets over the years. Even though N262 billion has been allocated to health in the 2014 budget proposals by the Jonathan administration, over 82 per cent of that amount will be for recurrent expenditure.

    The decision by the governments of Kano, Kaduna and Zamfara states to suspend polio immunisation campaigns in October 2003 was another self-inflicted blow. Widespread suspicion that the vaccination effort was part of a western-inspired plot to make Muslims sterile or infect them with HIV stymied efforts to immunise children against polio. In spite of sustained public-enlightenment campaigns and efforts to analyse the vaccines in Muslim-majority countries, many citizens in those states and elsewhere in northern Nigeria still regard the immunisation process with great suspicion. Medical officials and volunteers have been attacked by communities opposed to the immunisation of their children.

    The outbreak of widespread civil unrest in the country’s north-east aggravated an already-bad situation, as the shooting and bombing campaign of the militant Boko Haram endangered the delivery of effective healthcare services. Survival rather than health has apparently become the major concern.

    The consequences of these factors have been devastating. Nigeria is said to be the only country in the world to harbour all three serotypes of the polio virus, namely wild poliovirus type 1, wild poliovirus type 3, and circulating vaccine-derived poliovirus type 2. Although it has succeeded in reducing transmission of the disease in other parts of the country, its inability to finish it off has caused its recurrence in Nigeria and its transmission across national borders. The country’s streets are replete with the pathetic sight of polio victims, most of whom are compelled to beg for alms, as efforts to properly rehabilitate them are often arbitrary and inadequate.

    India has shown that polio can be beaten with proper planning and commitment. Nigeria can achieve similar goals if it confronts the polio issue with the seriousness that it so obviously requires. One of the first things is to ensure that adequate financial resources are committed to the anti-polio effort. While non-governmental organisations like the Rotary Club, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Dangote Foundation are committing substantial resources to the campaign, it is vital for the Federal Government and affected states to ensure that their financial commitments are similarly reliable. In addition, they must be at the forefront in ensuring that the cultural misgivings which still prevent some Nigerians from immunising their children are overcome.

    There is also the vital need to revamp the nation’s social infrastructure. Polio, like so many other diseases, is an affliction which thrives on poverty, ignorance and insanitary conditions. These must be rectified if the war against polio is to be won. A truly comprehensive anti-polio campaign, therefore, must involve the provision of potable water, adequate housing, proper waste disposal and functional education.

    It is no surprise that Nigeria’s partners in the polio club are Afghanistan and Pakistan, two countries beset by serious security challenges. Peace must return to Nigeria’s north-east if development activities are to continue in the area, to say nothing of immunisation campaigns.

    If all goes well and Nigeria is able to halt transmission and go on to eradicate polio, the country could be declared polio-free by 2018. The time for working towards that happy conclusion begins now.