The Nation Newspaper

Tag: afraid

Is Senate afraid of e-voting?

In this piece, Senator Bunmi Adetunmbi, who represented Ekiti North District between 2011 and 2015 in the Senate, urges the National Assembly to consider the imperative of e-voting, instead of using the ‘voice vote’ to arrive at decisions.

Some of the decision-making methods generally employed by parliaments all over the world include voice voting, rising voting, show of hands, roll call, e-voting. All except for voice voting, provides a means to directly measure the voting pattern of individual members of parliament. Since the inception of the 4 Assembly in 1999, the Senate has largely employed voice voting for practically all of its decisions with the notable exception of constitution amendment bills and rare cases of call for division. Majorly, “Say Aye” and “Say Nay” have been the voting habit, which sometime gets challenged and a call for division demanded by members who feel strongly that the Senate President, based on his discretionary interpretation of the relative decibel level of response, has not dispensed his judgement fairly.

In his epochal and widely publicized legislative agenda, Senate President Bukola Saraki identified legislative best practices as one of the pillars of a comprehensive agenda at reforming the legislative business of government. Under this pillar, he promised an E-Parliament “using ICT in the regular conduct of legislative activities of the Senate, such that modern information communication tools will be used across the activities of the National Assembly” He went further to specifically declare that “the Senate will make e-voting a regular feature of Senate legislative business. The adoption of E-Voting is to clear any iota of doubt on the credibility of the voting process in the Senate. The method will ensure transparency and accountability thereby restoring the credibility of the voting activities in the system.” These are laudable initiatives and Dr. Bukola Saraki should be commended for offering these radial steps at reforming the way the business of the Senate is conducted.

The recent passage of the harmonization report on the order of elections, which led to a walk out by 10 senators, brings to the fore the issue of transparency and public accountability in National assembly voting process. One wonders why despite the promised voting reforms of Senator President Bukola Saraki, some of the recent sensitive decisions of the Senate have been dogged with controversy and protests by aggrieved Senators that the Presiding Officer is undemocratic and nursing a hidden agenda. This is a serious allegation that could have been addressed if the proposed e-parliament envisaged by Senator Saraki had been implemented.

Parliamentary vote by roll call to enumerate those that say “yea” or “nay”, on specific issues provides verifiable and empirical record on how parliament voted. It enables the general public, constituents and political parties to know how their representatives voted on issues of interest and concern to them. This form of transparent and open balloting system is considered the best for any deliberative and parliamentary assembly that is accountable and responsible to a constituency. Although Rule 73 of the Senate Proceedings provides for dissenting members to call for division to call for recorded votes, but under the proposed e-voting reform of Senate President Saraki, this should have been the rule of voting rather than the exception. I believe this is the anomaly that the laudable declaration of Senator Saraki intended to address and reverse at the onset of his Senate Presidency in June 2015. Unfortunately, this is yet to happen in the eighth assembly.

There were many instances during the 7th Senate where I served, that I wished my choices on major issues were placed on record beyond the untraceable “Yeas or Nays have it” that characterized most of the decisions of that era. Only during constitution amendments and a call for division by Senator Babajide Omoworare of Osun State did I recall the use of recorded voting during my four-year tenure of 2011-2015. Calling for voting history of representatives to know their positions on important parliamentary debates is impossible as a result of this casual style of voting. This makes it practically impossible to assess the quality of representation and how much parliamentarians toe party lines on policies and electoral promises. Voice voting, in my view, should be limited to simple decisions such as adoption of record of proceedings and the likes. Other serious business of the parliament such as resolution of motions, passage of bills should be resolved through recorded voting.

For a parliamentarian, the duty of representation, in my view, is superior to that of law making because you have to be elected first as a representative before being law maker, in other words, without being a representative, you cannot be a law maker. Therefore, as representative of constituencies, senators have the primary and sacred duty of advocating the priorities of their constituents and constantly balancing local and national interests, and providing the constituents feedback on the choices he or she makes on their behalf. This is the soft underbelly of democracy and can only be measured if voting records of representatives are recorded and open for scrutiny and compliance trail by those whose mandate he or she carries and the party that gave it expression. Part of the reasons for the current poor public perception of the National Assembly is largely due to poor understanding of their roles and the value attached to it. The e-voting reform initiative proposed by Senator Bukola Saraki, if implemented, will give the media more work to do by creating a wider agenda of issue-based discussion on the deliberations of parliament and specific roles of individual parliamentarians and clusters of partisan and multiparty interest groups. This way, we can further build public confidence in the institution and further demonstrate its value to our democracy as well as justify the cost of running parliament in a democracy.

This is why Senator Saraki’s e-voting reform must be revisited to address a critical need for transparency in our legislative practice, boost the peoples’ confidence in the parliament and deepen our democratic culture. The public needs to be provided with relevant information to measure the quality of representation in the legislative chambers through transparent and responsible accounting of parliamentary votes. This is why, as much as practicable, voice voting should never be allowed to become the popular method for serious decision making in the legislative chambers. To the extent that it veils the voting identity of elected representatives, voice voting is fundamentally flawed and is a form of political corruption that should be discouraged in taking important decisions in the National Assembly. As it has played out in the current issue of the bill on the amendment of the timetable for the 2019 elections, e-voting would have established attendance, whether or not quorum was formed and how members wish to vote. Adoption of a voice call in such a sensitive issue is susceptible to controversies of the interpretational judgement of the Presiding Officer with the undesirable potential of promoting over time, the erosion of trust and confidence in the quality of decision emanating from leader of the deliberative assembly. Worse still, it helps to mask the face, muffle the voice and veil the choice made by each representative, this can promote indolence and non-transparent representation. It reduces public accountability on parliamentary decision to unacceptable minimum and provides undesirable cover for truancy on the part of some representatives.

