The Nation Newspaper

Tag: burden

  • Burden of a governor

    THESE are certainly not the best of times for Governor Dairus Ishaku of Taraba State. The ride is turbulent for him as he grapples to keep the rudder of the state stable. His is like someone presiding over a state fast sliding into ruins for no fault of his. The year began on a sour note. In January, 68 people were gruesomely killed in one local government area alone by herdsmen using sophisticated weapons. The dead were given mass burial as flags flew in half mast.

    The canvass of blood is now wide. Every day, scores of people are maimed and killed, homes and pricey properties set ablaze. For residents of Taraba, there is no peace in sight. The people are in mourning mood. They are angry too. As they mourn in the day, they go to bed at nightfall to hear gun sounds. At the crack of dawn, they count several people dead. There is fear (of the herdsmen) in the land. On Wednesday, nine persons were killed and their homes torched by the rampaging herdsmen in a dusk attack on Tutuwa village of Ussa. The Ussa council chairman, Rimansikwe Karma, and the police spokesman, David Misal, confirmed the killings to newsmen. Hunger is looming, as farmlands have been devastated. The number of internally displaced persons (IDPs) has continued to increase in camps. The IDPs live like people without hope. School buildings have become their new homes.

    The women give birth there without proper healthcare. The rooms lack ventilation. They sleep on the floor and mosquitoes feast on them. But above all, they do not have enough to eat. They have no idea when they will return to their homes, most of which have been destroyed. Many are still missing, while those injured are lying ill in the hospitals, a situation which has overstretched hospitals and clinics in the state, forcing the Darius Ishaku administration to employ more health workers. The socio-economic life of the state has been ruined by the herdsmen. Yet, there seems to be no end in sight to the hostilities by herdsmen. The herdsmen/farmers crisis has ruptured the peace of the state and grossly hampered development. The ethnic groups, which even inter-married, are now starkly fractioned into ‘farmers and herders’ camps with a bitter rivalry between them over grazing fields. “When I took the oath of office, I promised to provide development if my people could give me peace. For development, I am providing, but there is no peace to consolidate and sustain the developmental efforts,” Governor Darius Ishaku was quoted as saying in exasperation. Farmers have accused herdsmen of provocation by allowing their cattle to feast freely on their crops and going about with AK-47 rifles and double edged machetes with which they unleash terror.

    The herdsmen, in turn, accuse farmers of rustling their cows. For the herdsmen, it is human blood for a cow. As the population of residents grows at a geometric progression, the need for land expands, not the least for agricultural and livestock purposes. Thus, the crisis lingers. The killings continue. And troops deployed to violence prone areas seen to be helpless. The troops cannot remain there for eternity. Once they depart, the herdsmen will strike. Stephen Ibrahim Agya, Chairman of Kurmi local government council and Chairman of ALGON in Taraba State, said: “The Fulani herdsmen killing people are not the Fulani we know.” He said they are not the Fulani herdsmen who go about with quiet face, with a stick in hand, a wide hat for protection from the scorching sun, watching and guarding cows munch away on verdant fields. “These ones move with AK-47 rifles and poisoned machetes with which they unleash terror.”

    Witnesses said they often invade at night when the residents are fast sleeping. They open fire and disappear into thin darkness like guerrilla fighters. In the morning, several bodies are counted. In Taraba, hell has become synonymous with herdsmen. And their fear is the beginning of wisdom. So, why are these Fulani herdsmen different? Governor Ishaku said their violence is a drive for territorial control. So, why such a blind ambition to conquer and occupy other people’s territory? “Taraba State is a mini-Nigeria with over 80 ethnic groups and three religions to handle. It is not easy to always balance things up here. The state is contending with a different breed of herdsmen who are militias moving around with AK 47 rifles to remove anything in their way, unlike the known herdsmen who had cohabited with the people for decades without skirmishes. “The problem is never between the locals. The local Fulani and other tribes blend without issues. We have a new breed and specie of herdsmen militias who move around with sophisticated weapons; they are poised to remove anything in their track. They must be arrested now before it degenerates to something we cannot contend with,” Ishaku said. He added: “Taraba used to be the most peaceful state in the northeast geopolitical zone before the current crisis. Nearly 150,000 persons have been displaced and this has put a strain on the state’s health facilities.

    “The insecurity has put a lot of pressure on our health facilities, much more than you would anticipate. So, we have to do more; we have to engage more doctors, nurses and specialists, but we thank God.” The wave of the clashes between the herders and farmers has thrown up new ideas on how to end the problem. The most controversial is the cattle colonies. Ranching is a popular option. Taraba Governor, Darius Ishaku, like his Benue state counterpart, Samuel Ortom, thinks he can end the clashes between herdsmen and farmers in Taraba State through the instrumentality of the “Open Grazing Prohibition and Ranches Establishment Law.” Thus, his administration enacted the anti-open grazing law. But opposition came from the Miyetti Allah Cattle Breeders Association, which vowed to flout the law and resist arrest. In spite of the law, open grazing goes on, sparking off violence and killings. NEC intervenes Worried by the spate of killings in the country, the National Economic Council (NEC) constituted a 10-man working committee, headed by Vice President Yemi Osinbajo, to address “the impunity regarding the killings and violence by herdsmen, to ensure the perpetrators are prosecuted.”

    The governors of Taraba, Kaduna, Zamfara, Benue, Adamawa, Edo, Plateau, Oyo and Ebonyi states are members. The committee, in February, led by Ebonyi State Governor, Dave Umahi, visited the affected states, including Taraba, for “fact-finding over the security challenges and to work on resolving the conflicts between farmers and herders.” Umahi’s team brought every stakeholder together: farmers, herdsmen, members of Miyetti Allah Cattle Breeders and Farmers Association, all ethnic nationality representatives, government officials, women and youth groups as well as security agencies. All the groups made their submissions, orally and in print. It was agreed that open grazing led to bloodbaths and must stop, but other conditions must be put right first. That the state has the right to make laws, which individuals and groups must obey -whether they like it or not, but can only complain to the authority on any sections that infringe on their right, or go to court.

    That before the law, there were clashes and people were killed. Thus, there must be dialogue, since war cannot solve the problem. It was therefore, resolved that ranching of animals is the solution, but the anti-open grazing law be revisited and necessary infrastructure provided to address the fears of herdsmen. The governor (Ishaku) should give “more months of moratorium to allow the ranching in line with the law to take off and the state and federal governments to invest in livestock production, while cattle movement be restricted. TY Danjuma intervenes Former Defence Minister, General Theophilus Danjuma (rtd), in a rare outburst, at the Taraba state university maiden convocation, said, among others: “The armed forces collude with the bandits that kill Nigerians.

    “They facilitate their movement. They cover them.” The otherwise tarciturn General called on the people to engage in self-defence as a drastic solution to the problem. Danjuma’s indictment of the military came on the heels of a similar allegation by Amnesty International (AI), an international human rights watchdog, which earlier stated that little or nothing was being done to curb the mayhem by the herdsmen.

    Danjuma spoke on March 24. Eleven days after, the herdsmen struck in his home town -Takum, killing a couple and their two kids. Few days after, herdsmen attacked Jandeikyula village in Wukari Local Government Area. The presence of the Inspector General of Police, Ibrahim Idris, and a military panel probing the allegation by Danjuma did not deter them from carrying out the onslaught. Ishaku backs Danjuma Governor Ishaku backed Danjuma on the latter’s allegation that the armed forces “are not neutral” in the attacks on innocent Nigerians by “bandits.” Speaking before the military panel investigating the allegation, headed by retired Major General Joseph Nimyel, the governor said the people of Taraba State were fully in support of the statements by the former defence minister calling on Nigerians to defend themselves. Ishaku said the remarks by Danjuma, who once headed the Nigerian Army, should be carefully looked into rather than being criticised.

