The Nation Newspaper

Category: Editorial

  • Unworthy process

    Unworthy process

    •Only this can explain why we honour someone today only to strip him shortly after 

    Monday, 17th September was another day for the Nigerian elite to show- case their latest wardrobe acquisitions. The venue was the International Conference Centre (ICC) in Abuja. The event was the 2012 National Honours Awards Investitures for 155 recipients. For many of the awardees, the journey to being crowned a National Honours recipient was no easy one. Since the awards have come to be seen as a status symbol of sorts, many would go to any length to get their names on the list. But, amidst the pomp and pageantry, the point was clearly not lost on President Goodluck Jonathan, who presided over the event, that the prestige of the awards had over the years become eroded.

    It was thus to restore confidence in the awards that the President promised that the honours would be withdrawn from all those who are found to be of questionable character or have fallen short of public expectation. Unfortunately, very many Nigerians, as well as this newspaper, did not put much store by the President’s words. He sounded more like a politician making the right sound bites. The truth of the matter is that it does not take skills in rocket science to identify the ‘unworthy awardees’, blacklist them and strip them of the awards.

    For instance, it is well known that former Inspector-General of Police, Mr Tafa Balogun; former Managing Director of Oceanic Bank, Mrs Cecilia Ibru and chieftain of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Chief Olabode George, are all awardees who have been convicted for one misdemeanour or the other. What then stops the Presidency from taking decisive action on these and similar cases, to demonstrate that the President is actually sincere about his threat?

    In any case, is there not something wrong with a process that throws up awardees for the country’s most prestigious honours, who within a short time, are discovered to exhibit character traits making them unfit for the honours? We believe that part of the problem is that the process, which throws up many of these awardees is itself faulty and unworthy. Why, for instance, should certain office holders become automatic holders of some awards simply by virtue of their positions? What then happens if they abuse their offices or commit some infractions that compel their exit from office? Would it not be better to wait until such individuals had completed their tenures meritoriously before they are honoured?

    In Taraba State, Governor Danbaba Danfulani Suntai got the Commander of the Order of the Niger (CON) award. His Deputy, Alhaji Sani Abubakar Danladi, who had been slated for the Order of the Federal Republic (OFR), had his nomination withdrawn at the last minute ostensibly because he had disagreements with his governor and was facing impeachment threat by the House of Assembly. Again, do the governors not have an overbearing influence on the process of selecting awardees? Does it mean someone from a given state can be denied the honour if the governor does not like his or her face, and no matter how qualified the person is for the award?

    Of course, there are some outstanding Nigerians who were honoured this year, most deservedly. A good example is Chief Mike Adenuga, a foremost entrepreneur, businessman and employer of labour. Others include the six Paralympics gold medallists, Mohamed Tahir Zakari, a level 10 officer of the Office of the Accountant-General, who returned an overpayment to him of N6 million, and Mr. Jelani Aliyu who designed the world’s first electric chair. But then, a list of over 100 awardees every year is unwieldy and can only encourage the emergence of unworthy characters as awardees.

     

  • What Aung San Suu Kyi could teach President Obama and Mitt Romney

    What Aung San Suu Kyi could teach President Obama and Mitt Romney

    SOMETIMES IT IS more difficult to learn to work together than to suffer individually,” Aung San Suu Kyi observed to a Washington audience last week.

    Coming from a woman who has spent most of the past two decades in isolation, under house arrest, it was a striking statement. The Nobel Peace Prize winner from Burma was seeking support in Washington as her country, also known as Myanmar, emerges from a half-century of dictatorship. What seemed uppermost on her mind were the practical, human difficulties of making democracy work.

    She talked about how people in her country, a Southeast Asian nation of 50 million or so, don’t really know how to ask questions of their leaders, a practice that hasn’t been much encouraged in recent decades. Similarly, she said, politicians aren’t used to the notion that they have “a duty to explain their policies.” She fretted that the Burmese fear of losing face makes it difficult for politicians to compromise.

    All of which made us wonder whether Washington might not have more to learn from Aung San Suu Kyi than the other way around. No doubt Burma, like every nation, has challenges specific to its history and culture. But the allergy to compromise, the failure of leaders to explain their intentions — much of it sounded drearily familiar.

