The Nation Newspaper

Category: Open Forum

  • Leadership and the future of Nigeria

    Continued from yesterday

    Let me now speak about leadership and the future of our country, Nigeria. The core of my submission is that the present state of affairs in our country represents not only a clear case of national dysfunction, but also a bleak future with no assurance of the country’s continued existence as one political entity if the proposal that I shall proffer later in this presentation is not actively pursued in one form or the other by our Governments and peoples.

    There are facts about our country that I believe are incontestable to any objective observer. The first and overaching fact is that the very substantial revenue that Nigeria has earned from its crude oil exports over the years has had little or no impact on the lives and welfare of the vast majority of the population.

    In education Nigeria, in addition to having over ten million children out of school,  has retrogressed to having only one University (UI) ranked 601st among the top 800 world Universities and 14th in Africa, ie lower than Universities in Ghana and Uganda; in agriculture, it has retrogressed from being the world’s largest producer of palm produce and second largest producer of cocoa to being an importer of palm oil and minor producer of cocoa; it has retrogressed from having efficient railway transportation from Lagos through the North West to the South East regions of the country to having haphazard rail lines that are now being sporadically rehabilitated and built;  it has retrogressed from having first-rate hospitals such as the University Teaching Hospital in Ibadan which at one time attracted medical tourism from Saudi Arabia to now having such poor medical facilities that Government officials and the citizens who can afford it are compelled to seek medical treatment abroad; and perhaps most worryingly, Nigeria has retrogressed from being a country where people lived with their property in relative safety to being a country where insurgents, kidnappers and lately marauding Fulani herdsmen are killing men, women and children in significant numbers on a daily basis.

    In sum, our country Nigeria is currently drifting with decreasing respect for the sanctity of human life and as a result, has become number thirteen in the Wikipedia list of the world’s fragile states.

    In singling out absence of good leadership as one of the factors that have led to this unhappy state of affairs, I would like to quote one of  the country’s literary icons, the late Professor Chinua Achebe who wrote that:

    The trouble with Nigeria is simply and squarely a failure of leadership. There is nothing basically wrong with the Nigerian character. There is nothing wrong with the Nigerian land or climate or water or air or anything else. The Nigerian problem is the unwillingness or inability of its leaders to rise to the responsibility, to the challenge of personal example which are the hallmarks of true leadership”.

    But I must however hasten to say that we have had some flashes of relative good leadership in Nigeria, particularly in the immediate post-independence years during  the First Republic. In the First Republic, we had the focused and service-oriented leadership of Sir Ahmadu Bello that saw such achievement as the groundnut pyramids and vast plantations of cotton in the Northern region; of Chief Obafemi Awolowo that brought to the Western region free and universal education and the introduction of the first television service in sub-sahara Africa; and the good leadership of Dr. Michael Okpara that achieved the world-scale production of palm produce and the burgeoning industrialization of the Eastern region.

    Nigeria’s political and economic progress began its retrogression with the military intervention in the country’s governance in January 1966. For thirty-three years thereafter until May 1999, minus the relatively short period of the second republic (October 1979 to December 1983), the successive military regimes became responsible  for dismantling the foundations of the country’s political stability and economic progress.

    First, they dismantled the country’s true federal structure which had been carefully negotiated and agreed as the basis for stability and progress by the nation’s founding fathers, and in its place introduced series of constitutional arrangements that reflected the army command structure, thereby transforming the central government to the equivalent of the supreme military commander whose orders must be obeyed by all rank and file, in this case the federating units.

    Second, they replaced the negotiated and democratic process of creating new federating units, as was done when the new Mid-West region was created in August 1963, with arbitrary creation of federating units by military fiat.

    Thirdly, they imported and sustained the culture of impunity which is a natural concomitant of rule by force. As has been amply demonstrated, impunity not only vitiates the rule of law, it also facilitates corruption.

    I must however add that the retardation of Nigeria’s progress cannot be blamed solely on the military. The civillians, some of whom have been involved in encouraging and supporting the various coups, and many of whom as politicians whose brand of politics has promoted corruption and divisiveness in the polity, have their fair share of responsibility for the current very worrying state of affairs in Nigeria.

    Our country is currently beset by among others, the following worries: a totally enervating atmosphere of moral and ethical decadence; a debilitating rancorous politics that is partly exacerbated by lopsided federal appointments; increased divisiveness and lack of cohesion as the country slides deeper into ethno-religious and sectarian divisions; a limping weak mono-crop-economy in which values are hardly added;  loss of the country’s influence and standing abroad; and a growing insecurity of life and property with sickening daily reports of killings of human beings.

    The question therefore is: how can we arrest this current drift towards a failed state and build the Nigeria of our dreams?

    I want here to reiterate the view that I have been expressing since my return to Nigeria in 2000 namely, that based on the experience of other similarly pluralistic countries across the world, Nigeria will not achieve enduring political stability or realize its deserved development potential with its present non-conducive “federal” constitution.

    I believe that restructuring Nigeria’s present governance architecture by returning to the provisions of its 1960 and 1963 constitutional arrangements will not only help the emergence of a leadership that will pave the way for a national rebirth, but will also put the country on a more assured path to political stability and faster socio- economic development.

    Taking into account the historical and current developments, including especially the continuing outrageous killings in the North Central zone of the country, I am proposing a restructuring of Nigeria into a true federation of eight (8) federating units comprising the existing six geo-political zones plus a restored old Mid-West region and a newly created Middle Belt federating unit. The present mostly non-viable 36 states many of which can no longer pay the salaries of their workers, should be retained in the new federating units but as development zones to be administered without their current costly executive and administrative institutions. It would be for each federating unit to decide if and when to create within it additional development zone(s) in response to any genuine cry of marginalization.

    In addition to considerably reducing the overall cost of recurrent expenditure which at present amounts to about 80% of the national revenue, I believe that the new bigger and more viable federating units, with their regional police forces can better monitor and enforce the security of the citizens; with fiscal federalism can better plan and pursue at their own pace and on a more sustainable basis their economic, education and health facilities development; and also can more effectively check corruption and hold their administrations to greater accountability.

    Such restructured governance architecture will facilitate overall national economic productivity and bring about the necessary shift away from the present virtually unitary structure which encourages the  36 states and federal capital territory (Abuja) to rely on a philosophy of “sharing the national cake”, and it will encourage the more viable federating units to focus on productivity and internally generated revenues.

    Besides, I believe that the restructured federalism will rekindle among the citizenry a sense of nationalism and the spirit of unity in diversity. The more viable and fewer federating units will also discourage the “do or die” politics which in the competition for the all-powerful centre exacerbates the divisive tendencies within the country; and the centre  because of its reduced responsibilities and the consequent significantly reduced “national cake” to share will become less attractive to our power hungry politicians.

    It was the true federal governance arrangement which during the First Republic  guaranteed such a balance of power between the centre and the regions that led Sir Ahmadu Bello to prefer remaining Premier of Northern region and sending his lieutenant, Sir Tafawa Balewa, to the centre as Prime Minister. Like his counterparts in the Eastern and Western regions, Dr. Michael Okpara and Chief Obafemi Awolowo respectively, the troika, later joined by Chief Denis Osadebey in the Mid-West region, gave meaningful leadership in their various regions and this cumulatively enabled Nigeria to have veritable influence and standing in the international arena during that period.

    A restructured Nigeria would make it easier to do away with a political class that is mainly driven by self-centred concerns, and encourage the emergence of a class of leaders that are capable of inspiring and forming affinity with the people – leaders who, like our First Republic regional leaders, would be capable of delivering their electoral promises and meeting the needs of the people as well as articulating a vision of how to continue to sustainably meet those needs.

    I would like to conclude by saying that while leadership is a critical factor in the life of Nigeria and indeed of every other nation, good leadership thrives best in a conducive political and governance structure. An example of a major national disaster was what happened to the Socialist Republic of Yugoslavia because of a flawed governance structure. For failing to adopt a constitution that catered for the divisive tendencies that existed in the country, Yugoslavia disintegrated into seven independent countries after the death of Josip Broz Tito who by all national and international reckoning had been a charismatic and committed leader.

