The Nation Newspaper

Category: Editorial

  • Higher education bank

    Higher education bank

    •Good idea indeed that requires tweaking

    Indigent but brilliant students that cannot pursue their dream for higher education due to lack of financial assistance may have cause to smile if the bill proposing the establishment of a higher education bank scales through in the National Assembly. The bill proposes to establish The Nigerian Education Bank, with the primary duty of granting interest-free loans to poor students seeking higher education. Tagged The Students Loan (Access to Higher Education) Bill, it is sponsored by the Minority Leader of the House of Representatives, Mr Femi Gbajabiamila. The bill has passed the second reading in the House of Representatives.

    This is a welcome development in a country where majority of the population live on about one dollar per day. Of course there are many hurdles confronting prospective seekers of the proverbial Golden Fleece in the country, lack of funds is however a major factor.

    While the children of the rich who cannot cope with the rigorous admission processes find solace in many of the private universities in the country, many others find their way into higher institutions abroad. None of these come cheap; for example those in the private institutions in Nigeria pay as much as N700,000 to N2million per student, per annum. Those who go abroad for studies pay even far more.

    Against this backdrop, whatever is done to liberalise access to education, particularly higher education, should be applauded. No one should be denied access to primary or tertiary education simply on account of his or her parents’ inability to pay. Many of the elite, especially in the south -western part of the country who are something today attest to the fact that they could have become nonentities but for the free education initiated by the late sage, Chief Obafemi Awolowo in the Western Region. That region remained a major reference point in education and development matters until the military came and imposed unitary rule on the country.

    No doubt, there is nothing novel in what the education bank hopes to achieve. There was a students’ loan board under the Gowon administration from where indigent students accessed money to finance their educational needs. Unfortunately, many of the beneficiaries did not repay the loans, leading to the eventual collapse of that arrangement because the loan was supposed to be revolving.

    This is why we have to caution that there should be adequate checks and encouragement in the proposed arrangement to ensure that beneficiaries pay back with ease. Minimum wage in the country is about N240,000 per annum. This is grossly inadequate to finance university or higher education even locally; that is assuming the parents do not touch the money at all but invest everything on the student in higher school. So, it is highly thoughtful of the House of Representatives to have pegged those qualified for assistance under the scheme at those whose parents earn about N500,000 per annum. If people would not have access to higher education, it should be because they are not cut out for it or they are not serious enough; and not because the parents cannot afford it.

    However, we do not understand the basis of the two-year period that the House set for commencement of repayment of the loan. Ours is a country where graduates roam the streets years after graduation; what happens if the beneficiaries have not secured jobs two years after graduation? How would they be able to repay the loan so as to avoid the sanctions attached to it, which is that repayment should commence two years after the completion of the national service? These are very important questions that must be taken into consideration to make higher education a right and not a privilege.

  • A borrowing country

    A borrowing country

    •Minister Ngama’s advocacy for more loans calls for a jamboree we cannot afford

    Despite the avalanche of reproof against the country’s mounting debt profile, the Federal Government still believes that taking more loans is in the nation’s interest. The Federal Executive Council (FEC) at its recent meeting presided over by President Goodluck Jonathan declared that the nation is under-borrowed: and that the decision to go for more loans is irrevocable.

    Dr. Yerima Ngama, Minister of State for Finance and FEC spokesman, after the meeting reportedly declared: “We should borrow more, considering our economic activities. There is no problem with the level of our debt. The problem is the domestic debt. Interest rates are too high. Yes, we must continue to borrow. It is only poor people that do not borrow….you can borrow once you are credit worthy. America is the most indebted country in the world. Borrowing is good. The more money you have, the more money you need. There is nothing like satisfaction. If we are not oil rich, nobody will lend to us. We are borrowing because we have many projects.”

    We are astonished that such a high government official could publicly describe the collective decision of this administration’s highest policy formulating body on the salient debt question in such theatrical manner. It is outrageous to know that this administration thinks that the country’s domestic debt, reportedly put at N6 trillion, is not considered high despite the escalating cost of servicing it. We see nothing wrong in borrowing but we doubt if the country has the discipline and focus necessary for the deployment of borrowed money for purposes that would serve the interest of the people.

