The Nation Newspaper

Category: Editorial

  • One-day disasters

    One-day disasters

    Save the Children’s verdict that Nigeria is one of the worst places on earth  to deliver a child calls for sober reflection and quick action

     

    What do Nigeria and India have in common? According to the World Mothers’ just-released Report of Save the Children, an international NGO on maternal health and advocacy, the two countries are among the worst places on earth to deliver children.

    The United States too was found to log the highest number of deaths of new-born babies, among the world’s industrialised economies, recording 11, 300 deaths each year, and perching at 30th position out of 176 countries. The US number was however adduced to a high population and high rate of preterm births, the highest in the world.

    Still, India and Nigeria, by the neo-liberal economic book-keeping that somewhat praises growth sans development, are two countries with steadily growing economies. The United States, Breton-Woods metropolis, does not lack in cutting edge technology to assure safe births. Yet, it is hopelessly trounced by the Scandinavian trio of Finland, Sweden and Norway. The trio runs the good old welfare state, demonised by the neo-liberal lobby in the West, since the era of US President Ronald Reagan and British Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher.

    Might neo-liberal orthodoxy then have direct adverse effect on investment in health and other social infrastructure, given that the Scandinavian welfare states did much better in the report than the United States, even with its acclaimed technological wonders? The answer to this question must interest Nigeria’s policymakers, given their tight wedding to Breton-Woods economic orthodoxy.

    Besides India, which has followed a similar path to economic near-boom, still records 56, 000 maternal deaths – more than any other country in the world. Instructively, the report blames the poor situation on an invigorated Indian economy, the gains of which have nevertheless been “unequally” shared. To avert the Indian example, Nigerian policymakers must start building safety nets into the current economic policy.

    Indeed, it is not surprising that years of poor budget implementation, among other factors, have condemned Nigeria to the laggards, in this latest report on maternal health. Ranked 169 out of 176 countries, with an estimated 89, 700 babies dying on their first day, the country is one of the most unsafe places to have a baby. Indeed, more than one in every 10 (12 per cent) of babies who die under five years in Nigeria die on their first day; while more than three out of every 10 (32 per cent) die in the first month of birth.

    Nigeria’s company in the laggard zone of the bottom-10 ranked countries, all in sub-Saharan Africa, is instructive: DR Congo (the worst place on earth to have a baby), Somalia, Sierra Leone, Mali, Niger, Central African Republic (CAR), The Gambia, Chad and Cote d’Ivoire. All these countries, aside from The Gambia, have been war-torn in recent times. Aside from the Boko Haram insurrection and Niger Delta militancy, Nigeria has not been in a state of war since the Civil War (1967-1970). Yet, it cannot do better than these war-ravaged countries!

    These statistics are a serious indictment on how badly this country is run. The grim stats also call for a rapid response to correct the situation. Unfortunately however, hardly anything is assured.

    Still, the imperative for a response is clear, when the laggards are compared with the top-raters. In DR Congo, the worst global case, an average of one woman in 30 dies from pregnancy-related cases. But in Finland, the best case, only one out of 12, 200 does. That only translates to the odd probability – so distant and remote is such death actually happening. It is quite a gulf! So, how do the African laggards, especially Nigeria, even start rolling back these death rates, in a race Save the Children dramatically tagged “Surviving the first day”?

    But even survival at birth is only the first step in the whole gamut of maternal health, child mortality, education and income; with the Western countries, led by the Scandinavian pace-setters out-performing Africa and Asia, on such a superlative scale! Again in Finland, according to the report, children are guaranteed 17 years of formal education at the expense of the state, aside from an almost zero death at pregnancy and delivery. What is Nigeria’s equivalent of that and what is the quality of the programme?

    Indeed, in infants’ death, Africa only marginally outperformed Southern Asia. While Africa accounts for an estimated 396,500 first-day deaths (38 per cent of the global total), South Asia accounts for 40 per cent. Nigeria, because of its huge population and also its huge mis-governance, accounts for a huge chunk of that figure.