On the other hand, any other form of decision-making that maintains the record of individual choices provides transparent measure of the representative’s quality of decision making. It becomes easy to know how the choices made by each representative hurt or promote the interest of their constituents, supports or undermines the policy preferences of their political parties. Recorded decision-making tools also promote the emergence of ideological differentiation within the various parties in the assembly and brings into full public glare what side of issues their representatives stand on major social and economic policy debates.

Luckily for us, our Senate and House of Representatives chambers have fully installed, functional e-voting systems which can easily be put to use to put names to votes and give specific identity to decisions in our National Assembly. It must be emphasized that e-voting is just another form of recorded voting that can promote decision integrity in NASS and make our Chambers truly hallowed. It follows logically that even if the e-voting system is not employed for whatever reason, manual recording is very possible, roll call, division and several other manual forms parliamentary vote recording exist that can be utilised.

To improve on the quality of legislative representation and promote transparency and accountability at this critical stage of our democratic evolution, our Senate and House of Representatives must move away from the convenient but controversial voice voting to recorded voting. Every legislator should be identifiable with and account for the choices he or she makes on behalf of the general public, their constituents and the political parties that gave them electoral platform. It is on this score and in the interest of building the institution of parliament, that Senator Bukola Saraki should not abandon his original commitment to e-voting and thereby giving room for imputation of wrong personal motive or partisan interpretation to his role as Senate President. He owes it a duty to his tenure not to allow drift of a noble mission, and in his own words, he owes the public a legacy that will “clear any iota of doubt on the credibility of the voting process in the Senate.” There is still time for him to make good this ennobling reform.

February 23, 2018
‘PDP afraid of Amaechi’s visionary trends’

Rivers State Chairman of All Progressives Congress (APC), Chief Davies Ikanya, has said Peoples Democratic Party’s (PDP’s) members calling for the resignation of Transportation Minister, Rotimi Amaechi, following his reappointment as the Director-General of Buhari/Osinbajo Re-election Campaign Organisation, are afraid of another defeat in 2019.

He described the reappointment as not only a good omen and an affirmation of his greatness, in terms of his ability in human organisation, but also acceptance of the fact that the minister has what it takes to lead APC to victory.

Ikanya, through his Senior Special Assistant (SSA) on Media and Public Affairs, Chief Eze Chukwuemeka Eze, yesterday in Port Harcourt noted that asking Amaechi to resign, not minding his revolution in the transportation sector, was the ranting of frightened and defeated foes, who were being cowed by the capability of the minister.

He said: “We are convinced that Amaechi will succeed in this onerous task, not minding the arduous nature of the present task, considering how PDP members have poisoned the minds of Nigerians against the President Muhammadu Buhari administration in its efforts to correct the wrongs of PDP from 1999 to 2015.

“We sympathise with PDP members, as it will take them to do more than they are doing at present, to wrest power from APC. Besides, Amaechi needs not resign, as there is no constitutional backing to that effect. PDP members and their cohorts are only afraid of the visionary and revolutionary trends of Amaechi

“If the Transport minister could lead APC to victory in 2015 when PDP was in power, defeating the party, now that it is in disarray and in the hands of those that impoverished our people through looting of our common patrimony with impunity, the task before Amaechi and his team becomes much easier.

“The task of ensuring that PDP members and their co-looters are kept at bay from the centre of power should not be left in the hands of Amaechi and his team, every patriotic Nigerian must assist and cooperate to ensure the success of the venture, so that President Buhari will continue in his mission of rebuilding Nigeria, as envisioned by the founding fathers of our nation.”

The chairman urged the minister not to be deterred by PDP propagandists and un-progressive forces positioned to frustrate the efforts of the Buhari government.

He admonished APC chieftains to close ranks and ensure the party’s victory next year, stressing that PDP members had only one agenda of returning to power to safeguard their looted funds and continue to plunder the common patrimony with impunity.

Ikanya said it would be suicidal to allow PDP that put Nigerians in the present sorry state to stage a come-back to power.

January 9, 2018
Who is afraid of state police?

There is a renewed agitation for state police by stakeholders. But, it is believed that efforts are ongoing to frustrate the idea. Who is afraid of state police? Asks MUSA ODOSHIMOKHE.

The renewed agitation for state police by protagonists of federalism has polarised the polity.

On one side of the coin are those who believe that state and community policing will foster security at the grassroots. On the other side are those who believe that state police will become a tool of oppression in the hands of governors.

The mixed feelings are understandable. The protagonists explained that state police is grassroots-oriented, noting it will enable policemen who are familiar with local terrains to secure the environment.

According to them, when indigenes of a particular area serve as security agents in their areas, there would be no hiding place for perpetrators of heinous crime.

This, according to them, had been demonstrated in the past. Pro-state police agitators believe that, under the system, policemen usually have a way of linking certain crimes to its perpetrators and when they move swiftly to apprehend suspects, they were never found wanting or missing the mark.

Despite the obvious advantage of the policing option, those against it would herald disaster and confusion. They believe that politicians will hijack the process to pursue a narrow agenda.

In their view, past experience has shown that when state police was in the vogue, the country had sleepless nights. Political actors at the regional or state level used it against perceived foes. The performance of state police left a sore taste in the mouth because it was used to haunt opponents of ruling political parties to avert their defeat at the general election.

According to Afenifere, pan-Yoruba socio-political group, state police is the answer to insecurity in the land. The group said it is wrong for governors to rely on the order of the Police Inspector-General for the deployment of the police to restore law and order at the state level.

Crime is soaring across communities, making them to raise vigilante groups to wade off criminal activities in the neighbourhood. Vigilante groups are voluntary organizations. They receive little or no financial reward from government other than the supply of torch lights, bows and arrows, locally made guns and cutlasses. The performance of the groups have motivated the renewed clamour for an institutionalised security outfit, especially state police, to protect the environment.