    Already, the government is making alibi to cover up its ineptitude in this regard. The FEC played the neo-colonial game when it listed as a major factor leading to increased domestic debt the 2010 wage increase to civil servants. The FEC also revealed that domestic borrowing, in order to meet government salary obligation to workers has increased to N 3.6 trillion. More appalling is the servicing of such debts with N699 billion in 2012 alone. Unfortunately, much of these debts in reality were used to service the comfort and greed of appointed and elected public officials through dubious allowances and other unwarranted payments.

    Nigeria’s reserve of above $53 billion comprises a foreign reserve of $45 billion; excess crude of $7 billion and Sovereign Wealth Fund (SWF) of $1 billion. With this huge foreign reserve, it is quite clear that the country does not need any domestic or foreign loan. A situation where the nation saves money in banks abroad at two per cent interest and borrows locally at 15 percent interest is bereft of any economic sense. Whose interests are the decision makers protecting – their parochial pursuits or that of the nation?

    In 2006, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, then finance minister erroneously goaded the country into paying $12.4 billion, being questionable debts owed the Paris and London Clubs by past administrations. The motive was to get the country out of her then debt trap. Surprisingly, in 2013, under a different administration, Okonjo-Iweala, current finance minister and coordinator of the economy, in a manner that contradicted her earlier position, is at the forefront of moves to obtain more loans for the country. Unfortunately, over 80 percent of projects upon which the repaid loans were expended failed.

    Another jamboree under the guise of borrowing is going on at a time when the nation’s current foreign debt profile stands at a high $5billion dollars. There is no need to further plunge the country into endemic debt trap when already collected loans have not served the essence of generating income and employment because the economy is shrinking rapidly.

    We deprecate the insatiable official urge to obtain new loans that will overburden future generations. The situation becomes detestable considering the fact that previous loans were not committed to any meaningful infrastructural development in the country.

     

  • Maina: Not yet closed

    Maina: Not yet closed

    •The allegation of N195 billion fraud is too serious to be covered up by technicalities

    He was supposed to be a man on the run. After several months in hiding, Abdulrasheed Maina–erstwhile boss of the Pension Reform Task Force Team, showed up recently – not to prove his innocence or even disprove the misdemeanours linked to his name; rather, he wants to be restored to his plum civil service job as Assistant Director at the Customs, Immigration and Prison Pension Office.

    The suit, filed at the National Industrial Court has the Office of the Head of Service of the Federation, the Senate, the Federal Civil Service Commission, Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice; Clerk of the Senate as well as Clerk of the National Assembly as respondents.

    Why shouldn’t he? An Abuja Federal High Court presided over by Justice Adamu Bello had quashed the arrest warrant issued by the Senate on February 2, over his failure to appear before it in respect of his management of pension funds. The court also granted perpetual injunction restraining the Inspector-General of Police (IGP) from arresting him – having been declared wanted subsequent to the Senate’s warrant.

    The saga of the erstwhile boss of the Pension Reform Task Force Team, is yet another example of the many paradoxes dogging the nation. At best, it is symptomatic of the well-known impotence of our institutions in the face of alleged breaches of our laws, at worst, it is evidence of the institutional penchant to pursue shadows instead of substance.

    The substance here is the N195 billion fraud allegation levelled against Maina, which appears to have been forgotten. The Senate could not get him to help clear the fog on the affair. Now, armed with Justice Bello’s ruling, which held that the Senate warrant of arrest was out of order, and a restraining order on the police, it seems unlikely that Maina would ever honour the Senate’s summon not to talk of helping to shed light on the fraud said to have taken place at the police pensions office under his watch.

    Of course, the whole affair is unfortunate. Clearly, had the Senate not elevated mere procedural issues over and above the substance of fraud alleged, the ensuing muddle would have been avoided.

    Yes, we do not deny that the issue of Maina’s non-appearance before the Senate and the weighty allegations of fraud are somewhat linked. They are however distinct and separate – and the Senate ought to have taken due care to separate them.

    For treating the institution with contempt, the Senate was in order to have sought to punish Maina. However, the criminal allegations ought to have been referred to the anti-graft bodies. To compound the muddle, the Senate mounted pressure on President Goodluck Jonathan to determine Maina’s appointment outside of the strictures of applicable civil service rules. We see this as a grave error on their part.

    We do not however consider Maina’s case as closed – at least not yet. First, we find the inertia of both the Federal Civil Service Commission and the Office of the Head of Service of the Federation in the entire affair somewhat unnerving. Why should the two institutions wait to be prodded to act in a matter of discipline of one of their own? Should the interest of their own override national interest?