    Though Susan Grant, Save the Children’s Nigeria country director, insists every baby faces the gravest danger in its life on its first day, that the world outside Africa and Asia has virtually turned back that grim routine is clear evidence that African governments – and Nigeria’s in particular – must brace themselves up. As at now, they are clear non-starters, no thanks to overwhelming corruption and lack of focus.

    It is reassuring that at the report’s presentation in Lagos, Dr. Jide Idris, the Lagos State health commissioner, pledged his state would commit more resources to health care to roll back the disaster. The Lagos government must be encouraged to walk its talk.

    But it must also be realised that Lagos, which in comparative terms by Nigerian standards boasts tolerable health facilities, is likely not the most affected, even if the horrible statistics is skewed towards a national health disaster.

    That is why the Federal Government must show leadership and galvanise other state governments to take maternal and baby health very seriously. If Nigeria achieves a quantum leap in good governance, maternal and baby health too will receive a quantum boost.

    That is as good a field as any to calibrate good governance in the country. It is time to save the children.

     

  • This JAMB

    This JAMB

    •The board has repeatedly failed to live up to expectations; let varsities conduct their exams

    The release of the 2013 results of the Unified Tertiary Matriculation Examination (UTME) by the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB) has once again provided cause for much soul-searching by parents, candidates and JAMB itself.

    In spite of the efforts of the board’s officials to gloss over the challenges of this year’s UTME, there can be no doubt that there were simply too many problems for candidates to contend with. The registration process was fraught with difficulty, as many candidates complained of the inability to easily submit their forms online. Examination centres for many candidates were found to be in areas that were relatively distant from their own homes, and led to a lot of inconvenience.

    The UTME examination itself was characterised by delays, last-minute changes and other break-downs in established procedure. Many candidates arrived at designated venues only to find that they had been relocated to other venues without their knowledge. The biometric verification formalities were often inefficient or not working at all, causing delays and frustration. The resultant confusion provided ample opportunity for examination malpractice.

    Given such poor omens, it is perhaps not surprising that the UTME results were not particularly encouraging. Only 10 out of about 1.64 million candidates were able to score more than 300 marks in the examination; 628 candidates scored between 270 and 299 marks. About 50 per cent of those who sat the examination scored less than 200 marks. Some might attribute this poor performance to the falling standard of education in the country; it might well be; but JAMB is not helping matters with its incompetence.

    Meanwhile about 12,000 results were withheld, while another 68,000 are still being scrutinised. This has led to protests by some candidates in Kano State who are demanding the immediate release of their results. Even the results are in question: some candidates are claiming to have received scores in subjects that they did not register for; others say they have multiple results for the same subjects.

    For an organisation which has been in the business of conducting matriculation examinations since 1978, this cannot be good news. Despite modern improvements in technology, logistics and administrative practices, candidates find it more difficult to register, less easy to locate their centres, experienced increased delays during examinations, and display greater uncertainty about the validity of their performance. Added to this is the still-unsolved problem of inadequate places for those seeking university admission: only about 520,000 spaces are available for the 1.6 million hopefuls who sat for the UTME.

    JAMB has failed to live up to its central mission of acting as an efficient clearing-house designed to facilitate the university admissions process. The anomalies it was set up to prevent have been replaced by even greater disjunctions which continue to undermine it at every turn. The board appears to be losing credibility almost on an annual basis, as parents and candidates become increasingly frustrated with an organisation which seems to be bent on making an-already difficult situation even worse.

    It is time for a new paradigm. Individual universities must be permitted to conduct their own entrance examinations and send the results to JAMB, whose clearing-house function would now be restricted to that of ensuring equity, geographical spread and inclusivity in admissions.

    The advantages are self-evident. Candidates will no longer have to endure sleepless nights in front of computers in their efforts to register; any university that makes the registration or examination process unduly difficult will be dropped in favour of those that do not. The double jeopardy of sitting for UTME and post-UTME will be eliminated. Universities will be under greater pressure to ensure that they are good enough to attract the best students. In essence, the decentralisation of tertiary matriculations examinations is almost certain to make it more efficient and more equitable.