However, in some communities, the bad behaviour of members of the vigilante groups has led to their disbandment. Thus, opponents of state police have linked the operations of vigilante groups to the state police. According to them, the only difference is that state policemen put on uniforms while vigilante members put on charms and amulets in rag tag clothing.

The Inspector-General of Police (IGP), Ibrahim Idris, said the country is not ripe for state police. To make the police effective, he called for improved funding. He said the country lacked the maturity and understanding to manage state police.

Idris noted the agitations by some groups for the creation of state police, but argued that the federal police was better.

He said: “I sincerely believe that the federal police is still the best for the country and with improved funding the challenges of crime will be addressed.Those agitating for state police should consider the level of our political maturity.”

Idris said the passage of the bill on Nigeria Police Trust Fund would contribute remarkably to the effectiveness of the paramilitary.

He urged Nigerians to propel the National Assembly to expedite action for the speedy passage of the bills, noting that, if the force was given adequate attention, civil disorder and societal malaise would be tackled headlong.

Idris added: “It is my sincere believe that once the Police Trust Fund Bill is passed into law, the necessary finances required to effectively police the nation will be available.” He said this would also reduce the pressure on state governments in the funding of the police.

Idris noted that the Nigeria Police are one of the “least paid” security organisations in the world in spite, of operating under the UN ratio of 1:400.

He added that, with the ratio of one policeman to 602 people, the Nigeria Police was operating far below the United Nation’s ratio.

Idris stressed: “About 10,000 police officers have been recruited recently to fill the gap but this is still a far cry. To meet up with the UN ratio of 1:400, the Nigeria police requires additional 155,000 Police Officers for the next five years.”

The Inspector-General said a request to recruit 31,000 policemen had been sent to President Muhammadu Buhari for approval.

The IGP said the management was making efforts to establish structures that would bridge the communication gap between the police and members of the public.

Idris called for the establishment of the Nigeria Police Broadcasting Service (NPBS), adding that it would shrink the widening communication gap for better service.

Experts say the Federal Government may buy the idea of state police. They expressed hope because government could no longer pretend that the call for state police is a non- issue.

Recently Vice President Yemi Osinbajo (SAN) disclosed that plans were underway by the Federal Government examine the agitations for state police.

Osinbajo said the plan may be implemented very soon so that policing can be more effective in the remote parts of the country.

Prof. Osinbajo, who spoke throuh his Special Adviser on Political Matters, Senator Babafemi Ojudu at a book presentation in Abuja, the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), said community policing will bear good fruits.

A civil rights organisation, Save Lagos Group (SLG), condemned moves by governors to establish state police in their domains, if the constitution is amended to permit it. The group described the move as ill-motivated, selfish, wicked and unconstitutional.

SLG urged Nigerians to rise against the plan, warning that they would bear the brunt, if the governors were allowed to have their way.

The convener, Comrade Adeniyi Sulaiman, urged the National Assembly to ignore the idea, saying that it is counter-productive..

He said: “All men of goodwill must stand up to stop this ‘shenanigan’ being carried out by the state chief executives, all in the name of an illegal entity, which is unknown to any law of the land.

“We are opposed to the idea and the move by these governors who are being urged on by the power that be. Our opposition is based on the current realities in the various states where the governors have constituted themselves into despotic emperors.

“The little policing structure that they have been using in their respective states have turned to punitive tools with which they have been using against the hapless and powerless people of their states who are daily subjected to harrowing brutality.”

Sulaiman made refrences to Lagos State, where he said men of the Kick Against Indiscipline (KAI) and the newly established Neighbourhood Safety Corps have become agencies with faulty operation.

He said: “We are daily witnesses to the atrocities being carried out by KAI and men of the Lagos State Traffic Management Authority (LASTMA) on the people of Lagos everyday.

However, some observers disagreed with Sulaiman, saying those castigating Lagos State Government efforts to bring sanity to the Centre of Excellence through its paramilitary service have missed point.

They said Lagos State provides some of the best paramilitary services in the country, stressing that LASTMA and KAI have contributed their quota to security.

Afenifere Publicity Secretary Yinka Odumakin also disagreed with the Inspector-General, saying that “Nigeria is over ripe for state police.”

He said in country where there is cultural diversity, religious pluralism and multi-ethnic composition, the best way to relate is the adoption of true federalism.

Odumakin added: “It is very clear that in a multi cultural society, the best way to live is through federalism, where the states and federal government could make law on certain components.

“Since states are making laws they must have their police to enforce it. You cannot have a single police in a federation. I can say that a day hardly pass without people reading about the rising level of crime in the country. This is because the federal police are not capable of handling crime at the local level.

“We have seen what the vigilantes have done against Boko Haram in the Northeast, they have been more effective than the regular police, and this is because they know the terrain.

“Former Vice President Abubakar Atiku said when he was growing up in Adamawa; there were only five policemen in the community. He said they did their job effectively because they knew the terrain and the people. They could easily fish out criminal when they acted against civil order.”

Although there is no consensus on state police, analysts say the advantage of policing the countries through the states far outweighs the disadvantages.

Nigeria is the only prominent member of the Forum of Federations that is maintaining a supposedly federal structure with only one police force to maintain law and order in a population of more than 170 million spread across 36 federating units and 774 local government councils.

The United Kingdom has 45 territorial police and three special police. This does not include non-police law enforcement agencies or bodies of constables not constituted as police forces. The United States is exemplary in this regard.

Advocates of federalism believe that the Federal Government should begin the sensitisation that will lead to the establishment of state police. The fears of the die-hard unitarists should be addressed as both the federal and state police will let the world see Nigeria as member of civilised community.

August 24, 2017
Men are afraid to approach me – Yvonne Okoro

Nigerian-Ghanaian actress Yvonne Okoro, has come out to quell a notion about dating women in the limelight.