    The fraud allegation against Maina remains an allegation, though a grave one. He deserves his day in court. He must be made to answer to the weighty charges. As nothing in the ruling of Justice Bello can be interpreted as shielding him from investigation and prosecution, we expect the anti-graft bodies to step in – except they are convinced that there are no grounds to proceed. Even at that, the nation still needs to have the full facts on the whole saga involving Abdulrasheed Maina.

  • Sour grapes

    Sour grapes

    • PDP plays a desperate card as it suspends Rivers State governor for winning NGF election

    It is endgame in the Presidency’s hooded fight against the Rivers State governor, Mr. Rotimi Amaechi. The Goodluck Jonathan presidency, operating from the trenches of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, has carried on what seems like a zero-sum feud against the governor of the oil-rich South-south state for nearly one year now. What seems like a definitive denouement came last Friday as the Nigerian Governors’ Forum, NGF, chaired by Governor Amaechi held its election. And a clear-cut battle line was drawn as Amaechi chose to stand for re-election against entreaties by his party top-notch and the presidency not to contest. Thus the NGF election was remarkably sepulchral for PDP; it must have been searing to the soul of the party as two of its governors stood against each other as the party could not reconcile itself.

    The election was held late into last Friday night: Governor Amaechi of Rivers State versus Governor Jonah Jang of Plateau State. The actuality however, is that it was the Presidency, PDP and Governor Jang massed against Amaechi. There are only 36 governors with one absenting. There were 35 votes cast by secret balloting but counted openly. About 23 of the governors are members of PDP Governors Forum (PDPGF), freshly minted to aid the stop-Amaechi-battle. Yet when the votes were counted last Friday, Governor Amaechi won by 19 votes to 16 for Jang. But the presidency and PDP camp would not live with the shame of a David slaughtering Goliath. They tried to muddy the water and throw in undisguised subterfuge.

    Even though the entire process was video-taped and that there were only a total of 35 votes, yet they insist it was rigged. According to Governor Olusegun Mimiko of Ondo State who is the vice chairman of the ‘aggrieved faction’, the process was flawed because Amaechi would not step down as NGF chairman before the election. Hear him: “Amaechi insisted that he was going to be chairman of that election in which he was candidate, he produced some papers that he called ballot papers, there was no way we could trace the source, we don’t know whether they were pre-marked or whatever…

    “We kept emphasizing the point that it was wrong for Amaechi as an out-gone chairman who was also a candidate to preside and pick the method of election. When they refused to listen and they said they were continuing with it, what do you expect us to do?”

    The ‘aggrieved faction’ led by Governor Jang has gone on to form a parallel body since last Friday; they have hurriedly met with the party’s BoT chairman, put advertisement in the newspapers and have visited Vice President Namadi Sambo in Aso Rock Presidential Lodge. All these hurried and obviously nervous moves are to dredge up legitimacy and confound the populace.

    Yesterday, the PDP seemed to have played its last card by suspending Governor Amaechi from its fold. In a release signed by its National Publicity Secretary, Chief Olisa Metuh, he quoted a communiqué released at the emergency meeting of PDP’s National Working Committee (NWC). Metuh noted that the NWC had been moved to action consequent upon a petition by the Rivers State Executive Council of the party. The grounds for suspension of Governor Amaechi were based on Articles 57 and 58 of the PDP constitution.

    So many issues arise from what may be described as PDP epic endgame. First, has Amaechi been suspended for contesting this election or for winning it? Why was he not suspended before he entered the election? Why has the NGF and who leads it suddenly become a PDP issue and national cause célèbre? Before the Goodluck Jonathan administration, and in fact since the inception of the NGF, never had there been rancour over who headed the forum; there had never been an election as they had always changed guards by consensus. In Amaechi’s suspension, is the PDP not unwittingly suspending all the governors who voted him in the election? What does this portend for the party and for Nigeria at large?

    Is it an offence to win a free and fair election? This is the message the PDP has sent to Nigeria:. oder is sin; the gangster is king. We condemn that.

    Why would an ’aggrieved faction’ obviously defeated at an election they claim was flawed form a faction instead of seeking party intervention or legal redress? How could a group that claimed that an electioneering process was flawed turn around to claim victory in the same election? The surfeit of chicanery and bad faith by this forum of Nigeria’s governors is not only reprehensible but points to the quality and calibre of men occupying very high positions in the land. Is this a sampler of how they run their various states?