  • Adieu, Pini Jason

    Adieu, Pini Jason

    •Ace columnist and social activist passes on at 65

     

    Pini, as he was fondly called by all meant so many things to different people, but one thing all are unanimous about is that he was an exquisitely brilliant and wise fellow. Imbued with the gift of the gab, he had a strong sense of history and recollection of events and was quick to regale friends and associates with a repertoire of important happenings, not only in Nigeria but around the world. His tales are so juicy and fresh that you wonder whether they happened just yesterday. Such was the strong mental acuity of Pini that he seemed like a walking book of records.

    It may not be altogether surprising for a man of the word, a journalist and one of the longest-standing columnists in Nigeria until his death in Lagos on May 4. Pini kept a column in the national newspaper, Vanguard, since the ‘80s and, apart from his brief period of political appointment in Imo State (2007 – 2011), he kept faith with his readers with his last instalment coming on April 30, just four days before his demise.

    Pini who hailed from Aboh Mbaise local government of Imo State had a lifetime devotion to writing and journalism. He started out as a Customs officer but ironically, had to leave what is considered the most ‘lucrative’ job in Nigeria today, which many would pay a huge sum to get. By his admission in his last article for Vanguard, the lure of the word, instead of lucre, drove him to write columns under the pen name, Pini Jason for Daily Times, Nigeria’s foremost national daily at the time, even while in public service. He had earlier worked with Lagos Weekend and was an editor with the African Guardian, a weekly magazine under the stable of The Guardian Newspapers in the early ‘90s. He later founded The Examiner in the late ‘90s, which became defunct shortly after due to inadequate financial planning.

    Pini continued to keep faith not only with journalism but with his country through his weekly offerings in his column. He was one of the most read columnists in Nigeria, being very incisive, fresh and objective. Initially quite acerbic and no-holds- barred, Pini could be said to have mellowed with age, proffering deeper insights and masterly interventions in national affairs. His last piece in his column symbolises his current disposition and benign approach. Titled “A Letter to Yushua Shuaib,” he literally took Mr. Shuaib (who had drawn the ire of a serving minister with an article) aside like a great uncle and lectured him on public service rules and norms.

    Pini wrote: “this letter is not about whatever you wrote about the Honourable Minister of Finance. After reading your syndicated explanation, I asked myself whether it was an answer to a query, an apology to your establishment, NEMA, an apology to Dr. Okonjo-Iweala or just a deliberate enlistment of the community of public affairs analysts. After going through it over and over, I concluded you were simply a victim of a society that has lost its institutional memory. This loss of institutional memory has contributed to the rot we are in today. We have forgotten the proper way of doing things. We have destroyed every known ethos. Those who are custodians of the fine ethics that served us in the past are either ignorant themselves or too preoccupied with other interests to care.” This is vintage Pini at his best, matured like fine wine – subtle, detached, yet alluring.

    Those who knew Pini attest to his rigour, his commitment to duty and his high-mindedness. In a tribute, the former governor of Imo State, Chief Ikedi Ohakim who appointed Pini a special adviser described him as his debating partner and a man who had sound opinion on nearly all issues. Indeed, if there was a man who could be described as full of wisdom, Pini Jason Onyegbadue was one.

  • Lagos’ security cameras

    Lagos’ security cameras

    •Is the FG playing politics with this serious issue?

    Given Nigeria’s dire security challenges, one would have thought that there will be closer collaboration among the various tiers of government to ensure the safety of lives and property. This is especially so since the security of lives and properties is the primary responsibility of any government properly so-called. This is why the report that the Federal Government is standing in the way of the Lagos Safe City Project cannot be said to be cheery news. The project, an initiative of the Lagos State Government, aims at providing 10,000 solar-powered closed circuit cameras in the metropolis.

    Lagos State Commissioner for Information, Mr. Lateef Ibirogba, put it succinctly: “When we were about to embark on their installation, the Federal Government contacted us and said we needed to stop. The reason we were given was that the FG had a scheme in the pipeline, which involved the installation of security cameras all over major cities in the country.