On Tuesday, the actress who said she has been single for more than two years, took to her Twitter account to counter a notion that men are scared of her because she is in the limelight.

“I would say men are afraid to approach me, reason is there’s this misconception about women in the limelight:1woman=10men,this is a FALSEHOOD,” she wrote.

The tweet elicited several responses from men who used the opportunity to ask her out.

One of such fans was @lilmodulo, who tweeted at her, writing, “@yvonneokoro am not a superstar, just any ordinary man but will you accept my proposal. Don’t take in funny sense!” to which the actress responded, “So sweet but maybe next time.”

Another fan, @NYboateng, wrote, “Bringing my application letter,” to which Yvonne responded, “Pls no I beg.”

Continuing in another tweet, Yvonne wrote, “We are all not evil and we are all not surrounded by 100men at a time… It’s a really LONELY job we have and to trust som1 enuff to date#hard.”

In a follow-up tweet, the actress who won Ghana Movie Awards Best Actress Award in 2010 advised men who might be scared of her.

“So pls those men that are rattled by wat I said, dont be, it’s my experience, so please calm yourselves.”

The actress has acted in movies such as ‘Ghana Must Go’,’ Like Cotton Twines’, ‘Contract’ and ‘4 Play’ among others.

May 4, 2017
Who is afraid of Andy Uba?
In this piece, Ahiafor Mez justifies the entry of Senator Andy Uba into the Anambra State governorship race.

The media attacks on Senator Andy Uba since his declaration of intention to vie for office as Anambra State governor again have been sustained and I want to register my disapproval of it. The situation reminds me of the principled stand Wole Soyinka had to take against cruelty to Igbos during the 1967-1970 Nigerian Crisis. He did take that stand: “the man died who kept silent in the face of evil.”

Senator Uba is coming to election with clearly demonstrated effectiveness as a manager of people and resources, a helper to the helpless and a bridge-builder who attracts goodwill nationwide and internationally to richly empower all Ndi Anambra.

Uba was like the biblical Joseph in Egypt. He won and retained President Obasanjo’s confidence before and after his eight years as the Commander-in-chief’s closest domestic aide. Carefully using his command of access to the President, he ensured that strategic positions did not elude Igbos and Anambra State in particular. He was instrumental to the appointment of many Igbo people among others into the Administration. His position, arguably a reward for exemplary sacrifice and maintained by continuing faithfulness, became a wide open door of inclusion and accommodation.

As senator till date, Uba continued to serve the people. Issues affecting Igbo rights always found a voice in him. Courageously he has acknowledged that Igbo share of Federal Government jobs has reduced since the “change”, but added that the current ruling party would reverse the situation now that he is one of them. He is one of the senators that advocated the inclusion of the second Niger Bridge and the repair of the Enugu-Port Harcourt Railway lines in the 2017 Budget of the Federal Government.

He has argued for the release of Nnamdi Kanu the detained director of Radio Biafra, London. He has also called for the investigation of the alleged extra-judicial killing of pro-Biafran agitators by the Nigerian Army. He was among the senators who paid tribute to the late ex-Biafran commander-in-chief Odumegwu-Ojukwu, thereby removing the obstacles for the Federal Government giving the departed hero a befitting burial.

A quietly active lawmaker, Senator Uba has sponsored not less than four bills which will improve the ease of doing business when they become law. Including Company Income Tax Amendment Bill, the National Roads Fund Establishment Bill, Consumer Protection Act 2004 Repeal Bill and the Competition (Anti-Trust) Commission Establishment Bill, these legislative efforts have occupied the minds of fellow senators who are making inputs to them towards enactment.

Outside the senatorial scope, he has enlarged his people-oriented ventures to wide acclaim. He is lauded for building and donating a civic centre as well as a vocational training centre to his Uga community. An auditorium and an FM station for the Mass Communication department of the University of Nigeria, Nsukka and an 8,000 capacity church building in Nnewi are also ascribed to him. Also to his credit is the Faculty of Pharmacy building at Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka where 120 students have benefited from his scholarship programme. Again, scores of jobless youth have been empowered to provide food for their families through his donation of tricycles and motorcycles with which they freight people and materials.

Today, good news of Senator Uba; and tomorrow brings more. The excitement among Andy’s supporters continues to increase; the camp is gaining more and more activists by the day. No wonder, more and more stalwarts defect from APGA and PDP and join APC where Andy Uba has united with Chris Ngige, Tony Nwoye, George Moghalu, Phil Agbasi and other crowd pullers.

And this is no small worry to those who think Anambra State shouldn’t ask for more. This is the only cause of the desperate attacks on Senator Uba.

Well anyone who aspires to serve his people must endure flaks. Mandela’s walk to South Africa presidency was no easy walk. He was arrested a couple of times and finally sentenced to life imprisonment. He was a prisoner for 27 years until fortune smiled on him and released him to lead the healing of the apartheid-battered country. Likewise, Trump’s path to the presidency of the United States was strewn with thorns, but he fought on till the end and emerged victorious. Senator Uba must therefore take all the attacks in his stride. So far he has shown the capacity for that.
- Mez, a marketer and poet, lives in Lagos.
April 21, 2017
Who is afraid of Magu?