    As a long-term solution to the intractable problem, Governor Ishaku believes that the call for restructuring needs to be taken seriously. This, according to him, will enable the governors to take total control of the police. He said without total control of the police, governors are mere toothless bull dogs. He said: “I am a governor sworn in to protect lives and property, with a crown without a sword. How can I fight and keep control of my power, since I rely on the federal might for help? ‘’How can you be the chief security officer of your state when you don’t control the power that goes with the army and the police? It makes you a naked guard. “We rely on people who, when you give them instructions, they tell you to wait until they get clearance from above. “Before that clearance comes from Abuja, you have lost hundreds of lives. This is absolutely absurd and disappointing, particularly when you meet people like me who want to work with zeal. “How do you develop when there is no peace? You can’t do anything. Even when you provide development, it would be destroyed.”

  • A heavy burden

    To lift Senator Dino Melaye where he fell, in a futile escape bid from police custody, while being forcefully driven to Lokoja, last week, must have been burdensome. Dino like some of his colleagues in the National Assembly, is overweight; perhaps because of the feeding frenzy associated with their unlawful earnings, conservatively put at 13.5 million naira per month, by one of their own, distinguished Senator Shehu Sani.

    Another heavy burden is the multiple indictments the senator faces. For the alleged stunt on the Lokoja highway, the police have slammed Dino with charges of: “criminal conspiracy, causing damage to government property, attempted suicide and escape from lawful custody.” This is like adding salt to the wounds he sustained on the way to Lokoja.

    After he was granted bail by the Chief Magistrate Court, in Abuja, the senator was rearrested and ferried to face more charges, in Lokoja, for: “conspiracy and unlawful possession of prohibited firearms.” Thankfully, while the Kogi Magistrate disregarded Dino’s health condition, and ordered that he be remanded in police custody, the state High Court has righted that order, reemphasising that we are in a constitutional democracy.  I recall that Dino had alleged that Governor Yahaya Bello of Kogi, was planning to harm him, if he goes to Kogi to face the charges; a charge dismissed by the police.

    Interestingly, it is that precious life of a Nigerian senator, which is the causa proxima, for which Dino refused to go to Lokoja to face trial, for which Dino allegedly conspired with “hoodlums and miscreants” to escape from lawful police custody, and for which he allegedly jumped out of the window of a moving police bus, that is the subject of the charge for attempted suicide. For me, it is unlikely that any of our pampered senators would want to kill himself, and this is despite the video which shows Dino threatening to kill himself and put the police in trouble. But what are the charges?

    According to section 327 of the criminal code: “any person who attempts to kill himself is guilty of a misdemeanour, and is liable to imprisonment for one year.” I wait to see how the prosecution will be able to convince the court that a man who has the mental capacity to wax hit songs, to make laws for the federal republic of Nigeria at the highest level, to live large in all its ramifications, had the mens rea (the state of mind) to attempt to kill himself.

    With respect to the offence of conspiracy to escape from lawful police custody and unlawful possession of firearm, section 516 of the criminal code provides: “any person who conspires with another to commit any felony… is guilty of a felony, and is liable, if no other punishment is provided, to imprisonment for seven years, or, if the greatest punishment to which a person convicted of the felony in question is liable is less than imprisonment for seven years, then to such lesser punishment.”

    Seven years is like two terms in the senate. So, I expect Dino to hire the best lawyers to defend himself from serving in prison, instead of the famous red chambers of the senate of the federal republic. Notably, in Enahoro vs The State (1965) N.S.C.C. 98 S.C.,  the conviction of Chief Enahoro on this count was quashed, because he was charged under section 516 of the criminal code, dealing with conspiracy to commit a felony, instead of section 37(2) of the criminal code, dealing with conspiracy to commit Treason.

    The Robbery and Firearms (Special Provisions) Act, provides in section 3 as follows: “Any person having a firearm in his possession or under his control in contravention of the Firearms Act or any order made thereunder shall be guilty of an offence under this Act and shall upon conviction under this Act be sentenced to a fine of twenty thousand naira or to imprisonment for a period of not less than ten years, or to both.”

    If as alleged by Senator Dino the entire brouhaha about the police arresting those who conveniently claimed to be political thugs, that were recruited by another enemy of Kogi state Governor, who introduced the thugs to Dino, who allegedly handed them a bag containing money and arms on a public high, and commissioned them to go and cause mayhem in the state, is just a set-up by the state Governor, then the police has become a heavy burden on citizens. While the Governor may have the mens rea to inflict maximum pain on Dino, considering their spat in public, Dino has to prove the actus reus (the wrongful act).

    While Dino’s sympathisers would argue that the entire story sounds like tales by the moonlight, his conducts in the past, increases the burden of proving his innocence, at least in the court of public opinion. Luckily for him, the Judges are trained to act fairly and equitably, regardless of what Dino may canvas, amounts to police intimidation and bias. Unfortunately, while Dino may genuinely be afraid of his safety, in Lokoja, considering the political desperation of Governor Bello to cut him to size, evidenced by the failed recall process, I await court’s determination whether such fear is enough reason to attempt the escape from lawful police custody.

    Section 135 of Criminal Code provides: “Any person who, being in lawful custody, escapes from such custody – (a) is, if he is charged with, or has been convicted of felony or misdemeanour is guilty of a felony, and is liable to imprisonment for seven years, with or without canning; and (b) is, in any other case guilty of a misdemeanour and is liable to imprisonment and is liable to imprisonment for two years.” Section 134 provides for the offence of rescuing or attempting to rescue any person from lawful custody.

    From the foregoing there is no doubt that a heavy burden has been placed upon the senator representing Kogi West, in the Nigerian senate of avarice and multiple jeopardy.  Perhaps in realizing that one of their most vocal conquistador has been cornered by the political enemies, the senators have resorted more to executive sessions than plenary, where they usually grandstand for the benefit of the cameras. Considering that the senate constitutes a heavy burden on the national treasury, Dino and his colleagues have little public sympathy, in the war of attrition going on between factions in the ruling party, the All Progressive Congress (APC).

    With the war against corruption and sundry crimes dramatically claiming the scalp of a senior lawyer, Dr Joseph Nwobike (SAN), at the Lagos High Court, last week, and now wrestling a serving senator, to a stretcher, who says that President Muhammadu Buhari has no deliverables, as he gets ready for the campaign stumps. Meanwhile, those threatening the president with impeachment for a constitutional breach, may be up against the express train, as a guillotine.

  • Buhari and leadership burden

    More than ever before, Nigeria is in the news for many unprecedented challenges and problems that are of near-complete crisis proportions. Gloom and penury deepen daily among the generality of the people. The masses are the victims of the greed and utter rascality of successive governments as well as their agents. However, this current administration under the direction of President Muhammadu Buhari cannot claim that it was totally ignorant of the level of recklessness before it took over in 2015. This administration promised the Nigerian masses, a change from decaying standards of morality and socio-economic retrogression to a truly modern, civilised milieu central to the promotion of robust, fine-grained human essence in all its ramifications.

    Most Nigerians trusted the Daura-born general, based on his antecedent performance as military head of state between December 1983 and August. 1985. During the above period, Buhari and his charismatic deputy- Tunde Idiagbon, gave Nigeria a new national orientation defined by uncommon discipline including unalloyed patriotism. This was the reason why Nigerians, having been severely debilitated by hunger and all kinds of socio-economic dislocations, voted for Buhari, the All Progressives Congress presidential candidate in 2015. Nigerians do not need endless stories and excuses about how PDP government messed up the economy before the coming of the current administration. Action is badly needed now!  In other words, Nigerians would want to see a president who is sincerely prepared to speak and act with messianic fervour. A near-complete fiery political leader, reminiscent of Sango-the Yoruba god of thunder and lightning. That is, a political leader that is capable of sending shivers down the spine of every criminal in our land.