    Here we have a presidential campaign in which both candidates are more eager to tear the other down than explain what he would do if elected. Since Republican nominee Mitt Romney has been on both sides of so many issues, the problem is particularly acute in his case. He offers platitudes about lowering taxes but refuses to say how he could make the numbers add up. He faults President Obama for having failed to achieve compromise with Congress, yet his dismissal of the half of the country that does not support him hardly seems the basis for a unifying presidency.

    Having occupied the White House for nearly four years, Mr. Obama presents less of a mystery. But it is disappointing that he offers no second-term agenda beyond defending and completing the work of his first. He accepts no responsibility for the worsening gridlock that he had promised to alleviate; his only fault, he says, was to trust naively in the good faith of the other side. His takeaway is that “you can’t change Washington from the inside.”

    There’s nothing wrong with a president going outside Washington to mobilize support; that’s what the bully pulpit is for. But Mr. Obama’s version of the past four years is incomplete. Republicans were often more intent on thwarting him than helping the country, even reversing long-held positions to do so. But at key moments, when compromise might have been possible, Mr. Obama lost his nerve or failed to lead.

    More important than arguing over history is the oft-postponed challenge of repairing the nation’s finances. Even before Inauguration Day, the country, if its politicians cannot find a compromise, will slide over a fiscal cliff of tax hikes and spending cuts that will endanger national security and send the country reeling back into recession. What would President Obama do in a lame-duck session to head this off? What would a President-elect Romney counsel? We have no idea.

    Aung San Suu Kyi, who won election to parliament in April, said her party refused to make “easy promises” that it could not fulfill. “Some people tell me this means I’m not a real politician,” she joked.

    “Cut taxes.” “Preserve Medicare.” Those are easy promises. Righting this country will require more difficult measures — including Democrats and Republicans working together.

    –Washinton Post

  • Admission racket

    Admission racket

    •The University of Ibadan matter symbolises the situation in the country

    Admission rackets are not new to Nigerian universities and other higher institutions. Perhaps the news in the case of the country’s premier university, the University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Oyo State, is that a huge admission syndicate had been operating there in the last 14 years or thereabout. It is not yet ascertained how many fake students would have graduated from the university, what is known, at least for now, is that 63 of them were discovered to have gained admission into the university in the 2011/2012 academic session alone. And this is for those already caught; we also do not know how many other such syndicates are yet to be smashed in the university and in other universities.

    According to Prof Ademola Dasilva, the university’s director of General Studies Programme, 19 of the fake students were apprehended in his unit within two weeks of surveillance. Prof Dasilva said he stumbled on a lead that led to the smashing of the syndicate said to have considerable network in Lagos, Abeokuta and Ibadan.

    Three serving staff of the university suspected to be involved are Isaac Ubani (Publication Unit of the Registry), Onaolapo Michael Adebayo (Dean of Science Office) and Adebiyi Omolade (Bursary). The others who operated from outside the university are Kabiru Adetunji (a non-teaching staff of Adelagun Memorial Grammar School, Odinjo, Ibadan); Kazeem Adio Olakunle; Femi Eyiowuawi and the fourth suspect, a former porter in the student affairs division of the university, was dismissed about 11 years ago for a similar offence. They are all facing trial in Ibadan Magistrate’s Court, Iyaganku, Ibadan.

    It is unfortunate that this kind of racket could have been going on undetected in the country’s premier university for over a decade. This is a university that has produced many great minds in many disciplines, many of them renowned worldwide.

    But the fact that admission racket is flourishing in the country underscores the undue emphasis that we place on paper qualifications. This is responsible for the desperation of many people to gain admission into the university at all cost. Nothing else could have justified the readiness of applicants to pay as much as between N160,000 and N200,000 or more, as in the University of Ibadan case, to get a place in the university, illegally.

    For a nation that places such emphasis on paper qualifications, it would also have been expected that it would give qualified applicants equal opportunities to realise their dreams, either by expanding existing universities or by establishing new ones, or both. Regrettaby, while facilities in many public universities are shrinking or, at best static, the number of prospective undergraduates keeps swelling every year. Not even the establishment of many private universities in recent years has come close to solving the problem.