•The Senate’s delay in granting the EFCC boss a substantive status raises questions

Ibrahim Mustafa Magu was nominated Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) on November 11, last year. However, he is yet to be screened by the Senate as stipulated in the Constitution. This is disturbing, especially as no reason has been adduced for the tardiness. It is obvious that the War Against Corruption received fresh impetus when Magu took over as EFCC chair.
Unlike the situation during the Jonathan administration when the commission appeared to be in a coma, the Magu leadership seems to have aligned well with President Muhammadu Buhari who made the anti-graft war a major plank of his Change Agenda. Many of the political office holders in the last government are being called to account, and many have seen that the EFCC boss is in no mood to joke with his assignment.
A law-making chamber acting in consonance with the mood of the nation would have quickly approved Magu’s nomination. The depletion of national resources has been largely traced to diversion by those entrusted with our common patrimony; those entrusted with the responsibility of managing it. Magu understood that, unless such stolen wealth is retrieved, it would be difficult for the current administration to fulfil its promises to the people and restructure the economy.
It is not surprising that the Senate has failed to play its part in this wise. It has proved in many ways that it does not share the yearnings of Nigerians for prudence, accountability and transformation. We had expected that lawmakers, being direct representatives of the people, would watch out for their interests, check excesses of the other branches of government as well as support all measures to lift the economy out of the woods. But, rather, torn apart by selfish considerations, the Senate has been bickering unduly, and is doing all to boost the personal interests of members, oblivious of the state of the nation. It has ordered exotic cars for its members, chosen to delay bills that would empower the youth and sustain the aged.
It is unfortunate that self-serving bills such as the one designed to seize control of the Code of Conduct Bureau and the Code of Conduct Tribunal were given accelerated treatment by the two chambers of the National Assembly, while the passage of a Medium Term Economic Framework that would aid the early passage of the 2017 Budget is being given the short shrift. There is a suggestion that public hearings might be instituted before the terms of the framework could be considered and passed. While we could appreciate the point that the executive did a shoddy job in preparing such an important document, we are not unaware of the political undertone that necessitated the muscle flexing. A more sensitive and considerate lawmaking body would have swung into action negotiating the terms with the executive, with a view to setting things in order rather than play to the gallery by shouting at the roof top about the Presidency’s inadequacies.
The delay in confirmation of Mr Magu’s appointment is an eloquent testimony to the elite conspiracy against the fight against corruption. We agree with the President that corruption is bound to fight back, and this is what is playing out in the upper legislative chamber. Nigerians must rise up and form the bulwark against this unhealthy plot against decency.
However, we also call on the Federal Government to be more transparent in managing the process. At the moment, no one knows what has been retrieved from the enemies of state and how such loots are being kept. Nigerians deserve to know if they are to partner with the government to make the war a success.
We commend non-governmental organisations such as the Coalition Against Corrupt Leaders (CACOL), the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP), Centre for Transparency Advocacy (CTA), among others, that have taken the position of the Nigerian people in mounting pressure on the Senate to confirm Mr Magu’s nomination. He is eminently qualified and has demonstrated sufficient capacity to deliver on the expectations of Nigerians.

November 16, 2016
Who’s afraid of W.S.

When two supposedly senior lawyers translate their thoughts into lines of commentary, you should expect to tap into wisdom. No matter what you say about lawyers, their calling affords them access to the fount of any society. From handling a slew of cases, they dip their fingers into the pulse of society. They see people in their different states: in remorse and cunning, fear and trembling, defiance and humility, triumphal vanity and mea culpa. Whether high or low, they are witnesses to human folly and sublimity, when they stare into the abyss of the jail or prance at the accolade of society.

Their training also imbues them with the history of societies, the sociology of groups, the psychology of individuals. So, you expect them to convey deep learning and worldly wisdom.

Not so for two legal minds who allowed their nativist impulses to run away with them. They are Professor Imran Oluwole Smith and Kunle Uthman. They are principal officers of an otherwise obscure group known as Eko Foundation.

They have been making high decibels of noise over the appointment of Nobel laureate Wole Soyinka as co-chairman of the Lagos @50 committee set up by the Lagos State governor, Akinwunmi Ambode. In a slew of nouns, they say that “true” indigenes of the state have reacted with “shocking waves, trepidation and disbelief.” They follow these nouns with a raft of footloose adjectives, saying that the shock waves are “resonating, reverberating and deafening…”

First, how does Soyinka’s appointment lead to trepidation? Does Soyinka scare them so much? For their information, Soyinka is a harmless figure. They did not use the word fear, but trepidation and that indicates perhaps one of the highest levels of fear, if you discountenance such words as horror or terror. Trepidation is an urbane way of expressing high-octane unease.

As lawyers, they ought to understand such words, especially as Smith is a senior advocate of Nigeria, an epaulette that some thinking Nigerians now take with levity. Some SANs have been behaving badly in the past few years, especially in the past few days. Example: the flock of never-do-wells who lined up like bleating sheep behind Tarfa. No matter.

The lawyers said Soyinka was not an indigene, so he should not be chair of the committee. Haba! Soyinka lacks connection with the soul of Lagos. Soyinka is an Egbaman. Soyinka has no house or compound in Lagos. Is this how they argue in court, and rose to Nigeria’s legal prime? They also said Soyinka is alien to the “sights and sounds” of Lagos.

I think they were trying too hard to make an argument. They clutched at wet grass and it not only stung them, they bled. And what a sloshy pair of hands with its oddball mix of blood and mud and dew.

They are in the 21st century, but they still have not recovered from the Lagos of the early 19th century. They still live in primal Lagos. They are cavorting in the coastal Lagos of the canoes, of the lightless nights, of the ovine and bovine innocence, of the long treks without the whir of cars, of the illiterate many, of the pre-Kosoko and Akintoye duel, of the humble huts and zestless fashion, of unruffled accents, of the Egba suzerainty and the upstart Ibadan, when the Yoruba wars resounded from afar with Dane guns and refugees spilling over…

Well, this is news to them. This is Lagos of the variegated hues, of high rise and highways, of the technicolour nights, of a humongous port, of business mogul attracting the best of cultural mavens, of languages as diverse as the Nigeria, even West Africa, where it is not just a feudal king that reigns but a governor of a democratic vote. It is a city morphed from a few hundreds to several millions. It is a city where doctors treat from a place called hospitals, where herbalists are now Neanderthal, a melting pot, a megacity, an embrace of all colours, creeds, castes, of Yakubu Gowon, of Ojukwu. It bred Fela and I.K. Dairo and Ebenezer Obey. The Ibrus prospered here and others by them. It was home to Leventis and UAC and the big banks, etc. It is the same city where Soyinka celebrated first at the airport when he brought the nation and continent the world’s top literary prize.

