Category: Editorial

• Nigeria’s senior citizens are not being properly catered for

These are not the best times for Nigeria when it comes to assessing the country’s position on international rankings of general well-being. Apart from recently being proclaimed one of the worst countries in which to be born, it now appears that Africa’s self-proclaimed giant is also one of the most terrible nations to grow old in. The Global Age Watch Index 2013 has just ranked Nigeria 85th out of the 91 nations surveyed, placing it behind countries like Costa Rica (28th), Sri Lanka (36th) and Ghana (69th). Even the troubled territories of the West Bank and Gaza (84th) are better-placed than Nigeria.

The survey ranked the well-being of the elderly in the chosen countries by comparing data from the World Health Organisation (WHO) and other agencies on their incomes, health, education employment and environment. Sweden, Norway and Germany occupied the first three positions, while Pakistan, Tanzania and Afghanistan came 89th, 90th and 91st, respectively.

For a country whose indigenous traditions venerate old age, it is truly shameful that Nigeria should find itself in this position. It is evident that the country has not done enough to compensate for the rapid decline of the extended-family system under which older citizens were able to enjoy care, relevance and respect.

While states like Ekiti, Osun, Delta, Lagos and Jigawa have programmes aimed at assisting older Nigerians, it is obvious that the infrastructure needed to adequately meet the requirements of the aged is largely absent. There is no equivalent of the United States’ Medicare programme which provides subsidised healthcare for the elderly; the country’s decrepit pensions system often fails to meet its obligations to the elderly, and certainly does not take their special needs into consideration. There is no comprehensive system of subsidised housing, transport or recreation worth speaking of.

It is therefore no surprise that Nigeria has begun to witness the unwelcome phenomenon of destitution among its older citizens. Homelessness is perhaps the clearest manifestation of this; bus-stops, parks and gardens have become homes for some elderly citizens who have been let down by governments whose duty it is to care for them. Many older Nigerians discover that retirement is a luxury that they cannot afford and so are compelled to re-enter the labour force in a variety of menial jobs which they are usually unable to carry out effectively. Those who fall sick are sometimes abandoned by their own families and left to die slow, lingering deaths.

Nigeria’s inability to properly cater for its elderly citizens is all the more worrying given the fact that the world is greying at a rapid pace. By the year 2050, older people are expected to outnumber under-15s for the first time. Their special requirements will, as a result, become even more important than they currently are.

If the country is not to be caught unawares, it will have to expand its social infrastructure in such a way as to reflect the needs of the elderly. Medical facilities, transportation systems, housing, town planning and pension systems need to be completely reconfigured to reflect emerging realities.

In order to achieve this, the country requires an accurate database of its older citizens so as to know how many they are, where they reside and what their socio-economic and health status is. In addition, mass unemployment must be tackled; it is when citizens are gainfully employed that they can participate in the contributory pension schemes that can take care of them when they are no longer able to work.

Just as importantly, prevailing social attitudes must change: many Nigerians have the nasty habit of ignoring the elderly, only to mourn them ostentatiously when they pass on. Instead of expending time and money on wasteful funerals and hypocritical eulogies, it would be better for the nation’s senior citizens to be accorded the attention they deserve while they are still alive.

IT is common knowledge that Nigeria is the largest importer of generators in the world; it is also common knowledge that the country has a high prevalence of corruption. In short, that Nigeria is a country of absurdities is well known. Perhaps what is not public knowledge is the extent of the absurdities. Thanks to the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), that has also revealed that the country is currently the largest importer of US dollars.

But that seems set to change, with the latest apex bank’s policy banning importation of the United States dollars and other foreign currencies without approval. The bank’s deputy governor, economic policy, Dr Sarah Alade, who disclosed the new measure, said in a statement issued on October 1 that the move was aimed at saving the naira and the economy at large from external threats and dominance.

“In its determination to save the naira and the Nigerian economy from external threats and dominance, the CBN has banned the importation of all foreign currencies, except with the approval of the CBN. The latest move is sequel to the bank’s withdrawal of the operating licences of 20 Bureaux de Change found to have purchased and sold huge sums of United States’ dollars with no documentation to show details of the transactions”.

The alarm here must be in the fact that the CBN is only now waking up to a practice that has not only endured, but has actually contributed to undermining its ability to manage the foreign exchange market effectively. How about the laissez faire foreign exchange regime under which foreign currencies are openly traded in street corners without any controls? Does the CBN have measures in the pipeline to curb the abuses in that segment too, particularly as they also account for a sizeable chunk of the abuses? What about the increasing dollarisation of the economy – a situation that is fast eroding the status of the naira as legal tender?