    “According to the Federal Government, Lagos was going to be in the first phase of the project. That was why we stopped our own project”. Regrettably, till date, the much awaited Federal Government’s scheme has, like many other of its policies, remained in the ‘pipeline’; meanwhile, the state has been barred from going ahead with its own project that would have enhanced security.

    Yet, one of the things that cannot be taken from the Lagos State Government is its commitment to the security of Lagosians. The government launched a security trust fund which has been useful in addressing security challenges in the state. For a state that has demonstrated a huge commitment to security matters, the expectation would have been for an appreciative Federal Government to give a nod to the project without much ado. Unfortunately, the Federal Government has been foot-dragging on the issue in a way that shows just how warped Nigeria’s federalism is.

    This is a project that has been in the works since 2009, when Governor Babatunde Fashola mooted the idea. As a matter of fact, he said at a demonstration event that the cameras were needed to help reduce crime in the state. He noted, and rightly too, that the about 33,000 policemen in the state were grossly inadequate to protect and police the metropolis of about 18million people. As at the time the idea was made public, kidnapping was relatively alien to the state. Today, kidnapping has become a problem in the state, with security agents often helpless.

    This helplessness cannot be blamed entirely on the security agencies though, because the police that are supposed to be in the vanguard of internal security are as inadequate, ill-motivated and ill-equipped as they can be. For instance, the report that they have never used security cameras in their investigations in the state in this age and times is stunningly shocking. A source at the State Criminal Investigation Department was quoted to have said that security cameras have never been used in their investigations. “The only time we make use of CCTV cameras is when our investigation takes us to a hotel or mall with security cameras. But if it is a crime committed on a Lagos road, forget it,” the source said. If things are that bad in cosmopolitan Lagos, the state of affairs in the other parts of the country can only be better imagined with our federal police.

    We call on the Federal Government to either install its promised security devices or allow the state government that has always bent over backwards where the issue is security of its citizens to go ahead with its plan. There is no sense politicising a serious matter like security in an unsafe country like ours. A safe Lagos will not be a thing of pride to the state government alone; it will also rub off positively on the Federal Government and the entire polity. Five years is a long time to miss in such a crucial matter as this.

     

  • Kingmaker mentality

    Kingmaker mentality

    •Dokubo, Kuku and others have to purge themselves of this: ‘if not Jonathan, who’?

    Although still two years away, Nigeria’s next general elections billed for 2015 seem a matter of life and death for some devotees of President Goodluck Jonathan who might be seeking a second term in office. This is a terrifying development because it not only endangers the soul of the country; it is also contemptuous of the supremacy of the people, a principle that is generally recognised as a cardinal feature of democracy.

    The most recent indication of the desperate kingmaker mentality of some Jonathan supporters was the ridiculous bullying tactics employed by Mujahid Asari Dokubo, a former Niger Delta militia leader. He told reporters at a news conference in Abuja: “The day Goodluck is no longer the President; all of us who are on sabbatical will come back. There will be no peace, not only in the Niger Delta, but everywhere. If they say it is an empty boast, let them wait and see.” The sheer audacity of his position raises a question about the basis of the overconfidence, quite apart from the fact that his statement was blatantly irresponsible.

    It is intriguing that Dokubo, a former leader of the Niger Delta Peoples Volunteer Force (NDPVF) and former President of the Ijaw Youth Congress (IYC), attributed the relative peace in the oil-rich Niger Delta, previously a hotbed of disruptive militancy, to the activities of the Jonathan presidency rather than the Federal Government amnesty programme fashioned in 2009 by then President Umaru Yar’Adua. He compounded his illogicality with the introduction of a deplorable ethnic colour to his reasoning, claiming that Jonathan was occupying the presidential seat by virtue of his nativity as an Ijaw from the Niger Delta.

    Disturbingly, his declaration that Jonathan was entitled to an uninterrupted two terms as president echoed the thinking of Mr. Kingsley Kuku, presidential adviser on amnesty. A week earlier in the US, Kuku reportedly predicted “dire consequences” should Jonathan miss re-election in 2015.