    This country does not need ethnic chauvinism and/or religious bigotry. Religious extremism, no matter how carefully disguised and unbridled ethnic consciousness, are just a tool of desperate politicking. The Nigerian masses must understand, appreciate and appropriate this drama which is full of lies and deception. This is the reason why politicians continue to use circumstantialism of ethnicity and religion to oppress and exploit the people. Nigerians are merely experiencing a class struggle between the rich and the poor.  The target of the political class is to maintain the status quo at all costs. Poverty has no geographical, religious and ethnic boundaries. The Nigerian politicians are chronic Machiavellians.  Our president has to prove to us, that he is not one of them, by stepping on toes no matter how big, in order to rescue the Nigerian masses from untimely death. Currently, there is an increase in deaths from hunger and illnesses. Nigeria is now an unprecedentedly suffocating collectivity.

    President Buhari must work harder than hitherto in order to redeem his image which is now heavily skewed towards negative history either by errors of commission or omission. In the 21st century, the wife of the president of a country, has acritical role to play in politics embedded in social engineering. Nigeria can only be an exception at its own peril! Therefore, I’m pleading with you to extend the space of Hajia Aisha Buhari to more locations beyond the kitchen and of course, the other room.  As a matter of fact, I’m not aware of anybody in this administration who has keyed to your anti-corruption fight more than our cerebral, beautiful and courageous first lady.  Mr President Sir, your failure in politics is part of her agonies!  Similarly, your success is a component of her pride forever! Aisha, who occasionally (most probably)in frustration, becomes a whistle blower deserves a pat on the back. Her latest effort was about the rot in the Aso Rock Clinic where (according to newspaper and television reports) over three billion naira has been spent recently, without any tangible results. She could not hide her utter displeasure at this national disgrace.  How sickening!

    Up to now, nothing concrete has been heard from the official quarters. By 2019, the masses will have an opportunity to tell this government that they are not a bunch of fools.  No amount of travelling to overseas countries for support in fighting terrorism can solve the Nigerian problems.  Solutions will necessarily come from within. Despite the need to internationalise, the government must appreciate the fact that charity begins at home. Adamawa State has been serially attacked by suspected Fulani herdsmen in recent times. Currently, a sense of gloom pervades the Nigerian landscape as if there is an interregnum. This is succinctly put, unprecedented in the Nigerian political history.

    Those suspected Fulani herdsmen, who are proud of killing and maiming innocent farmers in their villages across the country are President Buhari’s greatest enemies.  This is because they make him lose popularity with the people very rapidly. Time will tell! These notorious Fulani herdsmen and their sponsors must do a rethink because they are among other things, giving Buhari and indeed, the entirety of the country, a bad name.  Nelson Mandela remains in the consciousness of South Africans and humanity at large, not because of his wealth and/or power, but rather the political ideals which he stood for when he was on this side of the divide. We are no longer in the Stone Age period characterised by maximum crudities.  No civilised country today around the world supports open grazing of cattle among other ruminants.

    Young Nigerians are now being sold as slaves in Libya and Italy largely because there are no hopes for them at home. The parents of these young Nigerians, are either retirees without pensions or government workers with several months of salary arrears yet to be paid. Sometimes, they are children of poor artisans whose businesses are in a coma because of the hostile economic environment withinwhich they operate. The rich-poor gap is getting wider daily. Indeed, Africa’s biggest democracy is on the threshold of disintegration due to mediocre, people-insensitive leadership. The DSS, SSS, ICPC and EFCC must begin to dance together in order to rescue the country from the cancer of corruption with all its debilitating effects.

    I feel that there is need for a cabinet reshuffle. Additional new ministries are also useful so as to gain greater efficiency. The President should drop the idea of new minimum wage of N56000 for now. He should ensure that the current minimum wage of N18000 is paid regularly, until such a time, when the economy would be able to realistically cope with a higher wage. The issue of minimum wage must not be politicised. How can a government that is owing workers up to 12 months’ arrears in some states (at N18000 per month) be talking of N56000? This is a gimmicky idea! The President needs to convince Nigerians, that nobody, no matter how close to him, is untouchable. This is the hallmark of good leadership.  President Buhari has to call the bluff of those clever rogues, who are hell-bent on damaging his hard-earned reputation as an incorruptible, no-nonsense leader. It is not too late to begin to change the current narrative of “business as usual!”

    Again, the President must caution those state governors or emperors who fail to pay their workers and pensioners as of when due. Their action or inaction in this regard, is an invitation to anarchy. The blood of those workers and pensioners who have committed suicide as well as those who have died, because of dire poverty, is on the governors’ heads and those of their nuclear families, for mindlessly promoting hedonism and self-indulgence. This is my message to President Buhari as we enter the new year-2018.

    • Professor Ogundele is of Dept. of Archaeology and Anthropology, University of Ibadan.
  • When courts add to litigants’ burden

    When courts add to litigants’ burden

    Courts are meant to resolve disputes among litigants by interpreting the law. However, incidents abound where, rather than help resolve disputes, courts, either wittingly or otherwise, compound them, leaving each party claiming victory. Eric Ikhilae presents some of such recent incidents.

    The court, ordinarily serves as the main institution through which the Judiciary carries out its core constitutional responsibility of law interpretation. And, in the process of interpreting laws, the court resolves disputes brought before it by litigants, who could either be natural persons or otherwise.

    Ordinarily, courts are meant to resolve conflicts among litigants and help put issues in proper perspective by effectively interpreting the law, eliciting its clear, lucid and unambiguous meanings, and thereby, giving life to the draftsman’s true intention.

    Of recent however, there appears to be a departure from this original practice. Court decisions tend to leave litigants confounded and issues muddled up. Rather than resolve disputes, some court decisions appear to engender dispute.

    Such appears to be the case in the seeming unending dispute over the Anambra Central Senatorial district seat.

    The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), like every other party, had, preparatory to the last general elections, held a primary on December 7, 2014 to choose its flagbearer for the Anambra Central Senatorial seat.

    At the conclusion of the exercise, the PDP pronounced Mrs. Uche Ekwunife, then a decampee from the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA), as winner. An aggrieved aspirant, Obiora Okonkwo went before the Federal High Court, Abuja to challenge the outcome of the primary.

    In the suit he filed on December 23, 2014, marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1092/2004, Okonkwo claimed to have scored the highest vote at the PDP’s primary election and sought to be declared the party’s actual candidate.

    He listed as defendants, the PDP, Adamu Muazu (sued for himself and on behalf of the PDP’s National Executive Committee and the party’s National Working Committee) and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

    While Okonkwo was in court, Mrs. Ekwunife contested the March 28, 2015 National Assembly election as PDP’s candidate and was declared winner of the Anambra Central Senatorial election by INEC.

    By the result announced by INEC, Mrs. Ekwunife polled 101,548 votes to defeat APGA’s Victor Umeh, who had 77, 129 votes and the candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Chris Ngige, who came third with 20, 850 votes

    She was issued certificate of return and subsequently assumed the Anambra Central Senatorial seat at the Senate.

    Hardly had Mrs. Ekwunife settled on the Senate seat when APGA’s candidate for the election, Victor Umeh served her court papers, indicating that he was challenging the election outcome before the election tribunal.

    In its judgment on October 8, 2015, the election tribunal, led by Justice Nayai Aganaba, affirmed Mrs. Ekwunife’s election, but proceeded to alter the final votes earlier allotted by INEC to the PDP and APGA candidates.  The tribunal reduced Ekwunife’s final score to 93,300 votes and raised Umeh’s score to 85,898 votes.

    Unsatisfied, Umeh headed before the appeal tribunal in an appeal marked: CA/E/EPT/28/2015. After hearing parties, the appeal tribunal, at the Court of Appeal, Enugu rendered its decision on December 7, 2015, voiding Mrs. Ekwunife’s election on the grounds that she did not emerge as candidate of the PDP from a properly conducted primary election. It ordered a rerun and barred Mrs. Ekwunife and the PDP from participating in the rerun election.