    I therefore call on our Governments and lawmakers to heed the growing warning signs of potential national disaster by agreeing to adopt a restructured true federalism which I believe will provide the best basis for the realization of the Nigerian nation that we all desire, a stable, united and socio-economically fast developing country with a correspondingly accountable and citizen-empathetic leadership.

    Finally, now that national elections are approaching in 2019, I would like to end by urging all intending voters to regard a firm unambiguous and time-specific commitment to the restructuring of Nigeria’s present governance architecture, as the pre-requisite for voting for any political party and its candidates.

    I thank you all for your attention.

    Being the tenth memorial anniversary lecture of Sen.Abraham A. Adesanya, Lagos, May 2, 2018. 

  • Leadership and the future of Nigeria

    My first words must be about the man in whose memory this occasion has been organised, the late statesman Senator Abraham Aderibigbe Adesanya. It is now 10 years since he left us to join his God and ancestors. I thank the planning committee of this event for the honour of the invitation to be the Guest Speaker.

    Senator Abraham Adesanya was a symbol of authentic combination of loyalty to one’s ethnic group and loyalty to one’s country. He was at the same time an outstanding leader of Afenifere that sought to promote and protect the interest of the Yoruba and a nationalist leader of NADECO that sought to promote and protect democracy in his country, Nigeria. Inspired by the sage Chief Obafemi Awolowo, he led a life of idealism in which service to the Yoruba and to Nigeria was an uncompromising credo.

    Senator Abraham Adesanya’s unflinching political activism was devoted to the promotion of democracy in Nigeria.  He was a political activist that dedicated his political career to the righting of wrongs without deference to any form of prejudice, be it personal, ethnic or religious.

    I recall here that even without having met me in person, Senator Adesanya put up a stout defence of me in the Senate in 1983 when some members of the Senate Screening Committee sought, for clearly perfidious reasons, to mess me up during the ministerial confirmation hearing before my appointment by former President Shagari as Nigeria’s Foreign Affairs Minister. The incident was illustrative of how, in an uncommon public friendliness, Senator Adesanya could proceed in the defence of truth and public interest.

    I come now to the theme of this symposium, “Leadership and the Future of Nigeria”. I must first state that throughout this presentation, leadership implies good leadership in Nigeria and in other countries.

    A leader must, in my view, possess to a good degree inter alia the following attributes:  the capacity to inspire and form affinity with the people that the leader is leading; the capacity to have and articulate a vision of where he/she plans to take the country concerned; the capacity to deliver electoral promises; and the capacity to identify with and be seen to be tackling the challenges facing the people he/she is leading. Hence, leadership is primarily about service, and servant leadership enables the building of trust with  bonding and continuing inspiration of the people. A good leadership must be defined by discipline, resilience, perseverance, determination, unyielding devotion, and, above all, a strong political will to act without deference to sectionalism.

    It is not always easy to find a convergence of all these attributes in a single individual. Nevertheless, I shall want to mention three examples of leaders whose performance in their countries had demonstrable achievements, especially in putting their countries on the global map and in some cases, lifting them from the nadir of developmental challenges. A common feature of their successful leadership is their capacity, during electoral campaigns and on assumption of office, to spell out in clear and unambiguous terms the goals and guiding principles that would define their tenure in office.

    My first example is Prime Minister Muhammad Mahathir in Malaysia. At the time our country attained its independence in 1960, by virtually all economic and social indices-education and health, roads construction, agriculture, etc,– Nigeria was at par or even a notch above Malaya that subsequently became Malaysia in 1965. It is common knowledge that Malaysia, now the world’s largest producer of palm produce, obtained the seedlings for its palm plantations from Nigeria which was then the world’s largest source of palm produce. Today, Nigeria imports palm oil from Malaysia. And in the wider scale of development, including industrial, agriculture, and human skills, Nigeria now ranks below Malaysia. All this was mainly due to the leadership of Prime Minister Mahathir.

    To recall an illustration of Mahathir’s dedication and resilience as a leader, in 1981 when as Commonwealth Deputy Secretary-General, visited his office, he showed me a stand with aluminium panels on which the progress of projects being executed by the various ministries of his government was periodically recorded. And when eleven years later he received me as Secretary-General in his same office, he showed me how he was still regularly monitoring the performance of the ministries but now using a computer on his desk.

    My second example of good leadership is Mwalimu Julius Nyerere of Tanzania. When he assumed the presidency of his country in 1963, Tanzania had one of the highest rate of illiteracy in Africa, and the bulk of the population who lived in far–flung villages and towns were largely lacking in schools and medical facilities. Julius Nyerere, inspiring his people and winning their trust with his clear articulation of his goals for their welfare and unity of the country, proceeded, initially with his socialist Ujamaa policy which he subsequently moderated by accepting a more liberal economic policy, to build a large number of schools, hospitals and health centres, and impressive transportation facilities that included roads and the famous TanZam railway built with  assistance from China to serve Tanzania and provide access to the sea for its  land-locked neighbour, Zambia. Thus in a relatively short period, the literacy rate and human skills development in Tanzania began to compare favourably with other African countries.

    My third example of good leadership is Prime Minister Lester B Pearson of Canada. Mike Pearson (as he was fondly called by his friends and colleagues) was the Prime Minister when in 1968, Canada faced a major political crisis of imminent disintegration. The country’s major French-speaking province of Quebec was on the verge of seceding from federal Canada. The then French President, Charles de Gaulle, had the previous year in a state visit to Canada while addressing a huge audience in Quebec said “vive le Quebec, vive le Quebec libre” meaning “long live Quebec, long live live independent Quebec”.

    Prime Minister Pearson, himself English-speaking, was then approaching retirement and had to face the task of steering his political party in finding his successor. To the surprise of the long-standing senior members of his party, the Liberal Party, he jumped over the heads of such very senior party stalwarts as Paul Martin Snr and others to support a relatively junior French-speaking party member, Pierre Elliot Trudeau, from Quebec who had been in parliament for only about three years and with only about 18 months of ministerial experience.

    Pierre Trudeau’s prime-ministership arrested the secessionist movement in Quebec. Mike Pearson was able to achieve that because of the strength of his bonding with the citizens of Canada, and his wisdom in recognising the importance of inclusive policy in the governance of a pluralistic country that Canada, like Nigeria, is.

    I would like to recall here that I had accompanied the first Commonwealth Secretary-General, Arnold Smith who was a Canadian, on a visit to the leader of the Quebec secessionist movement, Mr Ronie Levesque, in the middle of that crisis and that Arnold Smith had not succeeded in persuading Levesque to give up his quest for an independent republic of Quebec.

  • The church and 2019 elections

    The Church, right from the medieval times, performed the role of the main stabilising force in Western Europe. Not only did it provide religious leadership, it also offered the world secular leadership as well. Through the Roman Catholic Church, the Church satisfied the spiritual needs of the medieval society. The Pope, who headed the Roman Catholic Church, offered ordinary folks of the time earthly and spiritual comforts in troubled times. Since it was the largest landholder in Europe at this period, the Church also possessed wide-ranging and significant economic powers. It played a very dominant role in reviving, as well as preserving, ancient Greek and Roman texts.

    In Africa, the church was no less dominant in the lives of the people. It played a formidable role in speeding up the end of colonialism and was responsible for the stoppage of slavery and apartheid in Africa, especially, its role in pushing up the internal contradictions of colonialism which led to the nationalist struggle for independence. The modern church has even played a greater role, especially in the mounting secular challenges of the 21st-century, most significantly, the increasing attempt by science and technology to swap the place of faith and the role of God in the lives of the human being.

    In my estimation, the greatest challenge for the church is the quality and inner constitution of elected representatives who would carry the baton of power from 2019 and beyond. For, if Nigeria is not successful in electing God-fearing men and women into positions of power in 2019, who will in turn ameliorate the social burdens that have consequentially become the heavy load which the church carries today, the pressure on the church would multiply, probably leading to a revolt of immense proportion.