They say he does not reflect the sights and sounds of Lagos. Really? He did not when he twitted the army in the same city? He did not when he was jailed in the town for his beliefs? He did not when he staged one of his major plays, The Dance of the Forest, at our independence in 1960? The lawyers might have read too much legal briefs and not read much of Soyinka’s works, such as The Jero Plays, Opera Wonyosi, etc. They probably do not even know the song, I love my country I no go lie?

They say his co-chair, the eminent Rasheed Gbadamosi, is indisposed. Are they his doctors to decide for him what job he can or cannot do? They admit that most of the 12 persons on the committee are indigenes. So what’s the problem with the Eko Foundation that their contentions lack foundation in Lagos thinking? They brim with nativist anarchy?

If they are afraid of W.S., they have only to confess, and we treat that ailment appropriately.

March 14, 2016
Why they are afraid of Amaechi, by Emami

Chief Ayirimi Emami is a leader of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in Delta State. He spoke with SHOLA O’NEIL on several national issues, including the confirmation of former Rivers State Governor Chibuike Amaechi by the Senate and defection of a former Commissioner for Youth in the state, Comrade Omolubi Newuwumi.

What do you think is responsible for the opposition to the ministerial clearance of Chibuike Amaechi by the Senate?

The reason for being some people are against Hon Chibuike Amaechi is that they feel that if he against the clearance of Hon. Amaechi by the Senate is that they know that when he comes on board, the APC in the Niger Delta would be stronger and we would have a rallying point in him, Edo state governor, Comrade Adam Oshiomhole and the APC candidate in Bayelsa State in the coming governorship election, Timipre Sylva.

•Amaechi

We, the progressives and the APC in the South-south need Rotimi Amaechi to be among the policy makers at the centre so that we can rally round him. We need someone to take our messages to Mr President because it is not possible to see the President always. But as a minister he (Amaechi) would be able to take our issues to the President.

Besides, if he wasn’t appointment a minister, people of the Niger Delta region would see the President as an insensitive person and they would say he used and dumped Amaechi. That will now become a tool for PDP leaders in future elections. They would say, ‘don’t be another Amaechi for the APC’ etc.

Let us not forget that the emergence of Jonathan as Vice-President under Yar’Adua was due to the funding of the election of Yar’Adua by one of our own (former Delta State governor James Ibori). The funding of that election was done by a Delta State man and when they got there, they dumped him.

That is what Chief Edwin Clark is displaying today. When he was down, Ibori did everything to get him up, but when he got there, he abandoned the same Ibori and said he is a thief and he should be jailed.

Today, he had been the father of (former President Goodluck) Jonathan from when he was in the office till he left. Now, he has turned against him. Are those the kind of people you want to call my leaders? I cannot associate with them. Buhari is not saying Amaechi’s position is to amass wealth, but he said this is a man who believes in something and we should work on it. That is why I always say ‘when the head is good, the tail will follow suit’.

On defection of Omolubi Newuwumi to the APC

Our mission is to ensure that by 2019, the APC can give a good fight to the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). And to those that use the party as a negotiation tool, it can never happen in this state again. Omolubi’s defection is a great loss to the PDP because he is one of those that are very committed; they are movers and shakers of Warri and Delta politics.

The election of Governor Ifeanyi Okowa has been validated by the tribunal and people fear that this could be the end of the opposition.

Okowa is not an issue to me; that has to do with the court. I don’t see that as a problem. We are focused and we know what we are doing.

The defection of Omolubi to APC means a lot because he is a force to reckon with in Warri North and the state politics. He is not one of those that you can give money to sell his conscience. That kind of person is one that you should appreciate.

President Buhari, during one of his television interviews, spoke about people like this when he made reference to Amaechi when they asked them questions about him. He said he did not get there alone, but with the people he worked with. He was referring to Amaechi. Those are people that you can work with because of their commitment and we have an Amaechi in Omolubi. They are not easy to find.

There are strong political leaders in Warri North already. What does Omolubi brings to the APC in Warri North?

Some of those I knew in APC while I was in PDP are negotiators and our agents. They are people that were planted by the PDP in Warri North to give feedback to the PDP after meeting with APC.

I do not regard them as party men. These are party men and if there is an election, you will know that these are the real party men and PDP knows that we are loyal to our party. When you say you are loyal to a party, you must be loyal through and through, no matter what.

At present, we have Okowa as governor of Delta State and he is a member of the PDP. When I come across him, courtesy demands that I give him his due respect as the governor. But when I go back home, I discuss with my people as members of the APC and ensure that my people are APC and those who are not are convinced to change.

I have left PDP for good and all I need to do now is to build the APC in Delta State to be strong and a force to reckon with. That is the reason why we are happy that Omolubi Newuwumi is with us because he has the determination and the strength to help us built a strong party in the state.

November 6, 2015
Who is afraid of NDIC’s amendments?
The appearance of Nigeria Deposit Insurance Corporation (NDIC) at the public hearing organised by Senate Committee on Banking, Insurance and other Financial Institutions to defend its quest for amendments of its 2006 Act last March has ignited a debate on the pros and cons of the proposed amendment. The debate is welcome in a democratic set-up like ours, in that it afforded the Nigerian public the opportunity to know what the amendments were meant to achieve. It is remarkable that the media are playing a very crucial role in providing the public platform to air these relevant arguments.

However, lately, some members of the anti-amendment camps are increasingly employing lots of spins in their narratives that smack of desperation. And, unfortunately, some media are being employed to – unwittingly — advance their evidently unhelpful sophistries.