    Governments have to seek ways to expand existing universities and fund them adequately. The six new universities in each of the country’s geo-political regions would have been applauded but our worry is that the problem is not only about number but also about the quality of teaching and learning that students would get in these institutions. We should also revive vocational schools and other institutions, including polytechnics and colleges of education, and make them worth attending by according their graduates the desired respect that will not make them feel inferior to their counterparts who attended universities.

    In the specific case of the University of Ibadan, we are happy that the suspects are already in court. Due process must be followed to the end, even as Prof Dasilva must be given the necessary protection from people who might have felt hurt by his uncovering of their syndicate and have been allegedly threatening him. It shows how far values have sunk in the country when people who should be remorseful for their actions are issuing threats and seeking to intimidate a constituted authority.

     

  • In defence of the right to free speech

    In defence of the right to free speech

    Freedom of speech is the essence of democracy. It is a check against oppression and a guarantor of the civil liberties that make up free and tolerant societies. Charlie Hebdo, the French satirical weekly magazine that has published cartoons of Mohammed, is testing that freedom to its limits. But the right to free expression cannot be compromised.

    The magazine’s decision to publish comes at a time of dangerous tensions between the Muslim world and the west. US diplomatic missions have been targeted in violent protests after a low-budget film that ridicules Mohammed was posted on the internet.

    Muslim anger is understandable as any depiction of the prophet is considered blasphemy. But there is no justification for the violence, which has cost innocent lives. Though Charlie Hebdo’s timing might be ill-advised, and the cartoons explicit, they make a serious point and it is one protesters should appreciate. By highlighting the risible nature of a film without artistic or intellectual content, its importance is diminished.

    In democratic societies there are enough laws to constrain abuses of the right to free speech. It is a crime in Europe, the US and elsewhere to incite hatred, whether religious or racial. One French Muslim group has launched a lawsuit against the weekly. The courtroom is the right place to judge whether a line has been crossed, not the street.

    Keeping the debate in the law courts is the challenge facing the Islamist governments that came to power after the Arab uprisings. They must reconcile the tensions that are emerging as they move towards more open societies. They should resist the temptation, indulged by their autocratic predecessors, of encouraging such protest as a way of letting disaffected citizens release steam. This is a mug’s game. The extremists stirring up violence on spurious grounds have no interest in building democracy.

    Mainstream Islamist governments will only win legitimacy by making all parties abide by the rule of law. Tunisia’s ruling Ennahdha party has rightly drawn attention to the dangers of manipulation by extremists. Too few have followed its example.

    Western governments, meanwhile, must resist their own temptation to buy peace with the Muslim world by imposing new constraints on free speech. While they can and should denounce needless provocation, they should be equally firm in their defence of citizens’ right to speak out.

    – The Financial Times

     

  • Private jets as status symbol

    Private jets as status symbol

    THE irony is poignant with sharp dramatic effects. There are about 150 private jets in Nigeria while all the domestic airlines in the land operate with less than 50 functional jets. A Nigerian ‘big man’ who is not known to run any business conglomerate owns no fewer than three jets while some airlines can barely boast of four airworthy craft. That is the current narrative of Nigeria: a very rich, and very poor country.

    This stark reality is exposed by a recent report from the aviation industry which shows that Nigeria is in contest with China as two of the fastest growing private jet markets in the world. It says that private jet ownership in Nigeria grew astronomically by 650 per cent from 20 jets in 2007 to 150 in 2012. This suggests that in the last five years, rich Nigerians have acquired about 130 private jets totalling about N1.18 trillion. A new jet sells for between $40 million and $50 million. It is also said that the new owners of these jets are preponderantly, top politicians, oil moguls and big business men. Major new generation church leaders too are not left out.

    Remarkably, the identities of the Nigerian owners of these jets are shrouded as the machines are often purchased by proxy through foreign firms based usually in North America. The offshore firms in turn, lease the craft through Nigerian companies. Moreover, most of them come with foreign registration particulars. Notably, there are more orders from Nigeria with delivery dates running into 2013 and even 2014.

    There is nothing wrong with people acquiring private jets or any property for that matter. Nigeria is supposedly a capitalist system. The constitution provides for the right to own property under the law. Therefore, the sharp rise in the number of private jets in the country is not by itself, a condemnable act. In fact, it may well signify a positive and salutary upswing in the economy.