    After a closer look at the appeal tribunal’s judgment, Mrs. Ekwunife, armed with several authorities, particularly some Supreme Court’s decisions relating to improper nomination and sponsorship, who could challenge the outcome of a party’s primary, and which court has jurisdiction over pre-election disputes, went back to the Court of Appeal, Enugu.

    She filed an application and urged the court to reverse itself. Although she drew the court’s attention to its decisions in similar cases involving Senators Andy Ubah and Stella Oduah, the court refused to be swayed and in a ruling on March 3, 2016, held on to its earlier decision, ordering INEC to conduct a rerun election for Anambra Central.

    Dissatisfied, Mrs. Ekwunife headed for the Supreme Court in an appeal marked: Supreme Court SC/204/2016. In its unanimous judgment on February 10, 2017, the Supreme Court dismissed Mrs. Ekwunife’s appeal on the grounds that it lacked the necessary jurisdiction to hear such appeal.

    Justice Amina Augie, in the lead judgment, said: “Looking closely at the wordings of Section 246 (3), it is clear that the decision of the Court of Appeal is final. This court is completely bereft of jurisdiction to entertain the appeal.

    “Once the Court of Appeal delivers its judgment on a National Assembly Election Petition appeal, the judgment becomes final. For the umpteenth time, the Constitution does not approve of the apex court to entertain this appeal no matter how cleverly it has been framed.”

    Meanwhile, while Mrs. Ekwunife was struggling to have her sack reversed, INEC, working with the December 7, 2015 judgment of the appeal tribunal, Enugu, fixed the rerun election for March 5, 2016. The rerun election never held. A lower court intervened and purported to reverse the decision of the Court of Appeal, Enugu.

    Contrary to the order by the appeal tribunal, Enugu, barring the PDP from participating in the rerun election, Justice Anwuli Chikere of the Federal High Court, Abuja gave a judgment on February 29, 2016 in a suit by the PDP and ordered INEC to include the party and its candidate in the rerun election scheduled for March 5, 2016.

    INEC rejected Justice Chikere’s decision and appealed to the Court of Appeal Abuja. Umeh equally appealed the decision. And on November 20 this year, the Court of Appeal, Abuja gave its decisions in both appeals marked: CA/A/160/2016 and CA/A/165/2016, and restated the December 7, 2015 decision of the appeal tribunal in Enugu, ordering a rerun, with the exclusion of the PDP and its candidate.

    The PDP has since appealed November 20, 2017 judgment and asked the Supreme Court to among others, void the judgment and order its inclusion in any rerun election to be conducted in Anambra Central.

    However, while Mrs. Ekwunife was fighting her sack up to the Supreme Court, and INEC and Umeh were challenging Justice Chikere’s decision at the Court of Appeal, the suit filed by Okonkwo since December 23, 2014 was stuck at the Federal High Court, Abuja, without it being decided one way on the other.

    Mrs. Ekwunife late applied and was joined as the 4th defendant in the suit by Okonkwo, following which parties filed all necessary processes and adopted them, after which the trial judge, Justice Ahmed Ramat Mohammed adjourned for judgment.

    Before the date set for judgment, the judge directed parties to adduce oral evidence to enable him determine which of the primary election results sheets, as presented by Okonkwo and Ekwunife, was the authentic one, and which the court could rely to determine the case.

    Court documents revealed that parties complied with the judge’s directive and another date was fixed for judgment. But before that date, Mrs. Ekwunife filed an application to set aside the order of adjournment for judgement and sought for an adjournment to enable her call additional witnesses.

    Although Okonkwo opposed the application, Justice Mohammed, in a ruling, granted the Ekwunife application. But, for unexplained reason, the judge later withdrew from the case.

    Okonkwo later appealed against Justice Mohammed’s ruling, allowing Mrs. Ekwunife to call additional witnesses. The Appeal Court dismissed the appeal and returned the matter to the FHC to continuation of trial and allow Ekwunife to call additional witnesses.

    When parties returned to the Federal High Court after the Appeal Court’s decision, the case was reassigned to another judge – Justice Okon Abang.

    At the resumption of proceedings before Justice Abang, Ekwunife failed to call the witnesses she had applied for, but instead, came with a fresh application urging the court to allow her do away with the planned additional witnesses.

    Okonkwo objected to the application and, in a ruling, Justice Abang dismissed it and ordered Mrs. Ekwunife to call her witnesses on the next adjourned date.

    Again, for an unexplained reason, when parties got to court on the set date, Justice Abang recused himself from the case and returned the case file to the Chief Judge for re-assignment to another judge.

    After some delays, the case got reassigned to Justice Babatunde Quadri, before who Mrs. Ekwunife failed to call her additional witnesses as ordered by Justice Abang in his last ruling in the case.

    Instead, she filed a notice of preliminary objection, urging the court to, among others, dismiss the suit on the grounds that the plaintiff (Okonkwo) had no cause of action and that all aspirants in the primary election were not made parties to the suit.

    After entertaining arguments from parties on the objection filed by Mrs. Ekwunife, Justice Quadri fixed August 3, 2017 for judgement. But, before judgment could be delivered, Okonkwo brought a motion, challenging Mrs.  Ekwunife’s locus standi to be joined as a party in the suit.

    Okonkwo argued that since the Court of Appeal had held that Mrs. Ekwunife was not validly nominated to contest in the election and as such sacked her from the senate, she could no longer be heard in relation to any dispute about the primary.

    He urged the court to first decide his later motion before its reserved ruling on Mrs. Ekwunife’s objection.

    In a ruling, Justice Quadri upheld Mrs. Ekwunife’s counter argument to the effect that Okonkwo’s request about dealing with his motion first amounted to arresting the court’s judgment.

    The judge proceeded to give his ruling on Mrs. Ekwunife’s objection and refused it. But, rather than proceed with the case, Justice Quadri withdrew. Okonkwo also appealed the judge’s last ruling.

    But, before the Court of Appeal could decide his appeal, Okonkwo withdrew it and, instead went back before the Federal High Court with a motion on notice filed on June 20, 2017 asking the court to among others, enter judgment in his favour.

    In the motion, Okonkwo stated that parties, “on May 18, 2017, agreed that the court hear the suit as originating summons by readopting their processes together with the motion on notice filed by the 4th defendant, challenging the jurisdiction of the court.

    “That by this agreement, all the parties do no longer wish to call oral evidence as per the judgment of the Court of Appeal in appeal No: CA/A/173/2016 by Obiora Okonkwo.

    “That on the same May 18, 2017 the 1st and 2nd respondents (PDP and Adamu Muazu) withdrew all their defence and processes they filed in the suit and submitted to judgment in favour of the plaintiff/applicant vide their affidavit of facts filed.

    “There must be an end to litigation and the end for the litigation for the validly nominated candidate of the PDP, who won the PDP primary election and National Assembly election will end by entering judgment in favour of the plaintiff/applicant upon the admission of his claims by the 1st and 2nd defendants/respondents and by implication, the 4th defendant/respondent, who has no locus standi to activate the jurisdiction of this court, and she is also relying on the same documents withdrawn by the 1st and 2nd defendants/respondents.

    “The 3rd defendant/respondent (INEC) is a neutral party, which has not filed any counter-affidavit opposing the claims of the plaintiff/applicant.”

    The judge to which the case was reassigned to, Justice John Tsoho decided Okonkwo’s fresh motion on December 13, 217 and granted some of his reliefs.

    Justice Tsoho held that Okonkwo was validly nominated by the PDP in its primary election of December 7, 2014 for Anambra Central Senatorial district held at the Ekweme Square, Awka.

    The judge ordered the Senate President to forthwith, inaugurate Okonkwo to take over the Anambra Central Senatorial District seat in the Senate. He also ordered that the certificates of return earlier issued to Ekwenife (if there is still anyone left) be withdrawn and a fresh one be issued to Okonkwo by INEC.

    Every interested party to the Anambra Central Senatorial seat appeared to have been thrown into a quandary of sort since the December 13 judgment.