    This emerging pattern has the tint of blackmail, and it is unacceptable. It is a settled matter that under the democratic system of government, which is in place in the country, the electorate is king and electoral office is not automatic for anyone. The logical implication of the sovereignty of the voters is that they, and not anyone else, ultimately decide who should rule. So, it amounts to impotent wishful thinking on the part of Dokubo and Kuku to imagine that they can determine the people’s choice for the exalted position, based on their own narrow interests.

    Indeed, their approach does disservice to Jonathan’s ambition, in case he has any. There is always the likelihood that their attitude, which bespeaks an imposition, would result in alienation of the voters. Fighting on Jonathan’s side or speaking for him should have limits. It would be immensely worrying and disappointing, though, if their outbursts happen to mirror Jonathan’s mind on the issue. It is noteworthy that neither Jonathan nor the presidency has made any move to discourage such Goodluck Jonathan-at all-cost mind-set.

    Related to this unbridled loyalty to Jonathan is Dokubo’s reported description of Rivers State Governor Chibuike Amaechi as a traitor on account of his alleged presidential ambition. This characterisation further betrays his incredible thought that Jonathan deserves a second term unopposed. It constitutes an objectionable assault on the governor’s freedom to have higher political aspiration. Evidently, Dokubo keeps forgetting that this is a democracy. Or perhaps, he believes otherwise.

    As astonishing as Dokubo’s bluster is that fact that only some months ago he made apparently contradictory comments. He said: “The President has allowed himself to be imprisoned by some greedy individuals. His goodwill will soon go and that will affect his second term chances.” His double-speak provides reassuring evidence that he really should not be taken seriously, after all.

     

  • Delayed justice

    Delayed justice

    • Court reinstates sacked CBN worker 21 years after. Good but could have been better

    Our judicial system surely deserves fundamental restructuring, if we seriously desire to make progress as a nation. While that important arm of government suffers many challenges, we note that undue drag in accessing justice has become one of the most critical challenges for a litigant.

    The experience of Mr. Tunde Akinlusi, whose employment was wrongfully terminated by the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), but reinstated by the Court of Appeal, Lagos Division, after 21 years is a fresh reminder of this grievous challenge. Interestingly, both the High Court and the Court of Appeal agree that the termination of his employment was wrongful, yet it took Mr. Akinlusi 21 years to get through the Court of Appeal.

    The length of time it takes to traverse our courts is rather too long, and there is urgent need for redress. Now, should the matter further proceed to the Supreme Court, there is the possibility that Mr. Akinlusi may spend another decade fighting a mere interpretation of a written contract. That is rather beguiling in a modern world underpinned by contractual obligations. If a fairly straightforward interpretation of a contract could take that long, it is better imagined the fate that befalls intricate criminal and corruption trials, which have continued to render our nation nearly comatose. This perhaps is why most of the trials of the corrupt public officials have remained at preliminary stages, some nearly a decade after.

    Interestingly, at a recent public hearing on the Administration of Criminal Justice Bill 2013 organised by the House of Representatives, the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Aloma Mukhtar and the Chief Judge, Federal High Court, Justice Ibrahim Auta, spoke on the delay in the administration of Justice. The CJN listed the challenges of our justice system to include corruption, too many cases in court, inadequacy of judicial personnel, lack of modern management technology and the absence of case management techniques. In his own contribution, Justice Auta hinged the greatest challenge on corruption among the police, lawyers, prison officials and the judges, who he argued all aid the delay in the delivery of justice.

    As the experience of Mr. Akinlusi shows, civil cases also suffer debilitating delays; so there is urgent need to restructure our entire justice system. As we have severally argued on this page, the National Judicial Council must work hard to rid the judiciary of corruption, to gift the country jurists who will dispense justice without fear or favour. Again, there is the urgent need to modernise the courts, and provide modern equipment to aid speedy dispensation of justice. One other way to stem the delay which Lagos State High Courts pioneered in the country is the resort to alternative dispute resolution mechanism, to help reduce the number of cases in court.