    But on the contrary, facts indicate otherwise. Nearly all human development indices show a downward trend in the quality of life of the average Nigerian and poverty index is still in the range of 70 per cent. More crucially, with Nigeria rated among the most corrupt countries of the world, we wager that this streaming in of private jets can only be the reward of unbridled corruption. Unlike in other parts of the world, say China, which is the second largest economy in the world and which can boast of thousands of thriving conglomerates, business moguls and entrepreneurs that can afford private jets, Nigeria is still largely an impoverished country with an import-dependent mono-economy.

    Unlike in Nigeria where majority of the jet owners are top politicians, this class of people would be hard put to give account should they be found flying in private jets in places like China and the United States. And if by chance a U.S. top politician can justify his ownership of a private jet, he would have the Internal Revenue Services (IRS) to contend with, in which case he would pay numbing taxes.

    Ironically, we wager again, that it may well be the little tax paid by the little people that may have been converted into private jets for the Nigerian jet-set top politicians. There is also the issue of ostentatious lifestyles of the Nigerian rich. While a Chinese or Indian rich would build a factory first, his Nigerian counterpart would opt for a brand new private jet.

    As Nigeria’s ‘new rich’ take to the sky, we must not fail to remind that the country’s national carrier was run aground many years ago; that aviation infrastructure is currently in dereliction and passengers are exposed to all manner of danger. Need we recount the state of Nigeria’s power sector, refineries, schools, hospitals and roads? It is otiose to note that those glistening metal birds competing for space in Nigeria’s substandard airports is no sign of a burgeoning economy.

    On the other hand, it is a recipe for social upheaval when basic amenities are in regression and the ruling class basks in obscene ostentation. The auguries are ominous.

  • Forced to eat the humble pie

    Forced to eat the humble pie

    ON September 20, President Goodluck Jonathan ordered the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) to apply the brakes on Project Cure, the planned currency restructuring under which it had sought to redesign the existing denominations of N50, N100, N200, N500 and N1000 currency notes and the conversion of the lower notes of N5, N10 and N20 to coins.

    Giving effect to the presidential directive, the apex bank’s public notice issued on the same day read: “the CBN hereby informs the general public that the President, on Thursday September 20, 2012, directed that further action on the approved restructuring be stopped”.

    The statement added: “In full compliance with the provisions of the law, the CBN hereby announces that further action on the said restructuring exercise has been stopped, until such a time Mr. President may direct otherwise”.

    There is no question as to whether or not the President acted right on this occasion. He certainly did. Next to Nigerians’ opposition to the removal of the so-called subsidy on petrol, there is hardly any other issue on which a broad spectrum of Nigerians appears so united as the opposition to the currency restructuring.

    Of course the arguments adduced by the CBN, since the August 23 anouncement, to justify the planned wholesale restructuring remain unconvincing. The point which is unfortunately lost on the CBN management, is that the restructuring underlies all that is wrong with the financial system. It admits there is a problem; the problem however is the therapy, which in our view seems clearly misdirected.

    The problems facing the financial services sector are beyond what the superficial currency restructuring could address. For instance, we could not find the nexus between the policy and inflation – the monster behind the travails of the naira as a store of value.

    Again, we sought for – but couldn’t find – the link between it and the prohibitive costs of lending which have kept the real sector at bay. How about the lingering issues of inefficient payment systems that have remained despite the so-called cashless initiatives? These are formidable challenges any day. So, rather than dissipate energy on currency restructuring, these are what should engage the CBN.

    The claim that the restructuring would not induce inflation should equally not go unchallenged. Those who see the proposed introduction of N5, N10 and N20 as possible inducement to inflation obviously know a thing or two about the Nigerian consumer psychology.
    Overall, the deliverables of the much hyped policy certainly come short in terms of addressing the problems facing the financial services sector. We do not even see the presidential intervention as one of pandering to the populism. After all, it goes to the heart of the making of public policies that those who undertake them embark on the widest possible consultations. As for Project Cure, we expect the CBN to consider the matter as closed.

    There are of course lessons to be learnt from the affair. One is that the nation may have quite a lot to benefit from a proactive, truly independent CBN; nothing however is to be gained from an insular institution that prefers to see contrary opinion as contemptible.