The issues that compel amendments to the Act are already in the public domain, but since not all members of the public will have the time or access to these amendments some people quickly cash on these weakness to dish out propaganda and twist facts. Therefore, those who believe that depositors need the kind of protection NDIC is proposing have the responsibility to refute the claims and set the facts straight.

Now let us look at some of the areas of misconceptions in the various publications to the proposed amendments.

The power to licence banks in Nigeria is strictly within the purview of the Central Bank. However, the Corporation has observed that banks, particularly microfinance banks (MFBs) and primary mortgage banks (PMBs), have closed shop shortly after being licensed and that some of them whose licences were revoked by the CBN could not even be located at their last known addresses after taking away depositors’ funds. Even the promoters could not be traced by both the NDIC and CBN. In practice, therefore, the Corporation is desirous of being involved in the process of licensing the banks, particularly in the area of carrying out “fit and proper persons test” in order to forestall the reoccurrence of events where promoters disappeared with depositors’money.

On the power to supervise banks by the corporation without reference to the CBN, it should be noted that the existing provisions in the NDIC Act, 2006 gave the corporation powers in Sections 27-31 to examine banks and issue reports and such reports were exchanged between the two institutions. Such was the practice until the assumption of office by the immediate past CBN Governor, Mallam Sanusi Lamido Sanusi in 2009, who requested that the NDIC and CBN should jointly examine banks and issue joint reports. However, the NDIC was of the view that it should revert to the status quo to maintain its operational independence. And what’s meaning of its operational independence if it must issue joint report?

On the power to terminate the insurance status of banks, the reality is that the power to terminate the insurance status of any licensed bank has been in NDIC’s Act since 1988 and is therefore not a new proposal. However, due to the observation by the CBN with respect to this clause, the Corporation decided to amend that section from ‘’Notification’’ to ‘’Consultations’’ whenever such need arises.

On the power to appoint itself as liquidator, it is pertinent to note that both the CBN and NDIC share responsibility for failure resolution. However, with respect to the appointment of the NDIC as liquidator, it was agreed between the CBN and NDIC that the provision be inserted to cater for situations where insured institutions, such as primary mortgage banks (PMBs) and microfinance banks (MFBs), would have closed shop for long periods and the CBN had not revoked their licences of insured institutions.

Although the provision on appointment of NDIC as Provisional Liquidator had already been tested with the revocation of the operating licences of some MFBs, its effectiveness was very much in doubt, given the experience with the cases of the defunct Fortune and Triumph banks. It would be recalled that the NDIC was appointed provisional liquidator for both banks since 2006 but, nine years later, the NDIC has not been able to carry out liquidation activities, such as the realisation of the closed banks’ assets and subsequent payment of liquidation dividends to the uninsured depositors of the banks involved. That was despite the status of the NDIC as a provisional liquidator of the banks. It is in this regard that the proposed amendment provided for the appointment of the NDIC as Liquidator simpli cita in order to ensure effective winding-up of the affairs of failed insured institutions.

Curiously the anti-amendment camp and their mouthpieces are not mentioning the following depositor-focus amendment proposals, which will amount to crass naivety to oppose.

i) Expanding Incidence for Payment of Insured Deposits To ensure that deposit pay-out are promptly made to the depositors of insured institutions where the insured institution has suspended payment or is otherwise unable to meet its obligations to depositors rather than wait until the licence of such institution is revoked by the CBN. The aim is to ensure that depositors do not suffer unduly.

ii) The Corporation is proposing an amendment to its Act that will empower it to enforce the recommendations contained in its Examination Reports, thereby strengthening its supervisory capacity. This is to prevent a situation where a bank is examined and the same lapses observed in previous examinations report are repeated due to failure of bank management to implement the earlier recommendations as well as to ensure prompt corrective action is taken on problem banks.

iii) The NDIC as Conservator – The NDIC is empowered through Section 34(a) of the Banks and Other Financial Institutions (BOFIA) Act 1990 (as amended) to assume control of certain category of failing banks. However, the subsisting NDIC Act has no provision stipulating its status under such circumstances. The experience of the NDIC in such matters had shown that its status should be likened to that of a Conservator. Accordingly, a problem bank which NDIC has assumed control of should be protected from attachment of its assets and the assets of NDIC against the liability of such distressed bank. The status of Conservator should confer on NDIC powers that would enhance its ability to recover debts owed to the distressed bank, protect its assets and effectively manage the bank for the purpose of restructuring and rehabilitation.

iiii) Payment of Insured Deposits even when action Challenging Revocation is pending in Court – The proposed amendment seeks to empower the NDIC to pay insured deposits to depositors of insured institutions whose operating licence has been revoked even when the litigation of the institution’s operating licence or winding up is still pending in court. The proposal aims to reduce the extent to which depositors are subjected to untold hardship anytime erstwhile owners of banks whose operating licences have been revoked take the CBN/NDIC to Court to forestall liquidation of their banks. Section 40(7) of the NDIC Act, meant to address the above problem does not prevent the institution of an application in court from payment of insured deposits. Rather, it regulates the venue for hearing such applications. Accordingly, under the current practice, once an application is filed and pending determination, payment of the insured deposits cannot be done.

The proposed amendments would enable the NDIC to pay insured deposits,irrespective of such an application pending in court, as payment of insured deposits would be statutorily obligatory. The equitable doctrine of lis pendis would not operate in the face of statutory provisions compelling NDIC to effect such payment. In the event that the licence of the institution is restored, the NDIC would exercise its right of subrogation.

v) Reduction of Pay-out period (Depositors’ Re-imbursement) from 90 days to 30 days. The purpose of this amendment is to guarantee prompt settlement of depositors’ insured sum by reducing the waiting period for payment from 90 days to 30 days. That means that the NDIC is seeking to commence the payment of insured deposits within 30 days.