    The first challenge which the church has to confront is the need for it to wake up from its apathy and lethargy of the past towards politics and the process of acquiring political power. You cannot blame the church wholesale for this. The church had been driven away from having anything to do with the process of seeking power. The backstabbing, murder, corruption, occultist search for power and sundry vices of politicking in Nigeria would make anyone who has integrity to protect to see politics and politicians as lepers. An average Nigerian politician will kill his father and rope his mother for the murder once it leads to political office. This has been on since the 1950s when indigenous party politics took over in the country. It has driven away many God-fearing people who had the heart of bringing meaningful changes into governance.

    Over the years however, due to the abdication of space by the righteous for the unrighteous to reign, the worst of us have superintended over the best of us, while the collective keeps silent. Nigeria has been battling challenges of corruption, nepotism, selfish leadership, ethnic irredentism and cronyism, among sundry others. These challenges are brought about by the executive who execute haphazard and self-centered policies which have kept Nigeria down; as well as the legislators who legislate unrighteousness as the credo of Nigeria’s legal code. So, for how long will the righteous stay on the sideline and allow the heathens take up the space to foul up Nigeria? This perhaps is the greatest challenge which confronts the church as Nigeria marches to the 2019 elections.

    The first way out is that the church must purge itself of its ancient allergy to politics. Not only must it come out of its hiding place, the church must take full and undisguised interest in who runs for offices, from the minutest to the biggest office in the land. Due to its closeness to the congregation, who make up the electorate and the people at the grassroots, the church has an understanding of who the nefarious people in communities and society as a whole are. It must move against the reprehensible set of people who contest elective offices and who have, over the years, drawn Nigeria backwards. The church must also wholeheartedly goad on and support the few good ones in society who demonstrate purity of mind and character.

    Even though the time is very short, the time to begin this task is now. My personal take is that the church must however be religion-blind in this task. This is because there are several people out there of different and even nil faiths but whose purity of mind is not in doubt. The church must embark on a methodic process of identifying them and parceling them for the process of seeking political power. The same zeal with which the church evangelizes for lost souls must be deployed in searching for the thousands of pure souls who can be encouraged to change the already messed up status-quo. Even though there cannot be any logical expectation that the church would be hundred per cent successful in getting righteous men to be in power in 2019, whatever strides it makes could be the foundation for future attempts.

    The church must also encourage the calls for a return to full-blown democracy in political parties. As it is now, the political parties are in the hands of a very few cabals who do not mean well for Nigeria but who crave a rehash of the same political party system with which they promote charlatans and never-do-wells to political relevance. This has resulted in the unmitigated disaster of governance in Nigeria. Governors, ministers and other political party barons have hijacked the parties, the only vehicle through which anyone who wants to contest political office can deploy. The result is that, if party politics is this uncharted and atrocious, it would be difficult to change the status quo from what it is to what the church and Nigerians in general want it to be, so as to better the lot of the common man on the streets.

    Party members must collect their parties from moneybags who run them today and this can be done by fastidiously paying their tokens at party meetings. We must also ensure that only those who have verifiable means of livelihood are nominated for party offices. The mistake of electing those who do not have verifiable means of livelihood is that, they become easily purchasable and worsen the take for the Nigerian people.

    Perhaps the most important challenge for the church is how to mobilize its members and communities within its jurisdiction to collect the Permanent Voter’s Card (PVC). This is an urgent imperative. Due to its age-long apathy towards the process of acquiring political power, the church has shown little interest in this core area of electioneering. For 2019, there must be an urgent reversal of this mindset. Since PVC ownership is a sine qua non for electing persons into office, other tasks earlier enunciated seem to be secondary when compared to the urgent need to collect the voter’s card. It would not be out of tune if the church dedicates some days to encouraging its members to collect the PVCs. It is when the church has ensured that members have sufficiently procured PVCs that it could go ahead with other strategic plans of securing the buying-in of its worthy sons and daughters into the task of vying for elections.

    Even though Christians and politics are uneasy partners, we must begin to befriend politics. Of a truth, philosophers like Nietzsche believe that this kind of alliance could lead to crisis, but the facts of our current helplessness as a people dictate that the church must take more than a passing interest in politics. Nietzsche had said that we must be careful, lest in fighting the dragon, we become the dragon but doesn’t the church possess the fire of the Holy Spirit any longer? Should the fire that the dragon spits frighten the church?

    The task of befriending politics in the build-up to 2019 for the church is very crucial. It is indeed in the interest of the church to so do. Otherwise, there may be a revolt among the congregation at their worsening plights.

     

    • Abridged version of a lecture delivered by Dr. Adedayo at the Ibadan Anglican Church Diocese’s Clergy Seminar on March 6.
  • Tinubu: Salute to courage as history beckons again

    Tinubu: Salute to courage as history beckons again

    Today, in Africa, the motherland of humanity, the self-glorification of the continent as the cradle of human civilisation is fast obliterating into a deprecable aqua of oblivion. It is becoming pellucid for any responsible and objective African personage that what would mark and herald the continent’s progress in spite of the traumatised stage that global political economy and neo-power geopolitics and stratagem have confined the continent to, is an audacious tackling of the continent’s current vaudeville of social, economic, political, religious and cultural phantasmagoria. Anything short of this is vacuous sloganeering.

    Yet, not many of African leaders in all spheres of life, with emphasis on the political sphere have come to terms with the afore-stated grim reality. In Nigeria, the over-rated giant of Africa, a giant standing on spaghetti legs, the ruling class just like the ruling class in most of Africa, is still wallowing in delusion of grandeur and self-delusional hocus-pocus instead of waking up from slumber to tackle the hard stuff of governance and development. The recklessness and tactlessness of the PDP administration under President Goodluck Jonathan clearly demonstrates the imperative of the enthronement of a philosopher-king-leader. A philosopher-king of the Platonic guardian class anchorage, naturally brings finesse, rigour, discipline, fortitude, tact and above all, vision to governance.

    Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, since the inauguration of the Fourth Republic has brought deft, organisational dexterity, benevolence, discipline and progressive bonhomie to Nigerian politics. The national leader of the All Progressive Congress (APC) has never been a pretender to power politics. He has always brought to bear his organisational skills and a given talent to strike the right chord at the right time. This is one African leader who is ideologically persuaded on how to turn the African fortune around as he continues to recruit well-heeled emergent leaders for the service of Nigeria. His knack for spotting and keeping very promising people with leadership potentials is unrivalled in contemporary Nigeria. A close look at the army of young turks  he worked with as governor of Lagos state between 1999 and 2007, who today are leading lights on the national stage foretells the sterner stuff of Asiwaju. His allies like Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola, Babatunde Fashola, Tunji Bello, Vice-president Yemi Osinbajo and a host of others amply demonstrate the sterner stuff of the APC national leader, Bola Ahmed Tinubu. His recent rapproachment with the Afenifere group is a political masterstroke and has left the PDP opposition befuddled and in the horns of discombobulation, especially with the tattered, shattred and battered nose its Oduduwa political subalterns received in the hands of hijackers of their recently held national convention. PDP Southwest operatives who had basked in the gregarious and temerarious mire of wittling down the prodigious influence of Asiwaju in the politics of the Southwest now have to go back to the drawing board. The great efforts of the APC national leader in building bridges across ideological, ethnic and religious divides put him ahead as the master-strategist nonpareil in Nigerian politics today.

    Love him or hate him, what critics and admirers of Bola Ahmed Tinubu cannot take away from him, is his organisational skills, a rare capacity to put his nose to the grind stone, a talent hunter, builder and investor in young men and women, imbued with cosmopolitan mien. As Senator in the aborted Third Republic, Asiwaju’s progressive jousting and performance in organising the opposition human rights and pro-democracy movements that challenged and defeated military dictatorship in the country is another testimonial to his progressive ranking.

    He did not only join in the mass struggle to resettle the military in its fortes, he galvanised numerous social forces (professional groups, radical patriots and socialists, minority ethnic rights groups, leading centrists, even progressive retired military officers, farmers, traders, taxi drivers, tailors, fishermen, leading members of the clergy and their followers) to ensure the nation survives the onslaught and devastating macho-politics of military jackboots. He gave life to radical newspapering in the country which called off the bluff and swashbuckling megalomania of the “kill-and-go” mien of the late General Sani Abacha.