    While asking INEC to issue him a certificate of return, as ordered by Justice Tsoho, INEC is unsure whether to proceed with its January 13, 2018 planned rerun election, which it scheduled shortly after the November 20, 2017 judgment of the Court of Appeal Abuja.

    INEC has since applied to the Federal High Court, asking Justice Tsoho to review his decision. While the court is yet to fix a date for the hearing of INEC’s fresh application, Umeh is of the view that Justice Tsoho is on his own and should not be taken serious. He said he was working towards the January 13 rerun election.

    Okonkwo’s understanding of the whole scenario is contained in a letter of December 14, 2017 written by his lawyer, Sebatine Hon (SAN) to INEC Chairman, Professor Mahmood Yakubu.

    Part of the letter reads: “we are counsel to Dr. Obiora Okonkwo, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) candidate that won the party’s nomination to contest the March 2015 election for Anambra Central Senatorial District but was unlawfully and wrongfully denied the ticket, which ticket was handed to Chief (Mrs.) Uche Ekwunife.

    “He is hereinafter referred to as ‘our client,’ and we hereby write on his instructions. Aggrieved by that clearly unlawful decision of the PDP, our client took out an originating summons in December 2014, challenging the actions of the PDP.

    “Joined as defendants in the suit were PDP, then chairman of PDP, Alhaji Adamu Muazu, Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and Chief (Mrs.) Uche Ekwunife.

    “In the course of the trial, however, counsel to the PDP and the PDP chairman; counsel to INEC and Counsel to Chief (Mrs.) Uche Ekwunife, all submitted to judgment, as per the claims in the amended originating summons and the motion for judgment filed and served on them by the plaintiff (our client).

    “It is instructive to note that the motion on notice sought for consequential orders, including an order that INEC should forthwith issue our client with a certificate of return and that he should be immediately sworn in as Senator of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

    “In the course of the hearing on Wednesday, 13th December, 2017, all defence counsel again conceded and submitted to judgment; hence the Hon. Justice John Tsoho of the Federal High Court, Abuja entered judgment for our client as per claims in the amended originating summons as prayed in relief 3 of the motion on notice.”

    The letter referred to the two judgments of the Court of Appeal and said they merely voided Mrs. Ekwunife’s candidacy, but did not void the election held on March 28, 2015.

    It added: “The Court of Appeal, in that decision also held that the APGA candidate, Chief (Sir) Victor Umeh, could also not be declared winner of the said election, since he did not poll the highest number of votes.

    “Therefore, that the Court of Appeal did not nullify the March 28, 2015 election into Anambra Central Senatorial District, but merely held that Hon. Uche Ekwunife could not prove her due nomination by the PDP.

    “Now that the Federal High Court in suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/1092/2014 has held that our client was duly nominated candidate of the PDP in that election; and in view of the settle case law that it is a political party as opposed to a candidate that wins an election, our client should, as ordered by Justice Tsoho J., be issued a certificate of return forthwith, to enable the senate leadership inaugurate him as Senator of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”

    Umeh however provided a contrary argument. He noted that Justice Tsoho’s judgment was given about three weeks after the Court of Appeal sitting in Abuja had instructed INEC to within 90 days conduct the Anambra Central rerun with the exclusion of PDP as directed by its Enugu Division which quashed Uche Ekwunife’s election on December 7, 2015.

    Umeh was optimistic that INEC, as a responsible agency, would not obey the high court ruling against a subsisting Appeal Court decision.

    He added: “The Federal High Court judgment did not make any reference to the Court of Appeal judgment that nullified the election. It did not make any reference to the Court of Appeal judgment delivered on November 20 that ordered INEC to conduct the rerun election within 90 days.

    “It did not say INEC should ignore those Court of Appeal decisions. What it simply said was that it delivered a judgment on who was the candidate of PDP between Ekwunife and Okonkwo.

    “That was the judgment and he (Justice Tsoho) proceeded to make fallacious orders that Obiora Okonkwo should be sworn in. Sworn in on the basis of which election? An election that has been nullified?

    “If the election had not been nullified, and he comes to the conclusion that Okonkwo was the rightful candidate of PDP, yes, he can order that Okonkwo should be sworn in.

    “But in the present case, the election in question has been destroyed by the Court of Appeal judgment delivered on December 7, 2015, which nullified the election. And that is why the seat has been vacant till date.

    “So, Okonkwo is not going there to replace anybody because there is nobody there. The election has been voided by the Court of Appeal, which is the final court vested with the authority to adjudicate over National Assembly matters. And that was what the Supreme Court judges told Ekwunife on February 10, 2017. They told her that they don’t have any authority to tamper with the judgment of the Court of Appeal; that the judgment is final. So, the election remains nullified forever.

    A High Court cannot pretend that it is treating a pre-election matter and fail to recognise the fact that nobody can be winner of a nullified election. There is nothing for Okonkwo to claim because the election does not exist anymore. It has been invalidated,” Umeh said.

    Is there still a live election?

    Umeh’s argument that the election that Okonkwo seeks to inherit has long been voided is supported by two recent developments.

    First is the finding of the Court of Appeal in its judgment of November 20. The second is the observation by Justice Olasumbo Goodluck of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) in a judgment given few days before Justice Tsoho’s decision.

    In the November 20 judgment, Justice Tinuade Akomolafe-Wilson, who read the lead judgment, said: “Where a court nullifies an election and orders a fresh election, a political party which participated in the annulled election, at whose instance the election was nullified, cannot field a new candidate to contest in the fresh election.

    “This is because the fresh election does not entail an entirely new process; rather it takes the place of the annulled election, because the period of nomination of candidates has lapsed.”

    Justice Akomolafe-Willson noted that it was not the case of the 1st respondent (PDP), at the trial court, that it be allowed to substitute a candidate for Ekwenife, who had defected from the PDP, but for the “erroneous notion that the court-ordered rerun election, scheduled by INEC for March 5, 2016, entailed an entirely new process whereby it is entitled to conduct fresh primaries and nominate a new candidate.”

    She said it was unfortunate that the trial judge fell into a grave error by predicating her judgment on the ground that Ekwenife defected from the PDP. She added: “On the whole, having resolved the main issue in this appeal in favour of the appellant, this appeal is meritorious and it is allowed.

    “The decision of the trial Federal High Court delivered on 29 February, 2016, is hereby set aside. Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) (2nd respondent) is ordered to conduct a fresh election in Anambra Senatorial District within 90 days from today with the participation of the appellants (Chief Victor Umeh and APGA).”

    On December 5, this year, Justice Goodluck gave a judgment in suit No. FCT/HC/CV/1110/2015 filed by Barrister Chukwunweike (Chike) Maduekwe, who claimed to have been an aspirant in the 2014 PDP primary for Anambra Central Senatorial district.

    His main claim in the suit was for the refund of the N4.5m he paid to the PDP for the expression of interest and nomination form. He said the party failed to hold a primary and so, he was entitled to a refund.

    In her judgment on December 5, Justice Goodluck agreed with Maduekwe that PDP did not hold a primary and consequently, ordered the party to refund N4.5m to the plaintiff.

    The judge said: “It is hereby declared that the 1st defendant [PDP] is not entitled to retain the N4.5m paid by the plaintiff as the PDP Senate Expression of Interest EO1 and nomination form when the 1st defendant refused, failed and or neglected to conduct the primary election to elect its flagbearer for Anambra Central Senatorial District.”
    A similar confusing scenario also presented itself in the case over Kogi East Senatorial district. After spending over three years in court, with several court decisions, the situation is not yet clear who the actual winner is. Each party is claiming victory.

    Like the Anambra Central case, this one also arose from a primary of the PDP held on December 7, 2014 at Idah Township Stadium, Kogi State. Retired Air Marshal Isaac Alfa claimed to have won the primary, but that the party substituted his name with that of Attai Aidoko.

    On December 19, 2014, Alfa filed a suit before the Federal High Court in Abuja to challenge what he saw as unlawful substitution of his name. The Federal High Court, in a judgment on April 18, 2016, held in his favour, to the effect that he was the authentic candidate of the PDP for the Kogi East Senatorial seat.