    Most curiously, in the midst of all this routing of the PDP, for that is what all this is, President Jonathan plays the ostrich, insisting that he is neutral. A release on Sunday by Reuben Abati, President’s Special Adviser on Media and publicity states: “We have noted with regret the mischievous effort by sections of the mass media to portray President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan as an interested party and the main loser in yesterday’s (Friday’s) election of the chairman of the Nigerian Governors Forum (NGF).

    “Contrary to the impression of presidential partisanship and interference in the affairs of the governors’ forum erroneously conveyed by some headlines in the media today (yesterday), President Jonathan who is currently leading Nigeria’s delegation to the Africa Union Summit in Addis Ababa, had no preferred candidate in the NGF elections and could therefore not have been “floored” by any other candidate as some newspapers sensationally reported.”

    It is not possible that the president is neutral in the Amaechi feud which has simmered and festered in the past one year. Indeed, it requires little discernment to see the hidden fingers of the presidency in this unnerving affair that has left Rivers State prostrate in the last few months. The tell-tale signs are numerous; from the orchestrated Rivers State PDP crisis to the stalemate in the State House of Assembly on to the attempt to unseat Governor Ameachi as the chairman of the NGF among other troubles thrown in the governor’s path, there has been venom of animosity from the presidency towards the governor. It is primitive, graceless and beneath the the dignity of a republican leadership.

    Every Nigerian who loves democracy is appalled by the gangster-like conduct of the sore losers of a clear election. More condemnable is a presidency that sneaks a subterranean plot against all the niceties and decencies of democracy. If this is how the presidency and his PDP hope to prosecute the politics ahead of 2015 polls, then the signs are ominous indeed. Nigerians need to be saved from this savage style of leadership.

  • Emergency fiat

    Emergency fiat

    • President Jonathan must refrain from turning emergency rule into an exercise in tyranny

    The president pitched the declaration of emergency into another high of tension. In a surreptitious move, President Goodluck Jonathan introduced the state of emergency that gave him more powers than he implied in his broadcast.

    Playing on the emotional vulnerability of many Nigerians who were frustrated by the spasms of violence in the north, he applied wholesale force, without letting on the other form of coercion. That is, he planned to render the democratic structures not only impotent but virtually non-existent in the three states of Borno, Adamawa and Yobe, where the emergency measures have taken effect.

    He was praised by his own party governors and some other members of the civil society for respecting the integrity of the democratic structures. He relished the high noon from those he had goaded on.

    But the truth has been unveiled at last. What the president wanted were powers that were less obvious but equally lethal in the callow tradition of President Olusegun Obasanjo who slammed emergency rule on some states when he presided over the affairs of the nation.

    The Senate swallowed up the dangerous portions of the emergency bill that was gazette before the two chambers of law sat and upturned it, and the House of Representatives adopted it. The emergency law will go down in history as one of the irresponsible acts in our democratic history.

    When President Jonathan read out his broadcast to the nation, he asserted that the governors would function in the meantime. The phrase was routinely ignored by the commentators and the political society. In the usual Nigerian naivety, some trusted that the president, being apparently less boorish than his forbears on the throne, would act with honour.

    Now, let us examine section 3 of the Emergency Powers (General) Regulations, 2013 as proposed by the president: “The President may give directions to a state governor or local government chairmen directly or through his designate or duly authorised with respect to the administration of the emergency area and it shall be the duty of the state governor and local government chairman to comply with the directive.” Does this look like the governors and local government chairmen are allowed to perform according to their rights in the constitution? Are we paying any respect to federalism in any way?

    The compromise version changed it only perfunctorily.

    It provides a room for the president to undermine the governor and turn a designate into the de facto sole administrator and local government chairman, thereby rendering the elected officers completely sterile. Also important in the democratic structure is the state assembly, also elected by the people. Under the emergency law, they are in no position to checkmate the activity of anyone acting on the orders of the president.

    The other contentious part of this act, which the National Assembly accepted uncritically was section 2 (e), which states that the president can “provide for the utilisation of the funds of any state or local government area.”

    How does a government operate without access to funds? More importantly, how does a governor operate without control of his state resources? What it means is that the governor has to beg for his rights within the constitution. It is standing democratic principles on its head. It implies a further desecration of the federalist principle.

    Is it not with money the governor maintains the state programmes and runs the institutions of state? When the president exercises such powers, he has suspended the constitution, to all intents and purposes. The governors, lawmakers and local government officers are in office by name only. They have become appendages of a centre that can decide on a contemptuous whim to starve them until they squeak.