    Indeed, at a time when many great and respected Nigerians were hunted and murdered for their anti-establishment political activities, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu doggedly and ruggedly refused to tergiversate.  He retreated into exile and battled the Abacha junta to luxation. Tinubu’s humanism and flair for constitutionalism was consummated as the governor of Lagos State between 1999 and in 2007.

    Today, we are living witnesses to the giant strides of Tinubu as governor.  In his bid to test and concretise the quest for federalism, the APC national leader as governor of Lagos State created local councils and funded them. Some other states which initiated the Lagos model could not withstand the onslaught of the federal government under the leadership of Chief Olusegun Obasanjo who dictatorially stopped the Lagos State’s federal allocation. Other states quickly retraced their steps and annulled their newly created councils. But, Lagos State under the dogged and cerebral Asiwaju, a federalist to the core, truly committed to the ideals of federalism in a multi-ethnic, multi-religious, multi- cultural Nigeria pushed on with his newly created councils without Federal allocations for a number of years till he left office in 2007. Critics would easily say that Lagos is rich with huge internally generated revenue which emboldened Asiwaju to dare then President Obasanjo, but we all do know that if Asiwaju was spineless and pusillanimous, or even opportunistic to curry Obasanjo’s favour, he would have caved in and abrogated the councils he created.

    It took the Supreme Court ruling for Lagos State to convert its new councils to Development Areas. The lesson from Asiwaju’s resilience and political sagacity is to put the question once again whether Nigerian States are ideologically committed to the struggle to refederalise Nigeria, with the states or federating units reclaiming some of their rights and functions? The great federalist believes in action than cheap propaganda. Nonetheless, the lesson was not lost. The Asiwaju political machine made a statement that remains a watershed in the struggle for federalism in contemporary Nigeria.

    As the nation returns to electoral politics in the months ahead, the All Progressive Congress (APC) must leverage on the political fortunes and far-reaching socio-political  networks of Asiwaju Bola Tinubu. The Jagaban is already doing what he knows how best to do- reaching out to all that matter on the political stage, building bridges across the land to enhance the electoral chances of the APC.

    Asiwuja should and must also reach out to other politically estranged groups in the other geopolitical zones to fortify the chances of our great party in the 2019 general elections. Nigeria has always been Asiwaju’s political pet project and that is the more reason I call on him to shame and disappoint all those political Lilliputians who are praying so hard that there should be a crevice and snap in the tender and delicate political relationship between him and President Buhari. President Buhari needs Asiwaju Tinubu in 2019 just the same way Asiwaju Tinubu needs President Buhari in 2019. BUT A STEADY AND PROGRESSIVE NIGERIA NEEDS THE TWO OF YOU TOGETHER MORE. Truth be told. The other political parties are not offering better alternatives for the progress of our great country. History truly beckons again.

     

    • Honourable Obahiagbon is former Chief of Staff to former Edo State Governor, Comrade Adams Oshiomhole and a former member of the House of Representatives.

     

  • Nigeria’s economic future is in its hands

    Nigeria’s economic future is in its hands

    In a small, rural community outside Kaduna, a woman is starting her day. Her business is selling produce. Of all the tools she uses, the most important is one that fits in her pocket.

    Each day, she completes dozens of transactions using her mobile phone—buying crops from growers, selling to her customers, paying school fees and other family bills. Using her mobile phone remotely to access low-cost and secure mobile money services, she has been able to stabilise her finances, save for the future, expand her business, and invest in her family’s welfare.

    Mobile money isn’t a futurist fantasy, requiring new technologies that are generations away. If a phone can send and receive text messages, it can send and receive money. Eight out of 10 Nigerian adults already own a mobile phone with that capability. But only two out of 100 have a mobile money account—a lost opportunity to extend financial access to millions of Nigerians who are currently excluded from the financial system.

    When I last visited here five years ago in my role as the UN Secretary-General’s Special Advocate for Inclusive Finance for Development, Nigeria was launching a detailed strategy to expand financial inclusion, especially to poor and rural communities. The ultimate goal was to strengthen equitable growth and development. Today, advances have been made but half the country still does not have even a basic financial account, and so leaders are refining those plans to encourage significantly faster progress.

    Mobile money is one of the most promising and exciting tools available to transform the landscape of opportunity in Nigeria and around the world. A recent study from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology found that access to mobile money in one African country lifted ten percent of the extreme poor out of poverty—a truly inspiring result!

    So what could mobile money mean in the daily lives of Nigerians?

    • A peanut farmer in northern Nigeria could pay for his supplies in minutes using his mobile phone rather than traveling for hours to do so in person.
    • Remember our produce seller outside Kaduna? Thanks to mobile money, she can limit the risk of carrying cash or hiding it at home by depositing it electronically into her account.
    • A mechanic in Abuja could receive the credit he needs to improve his operation based on the digital history of his mobile money payments.
    • A family in Sokoto state that has never had electricity at home could purchase a few hours of light each evening using a solar system that they pay for and activate through mobile money.
    • A couple could afford to get medical help for an elderly parent in Kwara State thanks to low-cost health insurance they obtain through their mobile money provider.

    When more and more people experience benefits like these, opportunity rises, poverty erodes, and the wealth of the nation grows and grows. So how can we move quickly to speed progress on financial inclusion and build mobile money into a viable option?

    As the Secretary-General’s Special Advocate, I’ve traveled the world talking with governments, businesses, and individuals about financial inclusion—what works and what doesn’t. I’ve found rising recognition that mobile money can make an important contribution to financial inclusion and that it can be provided effectively by a range of entities, not just banks.

    Mobile network operators, for example, have deep knowledge of digital technology and a great network of access points for low income populations. Nigeria is estimated to have between 150,000 and 200,000 airtime agents throughout the country. India, Pakistan, Tanzania, and Ghana all offer compelling examples of how this can work.

    Other challenges will also need to be addressed. Anyone who has had their phone service drop out during a call can predict that problems with downtime could seriously undermine the growth of mobile money; connectivity will need to be strengthened. It will also be vital to build digital literacy among customers. And regulations must be put in place to protect them from fraud.

    But mobile money invites us to think creatively in all sorts of ways. Phones can be wallets. Small shops can be mini-bank branches. Mobile money payment histories can be used to build a track record to gain credit.  As your government sets the stage for these innovative ideas, we look to Nigeria’s banks and other businesses to bring them to life.

    There is a lot of work to do, but this is a country that knows how to succeed. I look forward to the next chapter of that success—one that includes all Nigerians.

     

    • H.M. Queen Máxima of the Netherlands has served as the UN Secretary-General’s Special Advocate for Inclusive Finance for Development (UNSGSA) since 2009. On the invitation of the President, she is visiting Nigeria from 31 Oct.–2 November to discuss the country’s progress on extending financial services to all.  As Special Advocate, she is the leading global voice advancing universal access to affordable, effective, and safe financial services. Collaborating closely with global and national partners, she raises awareness, encourages leadership, works to break down barriers, and supports action to expand financial inclusion.

     

     

  • Adesina should learn to speak the truth

    It has come to our notice that Presidential spokesman, Femi Adesina does not know the meaning of trust or he is pretending not to know.

    Adesina claimed in a tweet that the reason there was no outrage against the President Muhammadu Buhari-led government when it increased pump price of petrol from N97 to N145 is because Nigerians trust him as opposed to when former President Goodluck Jonathan increased it from N63 to N97.

    That assertion is shows Adesina has lost touch with reality.

    Back to the issue, the reasons there was no outrage against Buhari are aplenty and trust is not one of them. They include:

    1. The Buhari-led government frustrated citizens with scarcity of the product long before it eventually increased price.
    2. There was a rise of undemocratic abuse of dissent in the polity and Nigerians wisely accepted the availability of the product and avoided arrest.
    3. Just as they came to power, the Buhari’s government sustained the lies and blackmailed Nigerians who genuinely saw beyond their lies.
    4. Many patriotic Nigerians like Jonathan sued for peace and calm to give the Buhari’s government no excuse for failure.