    It is also important that the procedure for the appointment of judicial officials be made more transparent and competitive, so that only those fully prepared will ascend the bench. One other option which the constitution review process should consider is to allow the states to have their own hierarchy of courts, with powers to determine conclusively clearly delineated cases.

    The current system that allows all manner of cases to proceed to the Supreme Court should also be reviewed, as the appellate courts are clustered with interlocutory applications; which invariably suffocate the substantive cases. In the instant case of Mr. Akinlusi, the CBN may also, in the public interest, forgo its right for a further appeal to the Supreme Court, to save costs and allow their staff to enjoy the fruits of his labour while alive.

  • Too many boreholes

    Too many boreholes

    •Water corporations must run efficiently if we are to check the dangerous trend

    The haphazard digging of boreholes in the country seems to be getting out of hand, with the official alarm raised by the Federal Government. Mrs. Sarah Reng Ochekpe, Minister of Water Resources, during a recent courtesy visit on her by members of the Association of Water Well Drilling Ring Owners and Practitioners in Abuja pointed out the peril inherent in such habit. She said: “The construction of boreholes indiscriminately is capable of causing earth tremor. The need for proper and effective regulation of groundwater abstraction is now of utmost importance.’’

    In official and house-hold circles, borehole drilling has become rampantly disturbing. Governments at all levels shamefully join the bandwagon of borehole diggers even when an institution, usually the water corporations of states – primarily established to provide water for the citizenry, have failed to satisfactorily discharge their responsibilities. The sad trend will in the long run result in environmental hazards such as over-abstraction of ground water, salt intrusion, aquifer depletion and water quality degradation, among others.

    But, of what significance is the minister’s alarm, in view of the debilitating state of public water supply in the country? The rural areas across the land have been subjected to perpetual state of lack of potable water. They rely on river and stream water for drinking, with attendant vulnerability to avoidable water-borne diseases. Even in most towns and cities that once boasted of effective public water system, the situation on ground is very pathetic.

    What the state of affairs underscores is governments’ insensitivity to the water needs of Nigerians. Since life’s sustenance largely depends on water, governments are constitutionally expected to preserve life. Therefore, we expect those governing to show sufficient, not superfluous concern for the quality of water that the governed drink. After all, water aids digestion and absorption of food; helps maintain proper muscle tone; supplies oxygen and nutrients to the cells; rids the body of wastes; and serves as a natural air conditioning system.

    In fact, water transports, and chemically breaks down fats, carbohydrates, proteins, and salts in the body system. Thus, the provision of drinkable water in abundance is akin to government being alive to its responsibility of showing deserved interest in the wellbeing of the citizenry.

    At nearly 53 years of independence, we cannot fathom why it has become difficult for the nation to provide a workable public water system. Nigerians ought not to rely on self-help to provide water for their domestic and even agricultural needs. But because of the epileptic state of public water systems, they have been forced to resort to, initially digging of wells but now, what is in vogue is borehole digging – considered to be better than the former.

    Yet, the nation is not a desert but one blessed with abundance of big rivers that could be officially deployed for human consumption. The implications of this negative borehole digging fad are enormous and, as Ochekpe herself puts it: ‘…underground water is linked, and if there is contamination in one borehole, it will contaminate other boreholes within the area, with devastating effects on human health.’

    The problem of poor provision of water, like what is happening to the power sector, is one of misplaced priority. It is symptomatic of the recurring culture of systemic failure in the country. While a standardised Code of Practice is long overdue to curb indiscriminate drilling of boreholes, the best way to stop the trend and save the nation from environmental calamity is to make public water system work by governments.

     

  • Pre-paid meter palaver

    Pre-paid meter palaver

    •NERC ‘s somersault on ‘optional’ payment is questionable

    THE more things are advertised to change in the nation’s beleaguered power sector, the more it seems apparent that things aren’t about to. We refer to the latest policy somersault by the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC), over the procurement of pre-paid meters.

    On June 1, 2012, NERC came out with a position that electricity distribution companies will henceforth supply pre-paid meters free to their customers across the country. It was for most Nigerians a welcome development.