    The senate hurriedly accepted the emergency without looking at the terms. This is the height of legislative incompetence for a body the people assigned the task to check executive recklessness. The House of Representatives, after grandstanding, only worked superficial changes. In the end, the compromise law compromises the integrity of the constitution and republican ideals. The National Assembly, whose task it is to advance the balance of forces for a sense of equality and harmony, genuflected to an act of high tyranny.

    The impression has been allowed to fester that because it is a state of emergency, the president is allowed to wield autocratic powers that obscure the commonsensical principle of a democratic society. Nothing is further from reality. The president derives his emergency powers from the constitution of a democratic society. The emergency cannot subvert democracy that gave birth to it. Otherwise, that would mean that we can manipulate a democratic tenet to impose despotism. The result? Democratic self-defeat.

    In the lead up to the declaration of emergency, we have on good authority that the president had intended to dissolve the democratic structures but the leadership of the House of Representatives had resisted.

    In apparent terms, he did not dissolve the structures. But by taking away their life source, he has subjected them to the desperate debility of slow lynching. What this means is that the president was economical with the truth. It was a sly, despicable, backroom strategy to undermine the finer principles of democracy. He imposed a draconian principle with a sunny face.

    Happily, the states can recourse to the law and fight back. This matter ought to be resolved at the level of the Supreme Court, and this newspaper urges the governors and local government chairmen to seek a judicial answer to what is clearly an unprecedented show of force in the name of democracy.

    What the president has done may have repercussions beyond the states now clobbered by emergency law. If he does it to any other state, he could simply use the precedent of this law to dislodge the influence of the governor and recruit his cronies for political influence. The fears were openly expressed recently when jitters of emergency rule ran through the arteries of River State.

    When the president removes the funds of a state and puts it in the service of anybody he designates, it turns the state into an extension of his political sphere of influence. It becomes less about a matter of law and order, but a matter of muzzling what he could see as political foes. It becomes a flexing of muscles for swathes of the political landscape and not about the higher principles of ensuring that the people live in peace. It is a cynical thing, and it must be condemned without reservation.

  • Lessons from Woolwich tragedy

    Lessons from Woolwich tragedy

    There is a balance to strike between liberty and security 

    In any free society, governments need to strike the right balance when it comes to national security. While they must do what they can to ensure that the public is protected from terrorists who want to kill for political ends, they must also ensure that liberty and democracy are not trampled on in the process. This week’s brutal slaying of a young soldier in Woolwich has once again raised questions about where the balance lies.

    Nobody can deny the horrific nature of the attack on Drummer Lee Rigby of the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers. It is a reminder of the threat the country faces from violent jihadism. The deliberately provocative behaviour of the killers, both under arrest, has only deepened the public’s sense of outrage.

    The killing has raised questions about the role of the security services. It has emerged that both the perpetrators were on MI5’s files for some time before Wednesday’s outrage. While they were seen as people committed to Islamist extremism, neither was regarded as potentially violent and hence a threat. This has led to wild claims that Drummer Rigby was in some way “betrayed”.

    MI5 certainly has some questions to answer. Since the London bombings in July 2005 it has been generously funded precisely to counter acts of terror. The government has asked parliament’s Intelligence and Security committee to look into what MI5 knew before the attack. Unlike the investigation into the 2005 bombings – which took several years to report – this must be completed with all dispatch.

    But before denouncing the intelligence services or calling for tighter security laws, as some are doing, we should set this week’s tragic events in context. This was the first successful Islamist-inspired attack in Britain for eight years. The security services foil one complex plot every year. Last year’s London Olympics – a high-profile target if ever there was one – passed off without incident.

    Besides, there is a limit – both in terms of the law and the available resources – to what the police and intelligence services can do in a free society. Not every suspected extremist can be followed, nor can the authorities monitor every disaffected youth who looks at extremist websites or sends dubious text messages to his friends.

    This week’s events may mark the start of a new phase in Islamic extremism in which countries such as the UK face spontaneous lone wolf attacks that are harder to predict and thwart. These may be more limited in scale than the early days of al-Qaeda, but they will still cause anxiety.

    While the government should be vigilant, it should not tear down laws and liberties to counter these provocations. That would be simply to hand those who hate us a victory they do not deserve.