    Based on the Federal High Court judgment, Alfa proceeded to contest the National Assembly as the PDP candidate and won, while Aidoko appealed the judgment at the Court of Appeal, Abuja with a notice of appeal dated April 20, 2016.

    On December 14, 2016, after Alfa had assumed office as the Senator representing Kogi East, the Court of Appeal gave its judgment in the appeal by Aidoko, marked: CA/A/260/2016. The appellate court set aside the April 18, 2016 judgment of the Federal High Court on the grounds that the trial court wrongly assumed jurisdiction and that the suit was wrongly commenced.

    The Court of Appeal said among others, that pleading ought to have been filed at the court bellow and that the suit was not the type to be commenced by originating summons. It did not direct that the case be remitted to the lower court for re-trial, but instead, ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to issue fresh certificate of return to Aidoko.

    Alfa appealed the Court of Appeal’s decision at the Supreme Court, in appeal marked: SC/1088/2016.

    The Supreme Court delivered its judgment on the appeal by Alfa on June 16, 2017 and ordered among others, that the case be heard afresh by the Federal High Court.

    The apex court agreed with the aspect of the Court of Apeal that facts in the case was contentious, requiring that parties file pleadings and call oral evidence. Based on the Supreme Court judgment, Alfa refiled his case before the Federal High Court via a statement of claim on August 23, 2017.

    While hearing was about to commence afresh before the Federal High Court, Aidoko filed an application, requesting that three questions, which he raised on his own, be referred to the Court of Appeal for determination.

    Although Alfa objected to the application and the trial judge, Justice Nnamdi Dimgba found the application to be unnecessary, he allowed it and referred the questions to the Appeal Court as requested by Aidoko. And on December 18, this year, the Court of Appeal gave its decision on the questions referred to it by Aidoko, marked: CA/A/818/R/2017.

    Justice Abdu Aboki, in the lead ruling of the court’s unanimous decision, found that the three questions by Aidoko did not satisfy the conditions which must exist before the Appeal Court could give its answer under Section 295(2) of the Constitution.

    Justice Aboki said: “I have carefully gone through the three questions referred to this court for interpretation, the first question, in my view relates to the effect of the finding of this court which has not been set aside by the superior court (Supreme Court), whether it is binding on the parties and the courts.

    “The second question relates to rule of practice of the courts, relating to the doctrine of stare decisis and the third question relates to whether the Federal High Court has any jurisdiction to entertain and grant the reliefs sought before it.

    “It is trite law that reference, on a question as to the interpretation of the Constitution, to this court is not simply done as a matter of course, for mere asking sake. The question must be as to the interpretation of the Constitution or application of the Constitution.

    “In the instant case, it cannot be said that all the three questions relate to the interpretation of the Constitution. In the instant case, the reference questions, having been found not to have arisen from the proceedings of the Federal High Court, the further question as to whether it involves a substantial question of law does not arise.

    “The earlier judgment of this court, which went on appeal to the Supreme Court was no longer valid in view of the fact that all courts bellow are bound to follow the decision and order(s) of the Supreme Court.

    “In the instant case, the failure of the applicant (Aidoko) to establish all the three vital necessary pre-conditions for a proper determination of reference questions is fatal to the application. This application lacks merit, it fails and it is accordingly dismissed,” Justice Aboki said.

    Justices Peter Olabisi Ige and Emmanuel Akomaye Agim, who were on the panel agreed with Justice Aboki.

    Justice Ige particularly noted that Aidoko’s application to the Court of Appeal was an attempt to frustrate the execution of the Supreme Court order that the case be re-heard by the Federal High Court.

    He said: “In an apparent bid to stall and delay the hearing of the suit herein, as mandated by the Supreme Court, the applicant herein, brazenly brought a most reckless and bizarre application before the lower court, asking the lower court to refer, what the applicant, in his imagination, perceived to be constitutional questions to this court.

    “To my mind, the applicant has exhibited great disdain and contempt for the Supreme Court’s decision aforesaid. All he is out to do is to circumvent and render the judgment ineffective and frustrate the hearing de novo (afresh) ordered by the Supreme Court.

    “The lower court has ably stated the decision of the Supreme Court. This court as well as the parties are duty bound to obey and ensure the enforcement of the Supreme Court’s decision aforesaid. This court will not be a party to the intransigence of the applicant to truncate the decision of the Supreme Court.,” Justice Ige said.

    Since the December 18 ruling by the Court of Appeal, both sides to the dispute have been claiming victory. While Alfa’s supporters interpreted the ruling to mean that the Kogi East Senatorial seat has now become vacant, Aidoko’s supporters think otherwise.

    In his reaction to the ruling, Aidoko argued that his seat has not been declared vacant by the Court of Appeal. He added that at no point did the issue of candidacy or vacant seat come up in the ruling by the Court of Appeal.

    Why the confusion? What way out?

    A senior member of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) in Abuja, Abdulkarim Yunusa the confusion arises because cases are not determined on time. He argued that if cases were promptly heard and dispensed with by the courts, the confusing scenarios would not be witnessed.

    As a way out, he said; “For me, the way to go is for the courts to always ensure that cases do not get unnecessarily held down in court. When a judge recuses himself from a case, he should give reasons.

    “You don’t just withdraw from a case by merely citing personal reasons. What constitutes personal reasons? Judges should be firm and committed to their responsibilities. That to me, will save litigants from ala this confusion, the psychological trauma and waste of scarce resources,” Yunusa said.

    A senior law lecturer, Professor Josiah Chukwuma blamed that inability of the judges to connect with their environment for the confusion that mostly greet courts’ pronouncements. He noted that most judges have detached themselves from the society and interpret the law in abstraction.

    He cited the 2012 decision by Justice Abubakar Talba of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) in the criminal trial of John Yakubu, who pleaded guilty, in a plea bargain arrangement, to be involved in the theft of billions of naira in pensioners’ funds.

    Prof Chukwuma noted that the public outrage generated by the judge’s decision to give Yakubu an option of N750,000 fine, which later earned the judge a year’s suspension by the National Judicial Council (NJC), was because he did not consider the effect of his decision on the society.

    He said, where judges are mindful that they operate in societies inhabited by rational minds, they will learn to allow the interest of their societies and the possible impact of their decisions on such societies, reflect in their interpretation of the law.

    Prof Chukwuma said: “It is high time judges are reminded that they are able to sit comfortably in their chambers and dish out decisions because the society is at peace. Where the society is in turmoil, no one is immune to its negative impact.”

  • Their lordships’ burden

    Zambia’s President Edgar Lungu gave voice to a new elephant in the room concerning African electoral democracy, namely the judiciary’s role in facilitating or wonking the culture yet toddling on the continent. Lungu called out the recent precedent of loose-swinging judicial activism by justices in Kenya, with the raucous aftereffects, and admonished his country’s wigs against going that route out of sheer imitation.

    Speaking penultimate week at an event in Solwezi, northwest Zambia, the president impliedly conceded the separation of power principle; but he also counseled his country’s judiciary against adventure. “My message is: just do your work, interpret the law without fear or favour and look at the best interest of this country. Don’t become a copycat and think you are a hero if you plunge this country into chaos,” he said, adding: “I am not intimidating the judiciary. I am just warning you (judges) because I have information that some of you want to be adventurous. Your adventure should not plunge us into chaos, please. People are saying Zambian courts should emulate Kenyan courts… (they) should be brave and make decisions that are in the interest of the people. But look at what is happening in Kenya now…”

    Lungu was talking about a challenge by opponents to his eligibility for another term in Zambian elections due in 2021. He took office in January 2015 following the death of President Michael Sata, and stood for the 2016 poll in which he emerged tops amid fierce contestation by the opposition. The country’s constitution prescribes a five-year presidential tenure renewable once, and opponents argue that the 2016 mandate was his second and in effect final term, whereas supporters insist it was his first since he merely completed the deceased president’s tenure. “Whether I am eligible to stand or not in 2021 should not be dependent on the case in Kenya,” the Zambian leader said.