The problem here is that the country’s rich and nouveau riche who indulge in the practice see it as a status symbol; just as the practice festers because there are no sanctions or disincentives to deter it. Unfortunately, the activities of the BDCs have hardly helped matters to the extent that they continue to provide shelter for the thriving racket in foreign currencies described as the ‘parallel market’. Clearly, Nigeria must be one of the few countries where this is possible, just as it is one of such countries where local transactions are done in foreign currencies.

In the circumstance, the action by the apex bank has become a necessary step to preserve the national currency, to foster transparency in forex transactions, and to curb corruption and the menace of money laundering. The CBN’s fears that the foreign currencies being imported are for other purposes other than to engage in legitimate economic activities are not entirely unfounded; this is because adequate channels already exist for those doing legitimate business to avail themselves of forex without the resort to the large volume undocumented forex. The apex bank would do well to further tighten the rule against ‘hot money’ in the system, even as it must be ready to wield the big stick appropriately, for its effort to combat currency abuse and money laundering to yield fruit.

Merely withdrawing the operating licences of the 20 culprit BDCs seems in the circumstance a slap on the wrist. They deserve more serious sanctions to deter others from engaging in the same malpractices.

The outcry by the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Aloma Mukhtar, at the opening of the legal year, that the judiciary is underfunded, is disturbing. It is even more worrisome that despite a clear constitutional provision that the money due to the judiciary should be a first-line charge on the Consolidated Fund of the federation, such anomaly is allowed.

So we ask: between the National Assembly and the Presidency, who is responsible for this apparent abuse of our Constitution? Also, it is necessary to admonish those denying the judiciary adequate funding, to remember that in the absence of law and order, democracy abdicates for anarchy.

In case the officials of the Nigerian state responsible for the underfunding of the judiciary need to be reminded, Section 81(3) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, provided that: “any amount standing to the credit of the judiciary in the consolidated revenue fund of the federation shall be paid directly to the National Judicial Council for disbursement to the heads of the courts established for the federation and the state under section 6 of this constitution”.

We also hope that the legislature and the executive appreciate the need to make adequate budgetary provision for the judiciary, without waiting for any lobbying.

It is very strange that the Federal Government will act irresponsibly by its continued reduction of the budgetary allocation to the judiciary. As stated by the CJN, “a situation where budgetary allocation to the judiciary continues to drop while the general government budget is on steady increase every year is clearly an impediment to the quick and effective dispensation of justice”.

According to the CJN, the budgetary allocation to the judiciary has been on the decline, “from N95 billion in 2010, it plunged to N85 billion in 2011, then N75 billion in 2012 and dropped again in this year’s budget to N67 billion”.

This steady decline will be better appreciated, when we realise that the overall budget of the federation has been on steady increase in the years referred to; and the increase has particularly been to service the overall emoluments of the public officials in the executive and the legislative arms.

We consider the warning by the CJN timely, when she reminded us that, “the resultant effect of a slim budget in the judiciary is that a number of courts in Nigeria today evince decay and neglect of infrastructural amenities, particularly at state level”. The further result, as she noted, is that “in some cases, the court buildings do not possess the required well equipped library for judges to conduct their research.”

Considering the constitutional responsibility placed on the judiciary as a very important arm of the tripod of any viable democracy, it would be digging our common grave to allow it to be undermined by funding.

In making this argument, we are mindful that because the legislature and executive are more visible and better positioned in a contest for the resources of the state, there may be the instinct to look after their interests, while disregarding the judiciary, which is not well positioned to join thecontest for more funding. We must warn that the price for such an error of judgement will be paid by all and sundry, including the privileged members of the executive and legislative arms of government.

We therefore join the CJN to ask for an immediate reversal in the unfair budgetary allocation to the judiciary – unless, of course, President Goodluck Jonathan and the legislature are hoping that a financially starved judiciary will be more amenable to political interference.

Police should be required to get a warrant to search a smartphone, even if it belongs to a criminal suspect. Court rulings from decades ago need updating for the digital age.

Once they place a suspect under arrest, police in many parts of this country are allowed to search the contents of his or her mobile phone — including text messages, photos, video files and contacts — without a warrant. These searches can expose a wealth of personal detail that was inconceivable to the Supreme Court 40 years ago when it gave officers wide latitude to search people and their effects when taking them into custody. It’s time for the court to adapt its doctrine to new technology. Two pending appeals provide the justices with that opportunity.