    – Financial Times

  • Lazy judges

    Lazy judges

    CJN’s efforts at sanitising the judiciary are commendable

    Efforts by the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Mariam Aloma Mukhtar, to reposition the judiciary, are commendable. Justice Mukhtar, who doubles as Chairman of the National Judicial Council (NJC), has threatened to sack lazy judges from the bench. She was quoted to have said: “We are now thinking of looking at the performance evaluation of the judges for the purpose of discipline. If a judge cannot deliver three to four judgments in a year, there is no use keeping him on the bench other than to be shown his or her way out….”

    The CJN made her observation while receiving the report on the National Judicial Performance Evaluation 2008-2011; compiled by the Nigerian Institute of Advanced Legal Studies. She wondered how a judge could abandon his or her court and travel abroad while the courts were in session, despite the six weeks holiday that a judge is entitled to in a year. To stem this abuse by some judges, the CJN said that she has directed that before any judge can travel abroad, he or she must obtain permission from the head judge. We believe that except for medical emergencies or scheduled training, no judge should be allowed to whimsically abandon his/her court to travel overseas.

    She is also angry with judges who choose to sit several hours after the 9a.m. sitting time for courts. Those judges sit around 11a.m. or 12 p.m., and before 2p.m. have risen from their courts; while sometimes they do not sit at all for flippant reasons, forgetting the hardship to the litigants. The CJN observed, and rightly too, that: “These litigants are human beings. They go to court sometimes with their witnesses and lawyer and were told that the judges were not around. Sometimes after coming to court without seeing the judges, they abandoned their cases in the court. It is not fair.” It is indeed very unfair, for judges to sit perfunctorily.

    At another forum, organised by the Nigeria Bar Association, Rule of Law Action Group; the CJN correctly surmised that the rule of law is the foundation for the survival of any democracy. In her speech, she posited: “instituting a suit in court is an explicit expression of trust and assurance in the honesty and strong moral principles of the umpire, that is to say that the intending litigant believes the umpire will be unbiased and give him/her what he/she deserves positively or adversely. However, where that assurance is being questioned, then the judiciary is said to be suffering from a crisis of confidence and this may spill over into the society at large.”

    As she noted, judicial officers must be interested in participating actively in the establishment, maintenance, enforcement and observance of a high standard of conduct so that the integrity of and respect for the judiciary could be preserved. The positive attitude that the CJN has brought to bear on her position as the head of the judiciary is very timely, considering the crisis that is afflicting our national values. With corruption strongly undermining our executive and legislative arms of government, only a strong and uncompromised judiciary can save the country from a complete breakdown of law and order.

    It is therefore encouraging that the CJN is leading the judiciary to redeem itself. While laziness and ineptitude are strong malaises plaguing the judiciary, it has also been afflicted by corruption. As admitted by the CJN, many petitions against the judges are before the NJC, which is the body the constitution gave the power to discipline judges. We recognise the recent actions taken by the council against some of the corrupt judges and hope that more of such actions will be taken. We have no doubt that Nigerians are strongly behind the council under the leadership of the CJN in the on-going effort to redeem the judiciary.

    Thankfully, the NBA has indicated its willingness to support the NJC, in the onerous task to stem the decay in the judiciary. We note that recently, the disciplinary committee of the association debarred some of its members found guilty of professional misconduct. We urge for more cleansing within the Bar, since it is only a virile Bar that can guarantee an efficient Bench.

    After all, it is members of the Bar that are in a position to compromise the Bench, or at least aid the public to do so. We also urge for a proper funding of the judiciary to help the NJC to modernise, by providing effective modern working tools for the judges. Also, the process of selecting judges must be more rigorous, so as to forestall the infusion of corrupt, lazy and inefficient judges into our judiciary.

     

  • Bright stories

    Bright stories

    •Literary laurels coming Nigeria’s way show that all is not lost in a gloomy nation

    Cheering news about Nigeria has come from the literary world. It is symbolic that the fictive universe, founded on the guiding principle of “suspension of disbelief”, has generated belief in Nigeria. In spite of national troubles, some of them threatening the very soul of the country, the publicity of literary laurels won by her citizens brought a glimmer of hope.

    Indeed, the crowning of Nigerian novelist Sule Emmanuel Egya, who writes under the name E.E. Sule, as the 2013 Commonwealth Book Prize regional winner for Africa, is a redeeming feature for a country faced with a serious image challenge internationally. Sule, 36, currently an associate professor of English at Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida University, Lapai, Niger State, is one of five regional winners representing Africa, Asia, Canada & Europe, Caribbean, and the Pacific regions; they will receive 2, 500 pounds each. The overall winner of the 10,000 pounds prize will be announced at Hay Festival UK on May 31.