    Eleven months after, NERC is pushing an arrangement under which “willing” customers have the option of procuring their own meters. Described as Credit Advance Payment for Meter Installation – CAPMI, the arrangement will allow Nigerians desirous of speedy installation of pre-paid meters to advance money to the distribution companies, in return for energy credit and reduction in their fixed charges over time.

    To NERC chairman Sam Amadi, nothing has changed – at least not in any significant sense. First, he explained that the rationale is to fast track the procurement and hence distribution of the meters. Second, he said that the scheme is “optional” – since “only those who are willing to advance money for meters may partake in the scheme”.

    For those who opt for the scheme, they are expected to make an upfront payment of N25,000 for single, and N50,000 for three-phase meters, respectively. The fund will then be treated as deposit–refundable through a rebate on a fixed charge element from customers’ bills.

    We consider it important that NERC recognises and accepts that the cost of the meters should be borne by the service providers. The problem is that it has done very little, 11 months after it issued the directive on free pre-paid meters, to get the logistics for its smooth take-off, hence the current situation in which it has found itself. Indeed, the last we heard was that the evaluation of the bids submitted by various vendors was on-going, after which shortlisted ones would be ratified for subsequent approval of the Bureau of Public Procurement (BPP).

    When will this be concluded for the pre-qualified companies to swing into action? But more curious is how NERC arrived at the N25,000 and N50,000 price tag on the pre-paid meters, in the absence of a competitive bidding process.

    Now, the idea of requiring citizens to make capital contributions to procure meters under a deregulated environment seems to us the kind of novelty that a firm steeped in ancient monopolistic traditions can afford to indulge in. It is the kind of abdication that Nigerians are familiar with. For sure, the claim that it is “optional” changes nothing; it is optional only to the extent that those who cannot pay for the meters would have to wait – in most cases indeterminately – while being hooked in the interim, on the old inequitable, outlandish practice of estimated bills that merely serves the corrupt cabal in the electricity value chain.

    Moreover, only NERC deludes itself that the CAPMI arrangement is a “winner” for the electricity consumer who, under the pre-paid meter tariff rule pays his bills upfront, and now is further required to help fund the procurement of the device on behalf of the distribution companies.

    It is neither the path to equity nor would it enthrone the regime of best practices which the citizens craved.

    We understand the argument about fast-tracking the deployment of the meters. It is something that the distribution companies should be able to do without recourse to the electricity consumer. Theirs is to work at making the companies attractive to the financial markets for credit – which are what the markets exist for in the first place –not to impose further burdens on the ill-served electricity consumer.

  • Damning verdict

    Damning verdict

    •Govt will do well to accept that corruption is a major challenge rather than live in denial

    PREPOSTEROUS impunity! That was the pathetically vivid and detailed picture of the current massive corruption and official malfeasance in Nigeria recently painted by the United States Department of State. The United States could hardly be faulted when it accused government officials and agencies in the country of habitually engaging in corrupt practices with reckless abandon, and little fear of being sanctioned.

    Noting that corruption had become massive in the country under President Goodluck Jonathan’s leadership, the US Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labour Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2012, pointedly noted that “The law provides criminal penalties for official corruption; however, the government did not implement the law effectively and officials often engaged in corrupt practices with impunity. Massive, widespread and pervasive corruption affected all levels of government and the security forces. The constitution provides immunity from civil and criminal prosecution for the President, Vice President, Governors and Deputy Governors while in office. There was a widespread perception that judges were easily bribed and litigants could not rely on the courts to render impartial judgments”.

    Of course, the problem of corruption in Nigeria predated the Goodluck Jonathan administration. The vice has always been identified as a major obstacle to the realisation of the country’s vast potential and rose to astronomical heights during the locust years of military dictatorship. Massive looting of the public till resulted in the illegal and immoral enrichment of an unscrupulous minority and the condemnation of the vast majority to ruinous penury. With the restoration of democratic rule in 1999, President Olusegun Obasanjo raised high hopes of a new determination to fight the monster with his frequent anti-corruption rhetoric. The establishment of such institutions as the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) reinforced such hopes, which only turned out to be mere illusions. Despite some high profile convictions under Mallam Nuhu Ribadu’s leadership of the EFCC, Obasanjo’s eight-year tenure ended with corruption still alive and very well in Nigeria.