I cannot see any iota of intent from the foregoing amendment that posits NDIC as seeking to be a parallel or coordinate regulator for banks. Rather these amendments are intended to strengthen the corporation to play its role as a responsible member of the financial safety-net in Nigeria working with the CBN and other critical stakeholders to ensure the safety, stability and soundness of the financial system.

On a final note, one would like to appeal to the out-going 7th National Assembly to be on the side of history and Nigerian depositors by approving these novel and credible amendments that will keep Nigeria Deposit Insurance Corporation ahead of its peers.
- Hassan is business development executive based in Abuja.
May 11, 2015
Who is afraid of Ajimobi?

Several years ago, the only reason I visited Ibadan, the Oyo state capital, was to attend “compulsory” social functions…mark the word: “compulsory”! And hardly did I spend nights there. The only hotel l felt safe in was Premier Hotel. As a matter of fact, to me it was the only “correct” hotel in the city. A city I rather referred to as a large village. It was too sleepy for my liking. The roads were terrible and the sights were an eye sore. You needed to see the heaps of filth that had become hills and mountains.

That was the Ibadan I knew. Today, I know a new Ibadan. The beginning of the new Ibadan for me, started last year when l grudgingly embarked on a journey to the city for another social event.

Confusion greeted me right from the toll-gate end of the city on the Lagos Ibadan Expressway. In the past, I needed not watch out for signboards that greeted “Welcome to Ibadan”. I only looked out for the filth, the decay and blood red eyed young men. But on this day, I was confused because the “signs and sights” of “Ibadan” were nowhere to be found? I wondered if I had wandered into another city. Where is the Ibadan that I knew? Behold, it was gone! At that point I recalled what I had been hearing about the activities of the state governor, Senator Abiola Ajimobi. Transformation, Restoration, Urban renewal, I thought it was all “politricks” but here it was, staring at me like “politruths”

Ibadan was wearing a new look – clean roads, good roads, new structures, orderly parks and befitting markets. I thought I was dreaming- the same dream I saw happen in Lagos. After having a pleasure drive round the city, I attended my function and still decided to find out what happened or better still, find out who this man, Ajimobi was. I suddenly envied the people of Ibadan for being blessed with such a visionary leader.

I never got to meet him then but the impression was that he was not popular with the people. What! Why? A man who had so transformed the state and instituted peace, security and development that had long eluded the people? Something is definitely not right here, I said to myself.

My curiosity got the better of me and l began to grab every opportunity that would help me get a better and perhaps true picture of how people really felt about this man. l got a few but the most recent one got me thinking the more. I had the opportunity of observing at closer quarters, the people’s feelings and perceptions during the governors recent tour of local governments in the state. My findings jolted me.

First was the reaction of a people who from findings were skeptical of the administration since inception only to witness magical transformation within two years. I am not talking about the very evident Ibadan now. I am talking about areas other than the city that were hitherto forgotten territories – Ibarapa, Oke Ogun, Ogbomosho, Ono Ara and all the places visited.

During this tour with the governor, the people trooped out in their thousands to see him. Based on what I had read about him not being popular with the people, I expected that as they trooped out in their thousands, the governor would also get a thousand stones and missiles hurled at him!

But no, the joy on their faces was priceless! They were clearly happy to see their Governor. Men and women, old and young, professionals and artisans, everyone seemed ecstatic to see the Governor.

At nearly all the rallies too, there was a semblance of cooperation between the security men and the crowd. Even the crowds from the notorious Bere area to Mapo hall were not as unruly as they used to. Agreed, everything could not have been very perfect because we live in a complex and heterogeneous society. An example of that were few cases where over-excitement almost marred certain aspect of the occasion, but these were quickly curtailed.

All that joy and happiness said a lot to me. Why are the people so happy? If they did not like Ajimobi, why did they come out in all the local governments to welcome him? Why did they not stone him and curse him for whatever reasons were cited by those who wrote in various media that Ajimobi was not liked by his people?

I tried hard to justify the unjustifiable. I tried to separate Ibadan from the other towns. Quite right, Ibadan had been lavished with new roads, a new bridge and infrastructural development as well as aesthetics. So, these other towns, these hinterlands, what did they get in infrastructure because there was obviously no flyover bridge like the one in Mokola Ibadan? I realized that these people were happy because their narrow and bad roads had been repaired and widened, thereby facilitating their movement with their agricultural products. Farmers now had access to tractors. Their children – university and secondary school graduates had been employed into the civil service while others were part of the 20,000 engaged in the Youth Employment Scheme of Oyo state (YES-O).

So, who is afraid of Ajimobi in a new Oyo State? Definitely not the same people who feel so lucky to have such a visionary leader. Not the people who never knew that succor could come to them. Not the people who can now sleep with both eyes closed. Not the people who love him so much that they would cast their vote twice for his second term bid, if voting more than once was possible.

These are the group of people who I think are afraid of Ajimobi: Unrepentant hoodlums whom the security forces have caged; unscrupulous politicians who want a return to the old order where money meant for infrastructure were shared among them; enemies of the state, physical and spiritual, who want the state to remain in perpetual darkness and backwardness!

Who is afraid of Ajimobi? I believe this governor has out-performed the rest and performed beyond the people’s expectation. Ahead of the 2015 elections, the people’s choices have been easier because they only have to choose between governors who achieved nothing for the state and a performing governor. They have to choose between inexperienced leaders and a vastly experienced Ajimobi. They have to choose between conservative personalities and a progressive governor.

Who is afraid of Ajimobi? Not those who are enjoying the new lease of life in the state. Those who are afraid of Ajimobi are those worried that the governor is educating the people so much now that they are better exposed and now know what true leadership means.

I believe these are the elements that are afraid of Ajimobi and they are shaking really bad because the people are set to return the governor for a second term.

• Shokanmi, is a consultant with Olsphere Investment Limited, Lagos

March 23, 2015