    True to his nature, Femi Adesina willfully ignores these facts and also the fact that one major reason people protested during the Jonathan era was the propaganda machinery deployed by the APC to deceive the gullible.

    The opposition leaders lead the protest around the country. They did not stop there; they packaged the President as a reformed democratic forgetting that you cannot teach an old dog new trick.

    It is with deep regrets that Nigerians today look at this government and shudder. So before Adesina can talk about trust and be taken seriously, he must first learn to speak the truth.

    The fact still remains that Jonathan remains the most unappreciated leader of our time simply because people like Adesina are not called out on their false claims no matter how small.

    But not anymore, Nigerians will continue to resist this present government until the peoples’ voices are heard and obeyed.

  • Why Kachikwu should go

    Why Kachikwu should go

    Sam Omatseye’s column on the back page of The Nation of Monday, October 16, 2017 has raised some questions about the practice of journalism from the prism of critical ethics of objectivity, balance and truth. The eminent writer was apparently carried away by the allegations of an obviously frustrated Minister of State for Petroleum, lbe Kachikwu who openly indicted his boss, in a frantic bid to malign the reputation of his successor as Group Managing Director of the Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC), the “non-media friendly” Dr. Maikanti Baru.

    Without a thorough investigation to unravel the facts of the matter, Sam swallowed the prevarications hook, line and sinker. Thus, he amplified the tissue of lies reeled out by Kachikwu. The minister-turned propagandist instantly had a fan in an esteemed columnist, who fell into the same mistake of colossal impatience and neglect of verifiability. Sadly, the composition paled into a classic example of how not to write a column. The article may have been written in a hurry, in a fit of sensitisation, to assist in defamation and peddle deliberate falsehood, and to wipe up sentiment in a reckless bid to meet the waiting demand of antagonists and parochial minds eager to always crucify the president for an offence not committed.

    Kachikwu, a doctor of law, woke up from the wrong side of the bed when he wrote a protest letter to President Muhammadu Buhari over the award of $25 billion contract by Baru, without consultation with him and the corporation’s board. He accused the NNPC boss of a bravado management style, improper appointments and violation of due process. He explained that he opted for writing the president because he was denied access to him. His letter cast the president in the mould of an invincible leader out of reach of any aide, no matter how important.

    That was the baseline for Sam’s unrestrained outburst. In his highly disputed gospel of institutional purity, Sam, the distinguished writer and opinion moulder, lamentably regressed into a clear misuse of media privilege by inadvertently manufacturing an impeachment offence outside the constitution, based on what he described as the president’s contemptuous silence. He called for Buhari’s resignation. If he does not resign, the alternative is to incite the Senate to impeach the Commander-In-Chief for an imaginary offence. The whole scenario smacked of media terrorism.

    Kachikwu, who was ‘removed’ as the NNPC GMD, was full of bile. Apparently, he was nursing grudges over his limited role as an assistant minister. Instructively, the president still holds the minister of petroleum portfolio. No doubt, the minister of state is endowed with creative ability, strength, energy and vigour, but he has little to do in the ministry as, in the words of former Petroleum Minister Prof. Tam David-West, he is a ceremonial minister. Kachikwu claimed that he was being sidelined by the GMD and other heads of parastatals in major decisions. He acknowledged some allegations of graft against him. But, he hastily gave himself a clean bill of health as if he is the court of law. In a fit of psychic determinism, he said he was neither anti-North nor corrupt as being alleged in some quarters.

    Kachikwu’s vituperations underscored the danger of acting before thinking. The junior minister conveyed the impression of an apolitical operator without the slightest dent. He visited his frustration on Baru without let or hindrance, blaming him for insubordination. Operators in the sector were taken aback. Insubordination to who? The president/minister of petroleum, to whom Baru is directly accountable, or himself, a nominal deputy minister of an important ministry camouflaging as the overall boss? He confronted Baru, who replied that the president was aware of all his undertakings, which he now branded as unlawful. Yet, he refused to accept the response, until he could hear from the president, who, in his view, was being hidden from his preying eyes, probably by the same dreadful cabals, so that his attempt to report verbally to the president eventually was futile. The minister’s arrow missed the target. The complainant boxed himself into a corner. Kachikwu ended up as a rebellious and disloyal minister of government.

    By writing to the president without deep reflection, the embattled minister grossly capitalised on the new outlook of President Buhari, a no-nonsense military dictator-turned democrat, who now acts slowly, cautiously, but steadily and wisely, in a manner that befits the democratic order. The learned lawyer has strayed into a pool of unmitigated ignorance despite his rich curriculum vitae and vast experience in the sensitive sector. Suddenly, a deep hollow has surfaced in the enviable track record of a great technocrat, who has only mastered technocracy without its accompanying boardroom politics, which the corridor of power has made inevitable.

    That omission, particularly the neglect of the politics of crucial matters, accounted for his failure to properly manage the oil subsidy crisis, to the detriment of the economy and labour/government relations. Yet, the apolitical figure also succumbed into the gamble of regional politicking at a time some geo-political zones are firing salvos over perceived lopsided appointments in the NNPC by lending his voice to the lack of transparent recruitment. Although he temporarily succeeded in boxing Baru into a war of integrity, the startling revelations after the initial challenge turned the table against him.

    The reply by the NNPC opened a can of worms. The inconvertible evidence now stare Kachikwu and his cohorts in the face. According to the corporation, the minister lied when he said he was not consulted on the $10 billion Crude Oil Term contracts, the $5 billion Direct sales, Direct Purchase (DSDP) transactions and the Ajaokuta-Kaduna-Kano (AKK) pipeline contracts. In fact, it was revealed that the minister made an input into the shortlisting of 40 off-takers for the Crude Term Contracts for 2016/2017 by recommending seven companies. Remarkably, he did it singlehandedly. The seven companies were engaged by the corporation. How can a minister who recommended the companies claim that he was sidelined? If he actually nominated 10 firms and he now decries the process, how noble is Kachikwu’s intention

    Kachikwu alleged that Baru violated Sections 130(2) and 148 (1) of the 1999 Constitution. But, the GMD said that he followed the law by consulting the president, who is the Petroleum Minister. He also said that the current standards for transactions being followed by the corporation were put in place by Kachikwu when he was the GMD, wondering why he has turned around to raise eye brow at the same rules and regulations now that he is not the GMD.

    Baru also denied exceeding the stipulated contract limit. He recalled that as the GMD, his predecessor wrote a memo to the Bureau of Public Procurement (BPP) to seek clarifications on the financial limit of the NNPC Tenders Board. In its reply, the BPP put the limit at $20 billion, which the corporation’s management has strictly adhered to.

    There is limitation to the efficacy of propaganda. There are times when lies, fabrications and prevarications can backfire. Having reached that height in public service, what is Kachikwu still doing in government when he is unhappy? Why can’t he resign as a matter of conscience to draw home his point? Or is the president unavailable to receive his letter of resignation?

    There are other posers: would Kachikwu be pleased when Baru, who he has accused of insubordination, renders accounts to a minister of state, instead of the senior minister and president of Nigeria? When the president gives a directive and the minister of state gives his own rules, which one should take precedent? Or does the minister of state feel threatened by the GMD? Is his letter reflective of the general mood in the management board? Does the minister has the mandate of the board to embarrass the president?

    As the chair of the NNPC board , Kachikwu has the power and right to know what Baru is doing. He has the right to call his so-called subordinate to order. Instead of externalising the issues, through the leaked letter, he has the statutory power to call an emergency board meeting to discuss the salient issues. By choosing to externalise the matter, he could be suspected of a hidden agenda. Whose interest is he serving by refusing to do his job as the chair of the NNPC board ? Whose interest is he serving by opting to embarrass the government he is serving as a minister? How are his fellow board members responding to the disclosure that he nominated some companies that wete appointed off- takers? Will it be improper to accuse him of conflict of intetest? Of abuse of his exalted office ?

    What Sam Omatseye should have done is to call a spade a spade, and not to defend indecency in public life. A reputable columnist should have investigated deeply before rushing to the print. Facts are sacred. Truth is the only bulldozer for pulling down a mountain hill of falsehood. It is a weapon that cannot be cowed.