    It is not only interesting; it is also admirable that Sule shone for his first novel, Sterile Sky. It is instructive to know that the well-regarded Commonwealth Book Prize, awarded for the best first novel, seeks to “unearth, develop and promote the best of new writing from across the Commonwealth, developing literary connections worldwide and consistently bringing less-heard voices to the fore.”

    Sule’s literary glory is even more significant because it is not just an isolated case, but rather a telling signal of a creative flowering in the land. The evidence of this artistic wave is that the country made history by producing four of the five writers shortlisted for the 2013 Caine Prize for African Writing. It is, interestingly, the first time any country on the continent would have such a number on the prestigious literary shortlist. Flying Nigeria’s flag are Elnathan John with Bayan Layi; Tope Folarin with Miracle; Abubakar Adam Ibrahim with The Whispering Trees; and Chinelo Okparanta with America. The winner of the 10,000 pounds award, given each year for the best original short story by an African writer, will emerge at a celebratory dinner in England on July 8. It is notable that Nigeria’s Rotimi Babatunde won the 2012 Caine Prize for his short story entitled Bombay’s Republic, proving perhaps that the country’s domination of this year’s shortlist is no fluke.

    By a reinforcing concurrence of events, the country’s literary glories this year, in the context of the Commonwealth and Caine prizes, have coincided with the release and celebration of a new novel by Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, the US-based multiple award-winning Nigerian female author. Following her latest work entitled Americanah, she was recently spotlighted by the respected international TV news channel CNN in a magazine programme, African Voices, focused on “Africa’s most engaging personalities who are shaping the African continent in different areas of life.”

    Surely, these bright stories not only demonstrate the beauty of Literature and its image-building capacity for both individual and nation; they also underline the value of writing and reading, and their importance in the overall context of human capital development. In a striking sense, these literary success stories hold out positive and welcome examples for a country in the grip of a crass and crippling materialism. The enlightening lessons, among others, are that education pays; and that conspicuous acquisitiveness is not all there is to life. Regrettably, these are the very lessons that are undermined by the conduct of many in leadership positions across the country, especially the political elite, notorious for philistinism and mind-boggling material greed.

    For instance, isn’t it disheartening that the country’s primary school completion rate reportedly ranges between two percent and 92 percent, depending on the state? Even then, these alleged figures represent only the tip of the iceberg in a country darkened by widespread illiteracy and ignorance. We definitely need more of such bright stories to illuminate the gloomy situation.

  • Obama’s jaded African policy

    Obama’s jaded African policy

    •Hopes of an America-aided African growth fade after four years

    The election of Barack Obama as the first African-American to be trusted with the presidency of the most powerful country in the world was expected to expand the opportunities open to black Americans and spur real development in Africa. Prior to the emergence of the Obama phenomenon, it was considered nigh impossible that a white-dominated United States of America would elect a disadvantaged minority to the presidency. His election was thus regarded as an opportunity of a lifetime to break other barriers that have held down the blacks and other minorities in the country.

    The President and his wife, Michelle, are expected to embark on the first real African tour from June 26 to July 3, during which he is expected to meet with key government figures, private sector leaders, the youth and civil society groups. Curiously, Nigeria, being the most populous country on the African continent, and Kenya, Obama’s ancestral home, despite being sub-regional leaders in East and West Africa have been left out of his itinerary. This is generating ripples in diplomatic circles.

    It is disappointing that almost five years after Obama assumed office as American President, nothing has changed in the country’s African policy. If anything, his predecessors, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, proved to be better strategic partners of the African continent than Obama. Under Clinton, the Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, Susan Rice, said: “We have redefined the U.S. relationship with Africa. We have moved beyond Cold War competition, superpower exploitation, and patron-client mentality to establishing a partnership with Africa based on mutual interest and mutual respect.” Indeed, Clinton was seen by many as a true friend of the continent. In one of his visits, he apologised for the West and America’s infliction on pain on the continent in the past.

    When he was succeeded by George W. Bush, a Republican, it was expected that the enthusiasm would wane. It did not. While not expanding the horizon, Bush introduced and funded policies to mobilise support for measures to combat the Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) and that mass killer, malaria.

    Despite promising in 2009 that America would be a strong partner of the African people, there has been no fresh initiative to support this. On a visit to Ghana that lasted only a few hours, Obama characteristically raised hopes of a better day but soon went to sleep.