    The posturing of the apex bank as an all-knowing institution would seem vintage Sanusi Lamido Sanusi’s CBN. Had the bank been less haughty and less disdainful of contrary opinions in the restructuring push, most likely it would have gained from the feedback spawned by the planned measure. The failure to do that is what has led to the situation in which it is now forced to eat the humble pie.

  • Judges with ‘fat accounts’

    Judges with ‘fat accounts’

    EFCC should be careful the way it is handling the matter

    Many Nigerians hold the view that many of the judges in the country are corrupt. Indeed, a few years ago, a lawyer openly accused some Justices of the Supreme Court of corruption. This public perception is also applicable to some judges at the Court of Appeal and the High Courts. So, the recent news report that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) is closing in on five judges who allegedly have ‘fat bank accounts’ may ordinarily elicit, ‘we have always said so’ from commentators. Yet, we worry that an investigation preceded by such an unnecessary public show may have unintended consequences.

    Criminal investigations should be covert, to catch the culprits unawares and ensure that necessary evidence is not destroyed. Again, when media trial prefaces an investigation and trial in accordance with our laws, it is possible that suspects, who turn out to be innocent, may have lost their reputation for no just cause. Unfortunately in the current instance, with the investigation leaked to the press, the advantage of a covert operation is lost, and if not properly handled, the integrity of the process may also be affected. Indeed, there is the possibility that dubious officials of the agency and conmen may have been gifted an opportunity to descend on the judiciary for blackmail and extortion.

    The EFCC apparently also did not take into consideration the effect that indiscriminate corruption tar will have on the already besmirched integrity and public perception of the judiciary. Without the names of the judges concerned made public, the public perception will be that it could be any of the judges. It also brings to public enquiry, questions as to what standards the EFCC used to determine judges with ‘fat account’. Again, questions may arise whether a similar standard is being applied to every other public officer, just because of this unnecessary public show.

    For the purposes of clarity, we, like most Nigerians believe that there is enormous corruption in the judiciary. Indeed, when a judge with no other means of livelihood has millions of unaccountable sums of money in his account, such a judge may have rightly raised a prima facie case of corruption against him or herself. Also, because of the sensitive nature of the judiciary with respect to the wellbeing of the society, judges more than any group of persons, must be persons clearly above reproach in their conduct. So it may be necessary that a tab is kept on those who show the proclivity for corrupt enrichment in the judiciary, in other to have a better society.

    But in doing that, circumspection must be the rule. To do otherwise is to expose the entire judiciary to unnecessary pressure. Indeed, as things are, the upright judges will be worried that while they have not corruptly enriched themselves, they have not escaped the fate of those who are corrupt. This is because the greatest asset of a judge is his or her integrity. Where that is taken away, what is left is a hollow, instead of a hallow chamber of justice. In practice, when a judge’s integrity is correctly questioned in his conduct of a matter before him, such judges quickly hands off such matters, to restore the sanctity of a law court.

    A wholesome destruction of group integrity we think may happen to the judiciary, unless the EFCC quickly restores the integrity of the innocent, by naming the judges involved in the alleged corruption. The EFCC may also have to find out who and why the information was leaked to the press, for internal discipline. Unless of course our political leadership has resorted to the era of using the EFCC to try perceived opponents through the media, even when no result will be achieved thereafter. On this point, we hope that the EFCC will not allow itself to be used by the executive to intimidate the judiciary or browbeat judicial officers to engage in unconscionable conducts in the name of fighting corruption.

    While the law enforcement agencies should keep an eye on the judiciary, like every other arm of government, the judiciary must also fight corruption among its members. The constitution amply gives the National Judicial Council (NJC) the constitutional prerogative to discipline those, who through corruption bring the entire system to disrepute. The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) and the general public must also take up the challenge to expose corrupt judges, to ensure justice for such judges. The judiciary can establish secure opportunities for whistle blowers to help sanctify the system. In our view, all necessary steps must be taken to return integrity to the judiciary that is rightly referred to as the ‘last hope of the common man’.

  • Fuel scarcity again!

    Fuel scarcity again!

    The problem of fuel scarcity took a turn for the worse earlier this week when motorists in Lagos and several neighbouring states found themselves on long queues in petrol stations across the region. The scarcity represents a worsening of fuel shortages which first manifested itself in Abuja last month.