    Instead of turning the heat on the president by asking him to either resign or be impeached by the parliament, Sam should hit the nail on the head by asking the minister to resign. He should not have exonerated the minister of state and painted him as a hero while painting the president as a villain.

     

     

    • Olaitan is an Abuja-based public affairs commentator

     

  • Truth, Oshiomhole and the hatchet men 

    Truth, Oshiomhole and the hatchet men 

    Much as the proliferation of columns in Nigeria’s print media today offers a plethora of perspectives to public issues, the downside is the high incidence of abuse by mercenaries. A vivid illustration is a piece entitled “The disintegration of Oshiomhole” by Mr. Yinka Odumakin, a self-styled “Yoruba leader”, published recently in a national daily.

    Maybe, I should begin by explaining myself. I am a keen follower of political events in Nigeria, though neither a sympathiser of APC nor PDP. However, based on my own deep knowledge of the events Mr. Odumakin wrote erroneously about, I thought I am morally obliged to weigh in in public interest.

    In an attempt to settle personal scores with Comrade Adams Oshiomhole, the slayer of PDP godfathers, Odumakin  audaciously descended into libel, dressing hear-say as facts and passing judgement based on utter falsehood. Barely disguising his malice, he conveniently took off with the “unpopular view” reportedly expressed by the former Edo governor at the colloquium organised by the Nigeria Labour Congress two weeks ago on restructuring – the burning issue of the day.

    To be sure, I watched television footage of the event at issue as well as reports by at least four of the leading national dailies. Contrary to the spin by a section of the press, I don’t see anywhere where Comrade Oshiomhole spoke against devolution in a manner that would obstruct good governance of the country or impede the deliverance of  succor directly to the long-suffering masses of Nigeria.

    Comrade Oshiomhole is not just a talker, but also a doer, as can be verified from his stellar performance as two-term governor of Edo State. The memories of the likes of Odumakin may be short, but the real Nigerian workers will certainly not forget the man who never failed to champion their cause, even as Edo governor. When it was most “unpopular”, Oshiomhole once broke ranks with his fellow governors to join NLC street protest in Abuja demanding that the N18,000 minimum wage remain sacrosanct. Just as Edo teachers will certainly not forget who pioneered the payment of TSS in 2011 when the relatively “richer” states were foot-dragging.

    I think Oshiomhole’s only point of departure was the view that rather than be fixated on the current elite game of endless “talk talk” on restructuring, we should not forget to channel more energies towards evolving ideas that will immediately better the living conditions of the masses of Nigeria. He definitely speaks from rich hand-on experience in political office and genuine concern for the poor at the receiving end of the harsh economic climate today.

    In any case, having also been a two-term president of the NLC, a pan-Nigerian institution for that matter, how do you expect Oshiomhole to, at this point, descend so low as to be mouthing divisive or separatist rhetoric being indulged in by ethnic entrepreneurs and sectional irredentists like the Odumakins of this world? NLC only recognises one Nigeria. NLC is religion-blind and ethnicity-void. That is the pan-Nigeria movement Oshiomhole represents and on whose behalf he speaks.

    However, the former Edo governor expressed misgivings at what he described as the desperate attempt to hijack the restructuring debate by PDP and its apologists who he believes rather view it primarily as a tool to attack and vilify the ruling APC of which he is a proud member. Oshiomhole’s “yabis” against PDP is what I think actually annoyed Odumakin, who was undoubtedly empowered materially by the discredited Jonathan administration. Of course, it is a statement of fact that Odumakin and his madam temporarily relocated their matrimony to the 2014 Abuja confab and each collected princely N4m monthly while the talk-shop lasted.

    We all know plenty of dollars exchanged hands during Jonathan’s desperate bid for second term between 2014 and 2015. Odumakin even rushed out a piece of hagiography in praise of his PDP benefactors then. He is yet to tell us who sponsored the “emergency book”, even though it is already open secret. If truly Odumakin and his co-travelers were truly sincere about implementing the recommendations of the 2014 confab report and were so committed to “restructuring” then, how come they could not persuade their PDP paymaster then to implement aspects of the proposal that did not require legislative reengineering?

    These were the factual points Oshiomhole was trying to make, but which the Odumakins of this world are now labouring futilely to twist out of context.

    To show how jaundiced he was against Oshiomhole, Odumakin shamelessly raked up the issue of the ultra-modern 5-Star Hospital in Benin for which the former governor has been praised by all and sundry, but which PDP has expectedly been battling to discredit.

    Thank God, no one is accusing Oshiomhole of laying claim to a structure that does not exist, as was the case under PDP. The truth of the matter is that Edo now has a new governor in person of Godwin Obaseki, who appears to have a different view on how best to manage the hospital. The latter, being a technocrat, believes the edifice and its modern appurtenances are better left not in the hands of civil servants, but managers from the private sector to be given strict targets to deliver value to the public and the investor (government). Should Oshiomhole now be crucified for Obaseki’s different idea?

    But, for God’s sake, what has the Benin hospital got to do with the colloquium in Abuja? To hatchet men like Odumakin, a connection had to be made, no matter how ludicrous. Shamelessly, he devoted a huge space in his pathetic write-up to quote all the foul things earlier uttered by the voluble chairman of Edo PDP, Mr. Daniel Orbih. Just to get at Oshiomhole. What a shame!

    Most pathetic of all the drivel written by Odumakin is his attempt to belittle Oshiomhole’s remarkable achievements as an individual who rose from humble background to national limelight and his monumental contributions to the labour movement in the last three decades as a committed unionist. It is pointless even replying Odumakin here. Right-thinking Nigerians already know the truth.

    In any case, who is better placed to expose Odumakin’s treacherous character than Chief Ayo Opadokun, an Afenifere insider. During a bitter epistolary exchange not too long ago, the NADECO chieftain described in details Odumakin’s penchant for biting the fingers that fed him. For instance, when he was struck down by a mysterious affliction in his arm years ago and was penniless, Opadokun revealed that it was Asiwaju Bola Tinubu that came to his rescue by offsetting his medical bills. But that show of goodwill in his hour of dire need would not stop Odumakin from betraying his benefactor soon after he was discharged from the hospital.

    On the contrary, Odumakin is the one who is yet to explain satisfactorily to the public what he does for a living other than parading himself as “Yoruba/Southern leader” by virtue of being the “spokesperson” of Afenifere. That was the big challenge thrown at him in 2011 by no other than the Publisher of THISDAY, Mr. Nduka Obaigbena, when this political hustler tried to blackmail the media guru in the countdown to the general elections of that year. Of course, the “very principled” Odumakin was then working for General Muhammadu Buhari’s Presidential Campaign Organisation against Goodluck Jonathan.

    But by the next election season, this political harlot had slipped over to Jonathan’s bed without batting an eyelid. Yes, because the price was right! What a shame.

    Lately, Odumakin has been linked to a multi-billion naira radio station in Oyo State. He is yet to deny interest in the eye-popping undertaking and also explain where the money came from since the Afenifere job is not known to be a salaried job.

    Of course, the sacking of PDP from Ondo last year only meant the final destruction of the last source of “stomach infrastructure” for political mercenaries for South-West PDP like Odumakin. Until Gbenga Daniel lost out politically in 2011, Abeokuta used to be their rendezvous. Thereafter, they retreated to Akure and began to praise-sing Segun Mimiko as a latter-day “Awoist”. Too bad, the “Oshokomole” of Ekiti State (Ayo Fayose) is today not deceived by the theatrics of these funny characters wearing fake Awo cap.

    Overall, it is a measure of the political tragedy of Nigeria today that in an environment where you have the likes of Chief Olusegun Obasanjo and Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, both phenomenally accomplished in politics and professional calling by any standard, political riffraffs like Odumakin will take liberty to parade themselves as “Yoruba leaders”.

    So much for a pathetic columnist!

     

    • Comrade Arogundade,

    wrote from Ilasa, Lagos. 

  • My random thoughts…

    My random thoughts…

    I am sharing my thoughts in this article, not necessarily as the Governor of Lagos State but as a Nigerian; a Nigerian who wants to see progress and sustainable growth in our country.