    His referencing of Kenya hinted at a buzz among Africa’s power centres – executive lynchpins and possibly judiciaries’ as well – about tap-on effects that the East African precedent portend for the entire continent. Kenyan supreme court in a historic verdict on September 1st voided the country’s presidential election of August 8th, by which the electoral commission had returned incumbent President Uhuru Kenyatta as re-elected purportedly with 54 percent of the votes cast over challenger Raila Odinga’s 44 percent. Although domestic and international observers were unanimous that the poll was credible, the supreme court held that the electoral body “failed, neglected, or refused to conduct the presidential election in a manner consistent with the dictates of the (Kenyan) constitution” and ordered fresh vote within 60 days.

    That verdict was Africa’s first of such against a sitting incumbent, and it showed the Kenyan judiciary asserting fierce independence and a courage that defied moderation by non-juridical considerations.

    Ignore now the self-interest motivation for Lungu’s counsel to the Zambian judiciary, his dread of tap-on effects of the Kenyan verdict seems already playing out. Only last Monday, the supreme court of Liberia staunched the country’s presidential run-off scheduled for the next day and ordered the electoral commission to go dirt digging in allegations of “fraud and irregularities” stacked against the original poll by a candidate who isn’t even factored into the run-off.

    Ex-football international George Weah had topped the 10th October presidential election with 38.4 percent of ballots cast, Vice-President Joseph Boakai ran up with 28.8 percent, while Charles Brumskine of Liberty Party placed a distant third with 9.6 percent votes. A run-off was warranted because no candidate polled more than 50 percent of the votes as required by Liberian law for a straight win, and it was to be a square-up between Weah and Boakai. But Brumskine piled petitions against the October poll, on account of which the supreme court ordered last week that the run-off be shelved until the electoral commission probes the charges. The catch is, the tenure of outgoing President Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf expires shortly and Article 50 of Liberia’s 1986 Constitution stipulates that a successor be installed “at noon on the third working Monday in January of the year immediately following the elections.” With the open-ended pendency now imposed on the run-off, and the likelihood of ensuing litigation whenever it eventually holds, the application of that constitutional clause seems up in the air.

    Kenya had glowed with judicial preeminence on the heels of the supreme court verdict in September. But take a look at that country now, as Lungu – even if for a spurious motive – indicated. You could well say the East African country has morphed from a powerhouse to paradise lost, and it’s no thanks to the zero sum mentality that typifies Africa’s power elite. Following the September verdict, Kenyatta and Odinga dug their heels into odd trenches that sent their country on degenerative tailspin. But Odinga, at whose instance the August poll was voided, easily takes the prize for nihilism. He pressed for open-ended delay of a rematch slated for October 26th until the electoral commission met opposition shopping list for self-overhaul, while Kenyatta insisted that the vote should go ahead. And when the opposition challenger could not have it his way, he called a boycott of the fresh vote, which resulted in a paltry 38 percentage voter turnout in contrast to the uniquely high 79 percent turnout recorded for the August poll. He has since said the opposition camp was transforming into a resistance movement – with all implications of that move for polity stability.

    Meanwhile, the supreme court that had invalidated the earlier poll seemed too exhausted now to rein in the tense escalation of partisan bile. A bid by opposition agents to throw judicial spanners in the scheduled rematch fell through when the apex court, on the eve of polling day, declined to hear a petition to postpone the vote because only two justices showed up – three short of five justices required to form a quorum of the seven-member court. And as Chief Justice David Maraga announced the apex court’s inability to hear that petition, you could guess he and his colleagues must be ruminating the value their earlier verdict added to building Kenyan electoral democracy.

    With unbridled desperation of political gladiators in most African countries, Nigeria inclusive, for the power pie, their lordships may need to define the boundary between a tendency to exploit judicial processes for anarchic ends and seeking justice for genuine grievances.

     

    Jega on youth participation in elections

    Youths have vital roles to play in deepening the democratic culture across Africa and they should be pointedly coopted, says former Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Professor Attahiru Jega.

    He proposed that priority be given to enhancing youth participation in the electoral processes “because this would expand the democratic space, nurture inclusivity, bring the boundless energy and creativity of the youth into the political and governance processes, and significantly facilitate the entrenchment of a culture of electoral integrity, which is now most desirable for deepening democracy in Africa.”

    The former INEC chair was keynote speaker at the 4th Annual Continental Forum of Election Management Bodies (EMBs) organised by the political affairs department of the African Union (AU) in Kigali, Rwanda, at the weekend.

     

    • Please join me on kayodeidowu.blogspot.be for conversation.
  • ‘Akeredolu’s govt won’t put tax burden on masses’

    ‘Akeredolu’s govt won’t put tax burden on masses’

    The Oluwarotimi Akeredolu administration in Ondo State will not allow any group or individuals to take undue advantage to cheat the people, the government has said.

    Commissioner for Information and Orientation, Yemi Olowolabi, spoke at the weekend in Akure, the state capital, when members of the Tax Justice and Governance Network visited him.

    He said: “These are hard times for everyone, and the government owes the people a responsibility of protection, which comes in different ways.

    “One of the best methods is ensuring that the people’s hard-earned money is not taken away by cheats.

    “This government, led by Governor Akeredolu, has decided to be different. From what you have seen so far, you should know that any act of illegality will not be condoned.

    “Recently, the activities of a union were suspended due to reports of misdeeds. That is the way Akeredolu’s government will be run. There are plans to streamline the tax system in such a way that multiple-taxation will no longer take place in the state.

    “Taxation is inevitable; we must collect it. However, it should not be seen as being punitive or burdensome due to multiplicity. Nobody no matter how highly placed will be allowed to add to the burden of the people.

    “We owe the people a responsibility of reducing their burden through good governance. That is the promise we made during electioneering and we intend to do that.”

    The group’s Chairman Olakunle Oyegoke said Tax Justice and Governance Network is a non-government organisation (NGO) for mobilising people to pay their tax.

    The chairman urged the government to see to the multiplicity of taxes being paid by the people.

  • Makarfi and burden of repositioning PDP

    Makarfi and burden of repositioning PDP

    The Ahmed Makarfi-led National Caretaker Committee of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has been mandated to reposition the crisis-ridden opposition party. Assistant Editor GBADE OGUNWALE examines the  task before the committee.

    The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has begun the process of reconciliation. During its recent non – elective convention, the tenure of the Ahmed Makarfi – led National Caretaker Committee was extended till December. Having risen from the ashes of a 14-month leadership crisis that shook the party to its  foundation, the PDP may have learnt its lessons. Makarfi and his team are now confronting the challenge of rebuilding and repositioning the party. The team has been given a mandate to put in place a new National Working Committee (NWC). The setting up of the caretaker committee was a product of sound reasoning and deliberate planning. The members of the committee are known for their firmness and conviction, with no visible political baggage that could affect their objectivity and sense of judgment. To avoid conflict of interests, the Caretaker Committee has barred its members from seeking elective offices into the NWC. With the Anambra State governorship election in November, the first task before the party is to ensure the emergence of a credible candidate for the election. The Anambra chapter has the ugly reputation of being one of the most problematic among the state chapters. The state has been producing two parallel candidates at every election, with candidates emerging from two or three parallel primary elections. The last of the crisis in the chapter followed divisions among key stakeholders that lined up behind opposing camps controlled by the Uba brothers, Chris and Andy.