    The current crisis is a consequence of several interlocking problems. The most immediate is the recent murder of workers of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) by pipeline vandals who were trying to prevent them from repairing damaged pipelines in Arepo, Ogun State. In addition, the Federal Government’s alleged refusal to reimburse fuel importers for past consignments has led to a reduction in fuel brought in by some of them, as well as sympathy strikes by the Nigeria Union of Petroleum and Natural Gas Workers (NUPENG).

    Given all that the nation has gone through in the last nine months, it is truly surprising that Nigerians should find themselves in this situation yet again. Ever since its inception, the Jonathan administration has touted itself as the conqueror of fuel scarcity. The petroleum ministry claimed that it had initiated reforms which would make the downstream sector more efficient, more transparent and more self-sustaining. The icing on the cake is the long-awaited Petroleum Industry Bill (PIB), a policy initiative which is expected to revolutionise the Nigerian crude oil sector.

    However, the recurrence of fuel crises clearly shows that government has not achieved as much as it would like us to believe. When it began to make a case for so-called total removal of subsidy on fuel, it stated that its main goal was to attain higher levels of transparency and efficiency. But it chose to begin with the citizenry instead of looking at the industry, and especially investigating the extremely incompetent and corrupt manner in which it was being regulated.

    This is a fundamental error which has badly affected all attempts to reform the way Nigeria’s crude oil resources are exploited, refined and distributed. Although several oil-importing firms have been charged with sharp practices running into billions of naira, there is as yet no real attempt to hold the regulatory agencies to account. So far, none of the officials of the NNPC, the Petroleum Products Pricing Regulatory Agency (PPPRA), or the Ministry of Petroleum Resources has been charged with any offence, even though it is clear that these huge scams would have been impossible without their active connivance.

    Such is the government’s obvious lack of sincerity that it has enabled the oil-importers to fight back, using all the weapons in their arsenal. They have threatened not to import any more consignments of fuel until all outstanding bills have been paid, in effect forcing the authorities to choose between sanctioning them or getting fuel. These companies also appear to have staunch allies in NUPENG, whose wildcat strikes and scaremongering tactics have further compounded the situation.

    It is clear that government’s refusal to deal with the underlying causes of fuel scarcity has led the country to the unpalatable situation it is in. Instead of facing the corrupt oil-importation cabal and its collaborators, the government concentrated on the defenceless citizenry; instead of making the full resuscitation of oil refineries a cardinal point of its reforms, it chose to focus on better ways of importing the product. The vacuum created by this lamentable failure of leadership has allowed voracious oil-importers and their union collaborators to hold the nation to ransom.

    Nigeria can no longer afford to suffer unnecessary occurrences of fuel shortage. If government begins to deal with all parties utilising the right combination of fairness and firmness, the ugly sight of long queues at filling stations will be consigned to the past where it rightly belongs.

  • Don’t let Newswatch die

    Don’t let Newswatch die

    The resting of Newswatch magazine by Mr Jimoh Ibrahim, its new owner, is tantamount to the killing of an important institution in Nigeria’s media industry. The entire process of its sale puts the magazine in the news, albeit for the wrong reason. Sadly, a medium that used to be the bastion of progressive news generation has now become a victim being feasted upon for news. It is difficult to fathom that the magazine is about becoming a relic.

    The facts surrounding the entire sale look more confusing than intriguing. It has been the words of Mr Ibrahim against those of Messrs Ray Ekpu, Dan Agbese, Yakubu Mohammed and Soji Akinrinade, all co-founders with the magazine’s assassinated pioneer editor-in-chief, Mr Dele Giwa. Ibrahim claimed the quartet got paid off when they retired from the board of directors and the company as a whole. He gave the breakdown of payments: Ekpu- N79 million; Agbese and Mohammed were paid N76 million each while Akinrinade was paid N68 million. Also, he alleged that they collectively have 6.1 per cent total shares which is less than the minimum legal demand of 10 per cent stake necessary before any shareholder can be considered for a board seat in any company.

    The quartet concurred to selling 51 percent stakes in Newswatch to Mr Ibrahim on May 2, 2011 but insisted that it was with an understanding that the paper and the principle behind its establishment on February 28, 1985 would be sustained. Barely 15 months of publication after the sale, the magazine is now in limbo. It is trite under the law that whoever owns majority shares in a company owns the company. Thence, it will be futile and naïve of minority shareholders to erroneously believe that they hold any strand of control over issues regarding the affairs of any company.