    During his campaign for the 2011 elections, President Jonathan promised to fight corruption vigorously as a key part of his transformation agenda. It is thus a huge disappointment that the problem has worsened considerably under his leadership, as rightly noted by the US report. It is largely because President Jonathan has not shown a personal commitment, example and determination to confront the menace of corruption frontally that it flourishes at all levels and arms of government. In the usual kneejerk reaction of government officials to such reports, the President’s spokesman, Dr. Reuben Abati, has been quick to debunk the allegations, contending that the Jonathan administration has been the most transparent since the return to democratic governance in 1999. This assertion is untrue and such attitude unhelpful. Rather than living in denial, it is better to face the reality so as to be able to change things for the better.

    The examples of corrupt enrichment in this dispensation are legion. They include the massive fuel subsidy fraud, the pension fund looting and the gross moral decay in the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC), among others. In the performance of their oversight functions in the electricity, petroleum and capital market sectors, legislators have been known to compromise their integrity for pecuniary gains. The situation is even more worrisome in the judiciary where judges have been alleged to become millionaires by selling judgments to the highest bidder.

    Indeed, corruption in Nigeria is spreading like a cancer that is undermining the ethical foundations of the society. Of course, President Jonathan cannot be expected to violate the tenets of federalism or the principle of separation of powers in fighting corruption. But he can at least show a personal example by publicly declaring his assets, purging his administration of corrupt elements and giving the anti-corruption agencies the moral and logistic support to deliver efficiently and effectively on their mandate.

  • One Step Forward

    One Step Forward

    In any discussion of a negotiated peace between the Israelis and Palestinians, a crucial question involves what the Arab states would do. On Tuesday, the Arab League reaffirmed its 2002 peace initiative and suggested that the proposal could be modified to bring it more in line with American and Israeli ideas.

    The welcome announcement could be very significant. Arab leaders deserve credit for reviving the initiative, as does Secretary of State John Kerry for trying to reinvigorate some kind of Israeli-Palestinian dialogue. Mr. Kerry, calling the move a “very big step forward,” said it meant Arab leaders were offering a security arrangement for the region. The Arab League initiative, approved by all Arab states but rejected by Israel 11 years ago, endorses a two-state solution while promising peace and normalization in exchange for Israel’s withdrawal from the West Bank and East Jerusalem and a “just solution” to the Palestinian refugees issue.

    After a meeting on Monday with Mr. Kerry and Vice President Joseph Biden Jr., Qatar’s foreign minister said the league had eased its demand that Israel return to its pre-1967 borders. Instead, the minister accepted the possibility of adjusting those borders with a comparable and mutually agreed “minor swap of land.” Israelis and Palestinians were close to a deal along these lines in 2008.

    If there is ever to be a peace deal, Israelis will have to be persuaded that the Arab states, not just the Palestinians, accept their right to exist. And Palestinians will need to feel that the Arab states are behind them.

    This is the first hopeful sign in a long time. But it soon ran into trouble from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel who reacted coolly on Wednesday and questioned the fundamental idea of exchanging land for peace. “The root of the conflict isn’t territorial,” he told Israeli diplomats. “The Palestinians’ failure to accept the State of Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people is the root of the conflict.”

    On Thursday, he said any peace deal would be put to a referendum, which some experts say could be an obstacle. However, Justice Minister Tzipi Livni, Mr. Netanyahu’s peace negotiator, welcomed the Arab proposal, as did Ehud Olmert, the former prime minister, and other opposition politicians.

    “Mideast peace” has become a throwaway line. But that goal is unquestionably the right course for the Israelis, Palestinians and an increasingly unstable region. Arab leaders, after standing on the sidelines for too long, have made a contribution by giving the two sides something to talk about. Now it’s up to the Israelis and Palestinians, working with the United States, to take it forward.

    New York Times