    I have been lucky to be administering over a state that has been put on the right track by my two predecessors, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu and Babatunde Raji Fashola (SAN). I do not think I have done anything special except to bring my own style of leadership, my own experience and my vision.

    Lagos, as it is, has not reached its peak but we can see signs of progress and positive transition to the Lagos of our dreams. What bothers me personally is that I do not see the same level of progress elsewhere in the country. I am not happy that most states in our country are not advancing like Lagos. It will be unfair of me to think that because Lagos is functioning, then I can go to bed and assume all is well. If only one man is prospering in a village, it is not progress. Rather that man is in danger.

    According to the statistics released by the United Nations, by 2050, Nigeria is projected to have the third largest population in the world, with two-thirds of the population today below the age of 35. What are we doing today about this? What are we planning to feed them with? How are we going to provide them with jobs, housing and infrastructure? How are we planning to make the country self-sufficient and self-reliant for the future?

    One of the key instruments to the permanent prosperity of Nigeria lies in the hands of the 109 Senators and 360 Representatives in the National Assembly. I just want to plead that we should be open-minded and forward-thinking; we should think about the teeming millions of youths, from Kano to Ibadan, Zungeru to Warri, Jalingo to Yobe, Umuahia to Calabar, and then back to Lagos; we must give serious consideration to what we intend to bequeath to them.

    In my opinion, the prosperity of this nation lies with the states. We need to get the states and Regions working again and the only way we can unleash the potential of the state is for our representatives at the National Assembly to help their own states take the next step and move to the next level. In the past, there used to be positive rivalry and competition among regions prior to the entrance of the military in the national governance. The military split the nation into states and moved all resource control to the centre for their own administrative convenience. Now that we have tasted democracy, I think it is time for us to sit back and think, for the sake of those who are older than us and for the sake of our children, and even those yet unborn.

    We need to raise our voice in support of the demand for devolution of power to states and fiscal federalism, especially the review of the current revenue sharing formula.  These, in my view, are fundamental and critical to creating an enabling environment that will accelerate development in all parts of the country. The ongoing process for the review of the 1999 Constitution presents a golden opportunity for us to redress all the aberrations created by the interjection of the military that have stunted growth and inhibited the capacity of states to harness the huge potentials of our nation.

    Even with the kind of resources we have in Lagos, it is very clear that there is huge infrastructural deficit in the state. In addition, the resources are not so huge as to make Lagos globally competitive and deliver the social infrastructure we all crave. So, where will the money to drive the Lagos of our dreams come from?

    The economy is not doing well as much as we want. I cannot tax the people any more than we are doing presently, but we have to become more efficient in tax collection because that is the major source of revenue with which we can protect the future as well as improve the welfare and well-being of all Lagosians.

    This takes me to the kind of reforms that we have embarked upon in the last two years. We made security a priority. Our goal has always been to deliver a clean, safe and prosperous Lagos. I want to use this platform to thank the private sector and the corporate Lagos who have been wonderful and have been silently supporting us in the provision of security equipment and infrastructure to our security agencies. Because of them we have been able to improve the performance of our security agencies but we will not take them for granted.

    On Cleaner Lagos Initiative. In the last two years, we have found out that Lagos generates one of the highest waste in the world. As at the last count, documented waste in Lagos is estimated at 13,000 tonnes per day; compared to New York which is 10,000 tonnes. Considering undocumented statistics, we can add an additional 4,000 tonnes per day to that figure.

    Now, if we want to be revolutionary; if we want to be globally competitive; if I want to deliver on the promise that I made to deliver a clean, safe, and prosperous Lagos, I cannot use the same template that has been in use in the past. Cleaning Lagos and keeping the environment clean has nothing to do with environmental sanitation and putting your economic productivity at a standstill for three (3) hours in a month. That will not clean Lagos.

    Cleaning Lagos means we should give Lagosians scientifically treated land fill site, transfer loading stations, functional dyno-bins, functional compactors, brand new materials and also be able to employ more people. That is why I extended my hand to the private sector for a partnership that will lead to the introduction of 500 brand new compactors, employ more than 27,000 street sweepers across the various wards in Lagos and create 200,000 indirect jobs. And we are commencing this in another few weeks.

    I fully appreciate the concerns of the people who have been cleaning Lagos in the years past. I do not take them for granted, neither am I going to ignore them. The new model is a win-win for all of us; I have offered them 100% income from the commercial enterprise so that our PSP can gain capacity and also get more capital to do more work. There are over 5,000 companies in Lagos, enough to go around all the PSP operators, with a minimum of 15 companies to each PSP. The government can support them to make their contract with those companies bankable.

    So, while we are using the Cleaner Lagos Initiative to clean private residences and domestic refuse, our original PSP operators are compensated by dealing with companies and getting 100% revenues with just 1% administrative charges to LAWMA. In the past, LAWMA collects 40% in charges. This reform is a product of deep thoughts and serious human considerations for the environment and all stakeholders. We promise Lagosians that effective from October; within six months they will see the difference. All they need to do to help us achieve this goal is to cooperate with the government and pay the annual public utility levy in accordance with the law. This is what will fund the project. Our bins will be cleared systematically on a daily basis. The same way the way the refuse on Adeola Odeku is cleared is the same way refuse in Badagry, Ayobo, Agege and other parts of Lagos will be cleared.

    In the transport sector, we have decided that to integrate our rail, road and water transportation systems. It will take time and but I believe in the philosophy of Think It, Plan It and then Act It. Sometimes, people can be impatient and say we are not responsive, but the issue is that when you run a government, you cannot run a reactionary government. We are running a responsive government which is one of the tenets of good governance. We must and are expected to think through all our policies properly and to the end before planning and executing. The difference between the thinking time, planning time, the execution time and the action time demanded by the populace is what makes people cry out.

    There are a lot of things coming up under the bus reforms initiative. We are introducing new bus terminals; there are already new terminals at Tafawa Balewa Square and in Ikeja. We are constructing more; Yaba, Oyingbo, Mile 2, Ojodu Berger, Ogba and Agege. All these things will be in place before our new buses come in February 2018.

    We are doing a lot on water transportation also. We want to make sure that everyone is able to move from one place to another.

    Like the transport sector, we are doing new things in the health sector. We do not have enough General and Specialist hospitals. From Lekki to Epe there is no General hospital along that axis and we need to do something about it. More Specialist hospitals are coming up but the government cannot do it alone. My take is that the private sector needs to come on board. The private sector is at the front burner of what we are doing and we have a management team made up of experts from the private sector. We welcome ideas and projects that can bring value to the majority of Lagosians. We believe strongly that value is driven by the impact on humanity and that is what all our story is all about.

    We love the criticism that Lagos is the second least livable city. It is a challenge to us and we are working on it, but people forget that the major considerations for this classification are terrorism and crime which I believe we do not have in Lagos. I am passionate about Lagos. I do not compare myself (Lagos) with Melbourne. What is important is that we are making some giant strides, positively affecting the lives of our people and even receiving accolades for the little things we have done. There is still a lot more to come and in another one year, I believe that people will see that Lagos has taken proper shape. I am a good listener and I appreciate objective criticism. I read and listen even though I often do not respond.

    Lagos is the most thriving Cosmopolitan city right now in Sub-Saharan Africa. Our goal is to expand capital expenditure such that in another two to three years, Lagos state will become the third largest economy in Africa.

    These are just some of my random thoughts…

    •Mr. Ambode is the Lagos State governor.

  • State police: Nigeria’s silent albatross

    State police: Nigeria’s silent albatross

    The Nigeria Police Force is a creation of statute by virtue of Section 214 of the Nigeria Constitution of 1999, as amended which states that:

    There shall be established a force to be known as The Nigeria Police Force and subject to the provision of this section, no other Police Force shall be established for Nigeria, or any part thereof”.

    The Constitution of Nigeria is a product of the collective will of the people of Nigeria. The preamble to the grundnorm also states:

    “We the people of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, having firmly and solemnly resolved: to live in unity and harmony as one indivisible and indissoluble sovereign nation under God.