In a case from California, David Riley, a college student, was pulled over for expired tags. When police discovered that Riley had a suspended license, they impounded his car, searched it and found guns under the hood. When Riley was arrested on a gun charge, police confiscated his Samsung smartphone and searched through what one detective referred to as “lots of stuff.” They found text messages referring to a gang and a photo showing Riley and another man posed near a car that had been involved in a shooting. Riley was convicted in the shooting, after a trial in which prosecutors played a video found on his phone.

In seeking review by the Supreme Court, Riley’s lawyers noted that lower courts have been struggling to apply to cellphone searches “a set of legal rules largely developed decades ago, before the digital era.”

Also pending is the Obama administration’s appeal of a decision, by the U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, that police may not conduct warrantless searches of data on cellphones seized by arrested persons. That case involved a suspect whose phone received calls from a number identified as “my house.” When police went to the address associated with that number they found crack cocaine, marijuana, cash and a firearm.

Historically police were allowed to search the possessions of those they arrested because of the possibility that a suspect might threaten the officers with a concealed weapon or might try to destroy evidence. But in 1973 the Supreme Court said that such searches were legal even when there was no probability that weapons or evidence would be found. Bad as it was at the time, that holding threatens a vastly worse invasion of privacy when the object searched isn’t a cigarette pack but a smartphone.

The court need not agree with the 1st Circuit that warrantless searches of cellphones are always unconstitutional. It could rule more narrowly that searches are permissible when necessary to preserve evidence of the crime for which the arrest was made — for example, if there is a danger that confederates could remotely swipe incriminating information from the phone before a warrant could be obtained. But the court should make clear that police are not entitled to conduct an electronic fishing expedition into every aspect of a suspect’s life.

• Los Angeles Times

The report in major national newspapers that the presidency and the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) had concluded plans to stage a series of solidarity rallies in all parts of the country is indeed shocking.

The report, linked to a memo from the office of the National Chairman of the PDP, Alhaji Bamanga Tukur, indicates that plans had been concluded to hold a mega rally in Abuja; and other rallies at the zones and cities to “showcase the achievements of the Jonathan administration” and kick start a campaign for a second term.

We find it difficult to see the rationale for such a move at a time that the country is confronted with serious challenges. We see it as a march to an inglorious past when military leaders, out to perpetuate their holds on government lever and consolidate their seizure of the national treasury, chose to manipulate national opinion; and confuse the international community by staging such rallies. We recall, in particular, the infamous five-million man march staged by the late General Sani Abacha in Abuja when he had concluded plans to transmute from a military dictator to a civilian ruler.

The Jonathan/PDP plan is a sad reminder that all is not well with the country. Around the time that all Nigerians should be mobilised to reflect on the state of the country, the Presidency is being linked to a plan that is at best a carnival lacking in sincerity; and further draining the resources that should be used to prosecute repair of infrastructure. It is difficult to reconcile with the logic informing this move at a time that murderers, kidnappers and armed robbers are striking at will in different parts of the country. Life in Nigeria today is akin to that described by Thomas Hobbes as “short and brutish”.

We concede that the right to demonstrate support and stage protests is at the heart of democracy. It is inalienable. However, the precarious situation of things in the country dictates that the leaders should roll up their sleeves and galvanise action to keep the ship of state afloat.

A political party that has, by all standards, failed the country has no right to be faking popular support. We are worried by the security implications of such a march. What would happen if the agents of death in the land decide to strike at such a time? Wouldn’t that further polarize the country?

President Goodluck Jonathan should spend more time finding ways and means of leaving a legacy of service and honour. The shows of shame being staged by the PDP and the consequent embarrassment to the country call for more attention by the ruling party. Factions of the party are constantly at war, sometimes leading to desecration of institutions like the National Assembly that combatants in the party have turned to stages for boxing bouts. The tension created in the polity by the rancour in the party is not lost on any politically educated Nigerian. Yet, the party is said to be out to stage a rally demonstrating that it is united.

It is, in any case, immoral for the federal government to be involved in plans to stage rallies when opposition parties and leaders are daily harassed and denied such a basic right. In the last lap of his six-year tenancy of the Aso Villa, President Jonathan should think more of the mandate handed him and work for a place in the hearts of Nigerians.

No one is deceived by the denial by the official spokesman of the PDP. Nigeria deserves greater attention by those who have found themselves somewhat controlling the levers of power.