    However, the present hullabaloo should be seen beyond Newswatch; it ought not to be about legalism either; it should be about how to sustain a great institution and a brand that has made indelible imprints in the realm of defining what good governance should be, especially during the military era. It was in the course of pursuing this laudable goal that Giwa was killed on October 19, 1986. So, a veritable brand to which someone was martyred should not be destroyed under the guise of a wobbly business transaction.

    No doubt Newswatch lost touch with its credo at a time. The once vibrant magazine that made human rights statements as the epitome of its reporting, and one where written words became law had gone comatose as at the time Mr Ibrahim bought it.

    In spite of all these, what the magazine needs more now is not an undertaker but someone who would revive and possibly return it to its pride of place on the newsstands. This is why the promise made by Mr Ibrahim to revive it should be respected. To continue to insist on legalism in the entire transaction would further lead to undermining the mission and vision for setting up the magazine.

    Whatever the problems, we want Mr Ibrahim to know that there is no way the history of the tyrannical military era, albeit Nigeria will be written without a loud mention of Newswatch’s impressive role. How would it sound if Mr Ibrahim is recorded as the magazine’s undertaker?

    Mr Ibrahim should realise that for him to be part of history, he must ensure that the once popular Newswatch brand outgrows him. Any attempt to kill it will amount to killing a better part of the Nigerian media.

  • Mr. Romney’s ‘47 percent’ fantasy

    REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL candidate Mitt Romney’s comment demeaning the 47 percent of the country “who believe that they are victims” has received a lot of attention, and deservedly so. But in the same videotape of Mr. Romney speaking to donors, another remark also caught our ear.

    “You see, you and I, we spend our day with Republicans,”the former Massachusetts governor said. “We spend our days with people who agree with us.” This observation rings true, and it goes a long way toward explaining how Mr. Romney could be so wrong in his understanding of his country.

    There is a wisp of a serious argument in Mr. Romney’s comments bemoaning the half of the country that pays no income tax. Conservatives have worried for years that Americans who don’t pay taxes have no incentive to restrain spending. Government payments to individuals have risen dramatically, and beneficiaries become an interest group that makes reform of health and pension programs difficult.

    But here’s why it’s only a wisp. Of the 47 percent of Americans who pay no federal income tax, two-thirds pay federal payroll tax. Most of them aren’t making a lot of money; a couple with two children has to earn less than $26,400 to pay no income tax. Altogether, only a tenth of Americans pay no federal tax, and most who pay neither income nor payroll tax are retirees.

    Mr. Romney’s vision of the country, in other words, is a fantasy. He believes that 47 percent of Americans “are dependent upon government . . . believe the government has a responsibility to care for them . . . that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it.” This is dramatically out of touch with how hard most middle-class people work and how hard they find it to make ends meet. Half of all American households — households, not individuals — earn $50,000 or less, and the official poverty line for a family of four is a meager $23,021.

    Mr. Romney’s comments echo those of his running mate, Rep. Paul Ryan (Wis.), who told the Republican convention that President Obama offers Americans “a dull, adventureless journey from one entitlement to the next, a government-planned life, a country where everything is free but us.” Mr. Ryan worries not that the safety net may be inadequate but that it will turn into a “hammock.” Does Mr. Romney share this ideology, or does his profoundly skewed vision result from spending his days with people like him?

    Either way, Mr. Romney’s condescension toward half the country oddly mirrors the liberal disparagement of working-class Republicans that conservatives have long (and rightly) found offensive. The liberal misconception has been that anyone in the 47 percent who votes Republican is acting against economic self-interest and therefore must be stupid or duped by political ads — as if such voters cannot have principles on abortion, say, or economics that trump self-interest, even if you accept the Democratic definition of the latter.

    Mr. Romney suggests that Obama voters are such sheep that there is no point in reaching out to them — and that their support for Democrats is purely selfish. The possibility that principles might motivate their political behavior does not even occur to Mr. Romney. It’s a demeaning, as well as inaccurate, view of the people he hopes to lead.

    Washington Post