    And for the purpose of promoting the good government and the welfare of all persons in our country…do hereby make, enact, and give to ourselves the following Constitution

    Therefore, the provisions of the constitution which is a reflection of the general will and a collective aspiration of the people of Nigeria is sacrosanct and upholding the spirit and intendment ought to be a religion. One of its intendments is that the Nigeria Police should be an institution to foster unity.

    From its amalgamation into a national force on April 1, 1930 under the command of an Inspector-General of Police, the force has fostered and nurtured unity. It is pertinent to mention that Nigeria did not spontaneously declare a civil war in 1967. Rather, it treaded with care and caution by taking police action to make room for peaceful negotiation.

    It is also pertinent to advert our minds to the abuse of the native authority police in the 1960s that led to the Agbekoya uprising against the federal authority, the Andokas, a police local authority controlled by the Northern Peoples Congress (NPC) which was misused against political rivals. This led to the Willinks Minorities Commissions that visited Nigeria from 1957-58 and reported to the Constitution Reform Committee in London. Thereafter, it was resolved that the control of the Police should rest on federal hands.

    When an existing law is to be amended, the mischief to be cured must be identified. In the instant case, the fear of the absolute control of the police is allayed by Section 215 sub Section (4) where it states that: subject to the Provisions of this section, the Governor of a state or such Commissioner of the state as he may authorize in that behalf, may give to the Commissioner of Police of that state such lawful directions with respect to the maintenance and securing of public safety and order.

    The above express provision is adequate for the provision of security for the citizens of the state. It is adequate when the intention is with respect to the maintenance and security of public safety and public order.

    The above provision is powerful enough and sufficient to execute lawful duties, control crime and secure public safety and order, it is only inadequate when the executive has his own purpose to serve.

    Let us analyze this provision a bit with reference to the interpretation of statutes. In his book Drafting Conveyances and Wills, C. O. Adubi emphasizes the deep difference between SHALL and MAY when he states:

    The use of “SHALL” indicates that the legal subject is under an obligation to act in accordance with the terms of the provisions; if an obligation is not to be imposed, shall should not be used. The proper word to use is MAY. The use of MAY gives the legal subject authority to do the specified act; but the legal subject MAY or MAY not do so according to his discretion.

    It is doubtful if the absolute power being sought for now under State Police is for crime control, securing of public safety and public order within the state.

    The reason for this doubt is that before the chief executive of any state will decide that an act of commission or omission is a crime in a state, he is expected to have consulted his Council of Traditional Rulers, his security council and advisers, all of whom he has the power and access to consult before giving such order to the Commissioner of Police or “such Commissioner of the government of the state as he may authorize in that behalf”

    Assuming but not conceding that the consensus of all the levels of assessment and advisers is wrong, the Commissioner of Police is not to openly disobey the chief executive.

    But the provision of section 215 (4) gives the Commissioner an escape route. It states;

    Provided that before carrying out any such directions under the fore-going provisions of this sub-section, the Commissioner of Police may request that the matter be referred to the President or such Minister of the  Federation as may be authorized in that behalf by the President for his directions. 

    It is reasonable to infer from the above that “such Minister of the government of the Federation” in this context is principally the Inspector-General of Police.

    It is pertinent to draw attention to the express provision of section 215 (5) which states:

    The question whether any, and if so what, directions have been given under this section shall not be inquired into in any court. This is an ouster clause that denies the court jurisdiction in this executive decision. Jurisdiction is at the threshold to any judicial enquiry. It is fundamental.

    The second leg of the provision of section 215 (4) gives the Commissioner of Police an escape route to avoid disobeying the chief executive and protects him from carrying out unlawful or politically motivated directives. Hence, the use of the word MAY as opposed to the word SHALL in the first leg.

    If the Commissioner of Police refers the matter to the Inspector-General of Police, and the Inspector-General of Police takes directions from the President after all due consultations, that decision is final.

    In what circumstance can the spirit of this provision be invoked?

    If some squads of criminals in Maiduguri are moving towards Government House to attack it, can the second leg be invoked for the Commissioner of Police to turn a blind eye, take transport to Abuja for consultation before stopping them, even when he knows this a crime? The answer is no. Also, if some criminals are about to rob a bank, should the Commissioner of Police standby and run to Abuja before he can prevent the crime? He will be guilty of ineptitude, act of omission etc. Hence, these two provisions are adequate and sufficient to provide public safety and public order for the citizens of a state.

    The growth and development of Nigeria’s constitutional reforms have created an enduring flexible constitution that can cope with the diversity of Nigeria’s cultural differences and thereby strengthen the unity needed for Nigeria as a strong member of the African comity of nations. This is without prejudice to the fact that we have to jointly and collectively confront and remove injustice by harnessing our collective will and iron determination, to evolve strategies and action to confront injustice in the polity. Goodness is goodness and badness is badness. No other name for each.

    Even now that the deployment of the Nigeria Police is still subject to constitutional provisions and processes, thugs sponsored by subterranean   mentors still invade and scatter Houses of Assembly in Nigeria.

    Even with the control provided by section 215 (4) as stated above,  suspected agents of a state executive still invaded a court of law and disturbed judicial proceedings. Yet, some Nigerians are demanding for unfettered power for state executives. This is why Stephen F. Hayward in his book Churchill on Leadership says “health, intelligence and shrewdness are all good things in the abstract but they are bad things, in a bad person. Health, intelligence and shrewdness were bad things for Hitler because they enabled him to serve evil ends”.

    We should not behave like the moth fly. The moth fly hated its husband and threatened to burn its pregnancy. Anywhere the moth fly sees light in the village; it would struggle to enter the flame and would get stuck to the lantern or the flame. The moth fly ends up destroying itself before destroying the pregnancy that belongs to the husband.

    Do not make laws ad-hominiem – laws made with a particular person or group of persons are usually not objective.

    Chief Obafemi Awolowo, the legend and apostle of Nigeria’s unity says: I would rather be on the side of unity than to be on the side of disunity.

    At present, more than 50 percent of the population of the rank and file in a Police State Command is either indigenes of the state or of its neighbouring state and can speak the predominant language in the state. This is the cadre that interacts more closely with the indigenes and more conversant with the customs and traditions of the area. The senior officers are there to ensure that the custom and traditions are not repugnant to equity and can be of universal application, fairness and good conscience.

    To set up State Police between Nasarawa and Benue States or between Cross River and Imo around Iwukem /Azumini is to bury a time bomb.

    Let us not be copy cats at all times. Our constitutional development must be a reflection of our past experiences and hope for a united Nigeria devoid of oppression and injustice. That is what should demand our priority attention for now our constitutions must endeavor to be autochthonous.

    Between 1985 to 1986 during the time of trial and error with the Police Force. The fourth columnist came up with the novel and plausible policy that all police men from the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police be deployed to serve in their state of origin. In less than a year thereafter there was a national complaint of tribalism and nepotism against most of the officers. No sooner the policy was tried than it was reversed. Security is not a trial and error affair in a country in which a permanent Secretary could not safely travel from Osun state to Abuja before she was trailed, shot on the head and matcheted. A country where worshippers could be callously shot and killed desecrating a sanctuary.

    While there may be some who need State Police to attain some positive ends, one cannot rule out some who need State Police to enable them lock up their political opponents three days before election only to get such detainees released after election, given the propensity of some African leaders to engage in the breach of the constitution rather than its observance.

    What a relief when a traveller to Bayelsa State runs into a group of policemen along the Zaria-Sokoto highway and he hears one of them say; anua e or te bra or Teju ke imomu menenghan or Te ke memuniya . Similarly when a Sokoto traveller runs into a team of policemen between Port Harcourt-Yenagoa highway and one of them says yaya kake or ina zua – or where are you travelling to? At least the traveller will feel at home for that moment.

    The most beautiful and attractive birds in the forest are the multi-coloured.

    We should emphasize those things that unite us and collectively confront the vices that divide us. State police is a step backwards. It is a retrogressive step toward nepotism and tribalism; it is a blind march towards disintegration.

     

    • Mr. Abayomi Oluwaoje Akeremale, a retired Commissioner of Police practices Law in Abuja.