    The discussion on why he left Nigeria out of the coming visit is unnecessary. As President of America, he has the right to decide where to visit and when. A visit to Nigeria would not necessarily aid the drive for prosperity and even stability in the country. The previous trip to Ghana did not yield any fruit for that country.

    What we demand of the Obama administration is to live up to the promise of his election in 2008 by leaving a legacy that would enhance the place of the African Americans in the political sphere. He needs to identify and appoint more African Americans to positions of responsibility to emphasise their capacity to handle serious affairs of state. President Obama has thus far given the impression that he lacks the courage to do this.

    Second, he needs to come up with concrete policy initiatives that would promote the growth and development of the African continent. Many researchers have suggested that Africa is a sleeping giant that could wake up soon. China is already positioning herself as a friend and strategic partner. It is in the interest of the United States to move if it is not to lose a golden opportunity to book a space on this moving jet.

    While Kenya and Nigeria suggest themselves as natural allies who could help American interest as well as propel the development of the continent faster than Tanzania and Senegal that Obama has chosen to visit, what should be of concern to all persons of goodwill is the enunciation of clear policies to promote genuine partnership

  • Home truth

    Home truth

    • Kwankwaso’s x-ray of the Boko Haram crisis calls for a complete overhaul of the northern system

    Governor Rabi’u Musa Kwankwaso of Kano State hit the nail on the head when he declared dysfunctional youths from irresponsible parents create the nursery that feeds the Boko Haram insurrection.

    Speaking with visiting members of the Presidential Committee on Dialogue and Peaceful Resolution of Security Challenges in the North, the governor lamented the irresponsible conduct of some parents in the North who give birth to some 30 children, decide to take care of only two and unleash the rest of the pack on the society – with commercial-inclined states like Kano bearing much of the brunt.

    “They grow up to hate themselves,” the governor said of the children, “hate their parents, hate the leaders, hate the government and the society. They feel they are deprived, they feel injustice and they become enemies of the state and constituted authorities. They thereby become vulnerable to crime and violence.”

    The governor’s comment may well be a direct lift from the Boko Haram recruitment manual, if ever there was one! Coat this society bitterness with some self-serving dogma and you probably have an army of suicide bombers raring to go! In the colony of suicide bombers and sundry anarchists, therefore, you probably have a cadre convinced beyond any doubt – reasonable or unreasonable – that they must crush a society that thinks very little of crushing them.

    If the situation is as dire as the governor has painted – and with the violence and insecurity in the large swathe of the area, there is little doubt about that – then the governor’s alarm is nothing short of patriotic. In his x-ray, he has made for the root of the problem.

    But making for the root of the problem does not in any way suggest solving it is at hand. For starters, the North needs to critically examine its pristine feudalism that tends to allocate resources on the basis of birth and class; and not on the basis of equitability.

    It is undemocratic and unjust to deny the nobility of their trove. But to reduce resentment that often drives violence bordering on anarchy, deliberate, veritable and verifiable efforts should be made to care for the not-so-privileged members of the society. This the government can do with specific welfare programmes, targeted at the most vulnerable members of society. This can be done in areas of education, health and housing. Indeed, northern governments must collectively work on pan-northern free and compulsory education.

    Going hand in hand with the feudal system is the abuse of the tenets of religion. About every religion preaches procreation as a divine order. Also, religions hint at divine providence, which simplistic logic is no more than that if God had divined procreation, God will provision for that procreation. That, of course, is permissible and legitimate within the ambit of faith.

    However, faith presupposes the inevitability of blessing after hard work. Unfortunately however, many abuse this natural order of things; and deliberately omit hard work from the belief and blessing chain. That would logically explain why parents would have more children than they can ever take care of – and spill this ill-bred band on society in the scary way Governor Kwankwaso recounted.

    In this long entrenched practice, there is no short cut. The solution, of tinkering the northern society, is long-term enlightenment, matched with mass education. But that would mean tougher war on corruption to free resources for this developmental challenge. That would be tough, given how endemic corruption is. But with will, it is not impossible.

    Also, religious organisations must be encouraged to teach faith with hard work; and not socialise their flock to some inevitable divine manna which failure often turns expectations into frustration, with devastating effect.

    Parents should also be enlightened on the imperative of having only children they can cater for; by demonstrating the grim consequences of irresponsible parental behaviours.