    But, tension appears to have simmered, following the defection of Senator Andy Uba to the All Progressives Congress (APC) a few months ago. Andy went to the APC with his loyalists. His brother, Chris, had teamed up with the Ali Modu Sheriff faction against the Makarfi group. The July 12 judgment of the Supreme Court that sacked Sheriff has put the Chris Uba faction in disarray, forcing some of his loyalists to seek accommodation in the Makarfi-led leadership. With the Osun State governorship election coming up next year, shortly after the Ekiti poll, the state executive is also not in proper shape. With the mandate of the convention, the Makarfi team is to ensure the emergence of a credible executive committee for the state. The same goes for the Adamawa, Kebbi, Borno, Kwara, Lagos and Ogun State chapters where Sheriff succeeded in erecting parallel executive committees. This is to prevent a repeat of the Ondo scenario where the Sheriff camp threw spanners in the works by presenting a parallel candidate, Mr. Jimoh Ibrahim. The party’s authentic candidate, Mr. Eyitayo Jegede, suffered grievous political injury from the Sheriff camp, until the Supreme Court finally cleared him for the race at the eleventh hour. By this time, the PDP had lost rhythm in the campaign and the rest is history. The party is still sulking over the loss. To lay a solid foundation for repositioning the PDP, Makarfi and his men must  effect some fundamental reforms with a clear cut template in place. To ensure the supremacy of the party and the independence of its leadership, the position of “leader of the party” must be clearly defined. In democracies, the party’s national chairman is the recognised leader of the party. However, in the case of the PDP, former President Olusegun Obasanjo arrogated the position to himself, obviously to enable him control the party leadership. Chairmen of state chapters have continued to function as mere errand boys of the governors. The aberration continued with Umaru Yar ‘Adua through the Goodluck Jonathan years. This reduced the party chairman to a mere appendage of the President. And when the PDP lost the 2015 presidential election, the party was left without a “leader”, leading to conflict of interests among the members of the NWC. The then Deputy National Chairman, Prince Uche Secondus, became Acting Chairman after the exit of Alhaji Adamu Mu’azu, who was forced out of office after the 2015 elections .

    Secondus was to act for a period of six months within which the party was to produce a candidate from the North East geopolitical zone to replace Mu’azu. But, personal ambition took the better part of Secondus and his fellow NWC members at the time. While Secondus was scheming to become the substantive chairman, his colleagues in the NWC were also plotting to grab other positions by working hard to ensure that their choice positions were zoned to their respective geo-political zones. The musical circus was still playing when a former presidential adviser, Ahmed Gulak, leading a handful of associates, stormed the party secretariat and declared himself the new party chairman. That was what jerked the PDP out of its slumber, leading to a flurry of missteps that produced Ali Modu Sheriff as chairman that almost took the party to the undertakers. Similarly, the Caretaker Committee is also mandated to effect amendment to the party’s constitutional with the view to check frivolous litigations by members against the party. The proposed amendment, will be tabled for ratification at the next convention in December. Distractions arising from such litigations have reminded one of the party’s main headaches at the national and state levels.

    The interim PDP leaders are also to tinker with the party’s constitution in respect of waivers. This is to allow flexibility to accommodate defector to the PDP, particularly the high profile members that defected to the ruling APC before the 2015 elections. There are indications that some of these former members who are holding top elective and appointive positions in the present government, may have been signaling their intention to rejoin the PDP. Some of these high profile politicians are not in good terms with the government in which they serve, while a few of them are locked in bitter feuds with their various governors.

    Much is expected of the Caretaker Committee in charting a new direction for the party. It is left to Makarfi and his team to demonstrate leadership by example with the conduct of the December elective national convention. Like other political parties, the history of the PDP has been that of impunity and imposition of candidates. This was partly responsible for the loss of the Presidency and many states in the 2015 general elections.

    Apparently, the first test for Makarfi and his team will come with the conduct of the elective national convention. To make the task easier, the various elective positions in the NWC have been zoned to the geo-political zones, with the position of chairman zoned to the South West. The remaining 15 elective positions have similarly been zoned, thereby saving Makarfi and his team the burden of sweating to zone the positions. The task of deciding which state picks what position has been left to the various leaderships at the zonal level. But since they are going to superintend the exercise, it is expected that Caretaker Committee will demonstrate the required disinterestedness in the conduct of the convention. They will also have to ensure that the zonal leadership are not given undue latitude to impose candidates. Curbing the excesses of the governors may pose the greatest challenge to Makarfi and his men. Being the ones paying the pipers, the governors will certainly want to dictate the tune. Their preferences are usually at variance with popular choices. The governors are known for their uncanny penchant for impunity, typified by imposition of candidates at party, local and  general elections. It is left for the committee to seek ways of expanding the sources of party funding with the relevant mechanism put in place for aggressive revenue generation through membership dues and other legitimate sources. The PDP has no visible revenue generating sources that the party could draw from at short notices. Going cap in hand to the governors and other wealthy chieftains for funds has eroded the independence of the leadership to take critical decisions when occasion demands. Makarfi is expected to lay a solid foundation in this regard. To lessen its burden, the committee has excused itself from the task of disciplining errant members, as the job has been assigned to a newly created Disciplinary Committee, chaired by Chief Tom Ikimi. Shortly after the Supreme Court judgement, Makarfi had declared amnesty for Sheriff and his loyalists, but he was quick to add that any other intransigence against the party after the apex court’s judgment will attract sanctions. Also in place is a reconciliation committee which is headed by Governor Nyesom Wike of Rivers State. He is expected to be the arrow head of the party’s efforts to reconcile aggrieved members and to woo those that defected to other political parties back to the fold. The future stability of the PDP will largely depend on how Makarfi and his team handle the assignment on their hands. For now, the team enjoys a great deal of goodwill and support from  critical organs and prominent party chieftains in the various quarters across the federation. Going by the prevailing sober mood in the party, the committee is receiving the required cooperation from the generality of  members.

    In June, the PDP contested and won the Osun West senatorial bye election while the party was still undergoing tumult. This has obviously buoyed the party’s determination to make impressive showing at the next election. It may also serve as rejuvenating tonic for the Caretaker Committee and give it the required fillip.

    The Makarfi team parades a good number of individuals that have demonstrated a great deal of commitment and restraint. The chances of making the much needed difference will depend on the ability of the leadership and members of the team stick by the books. On the other hand, it also depends on the willingness of the various power blocs to submit themselves to the rules. It’s too early to tell how far Makarfi and his team can go in putting the PDP on sound footing.

  • Coca-Cola brands’ burden of market leadership

    Coca-Cola brands’ burden of market leadership

    Arguably one of the world’s famous bottler of soft drinks, Coca-Cola is battling with the allegation of ‘poisonous’  Fanta and Sprite. But will the allegation affect the market dominance of the giant’s product? WALE AJETUNMOBI reports. 

    THESE are not the best of times for bottling giant Coca-Cola Company. There is a raging controversy over the consumption of its products. Criticisms against the  company have been on the rise since 2000. There have been growing concerns over health effects, environmental issues,  animal testing, economic business practices and employee issues.

    The company has multiple lawsuits to contend with. Its brands are some of the world’s most assaulted. In every market, the volatile competition has thrown many blows against one of world’s oldest brands. It has been from one trouble to the other from its Coke, Fanta to Sprite brands.

    Not a few consumers confirm these assaults, regulatory authorities in various markets where the brands hold sway are often knocking at the company’s door to explain one consumer violation or the other.

    The dust raised by half-filled bottles of Fanta and Sprite accusations in 2014 had hardly been cleared by the  Consumer Protection Council (CPC) before another was raised recently. A Lagos State High Court, Igbosere, judge, Justice Adedayo Oyebanji, on March 14, ordered the National Agency for Food, Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC) to compel the Nigeria Bottling Company (NBC) Plc, manufacturers of Fanta and Sprite soft drinks, to include a written warning that the drinks should not be taken with Vitamin C.

    It was the climax of a nine-year old suit against NBC and NAFDAC. A Lagos businessman, Dr. Emmanuel Fijabi Adebo and his firm, Fijabi Adebo Holdings Ltd., who sued NBC and NAFDAC, urged the court to direct NAFDAC to conduct routine laboratory tests of all soft drinks and allied products of the company, to guarantee their safety on the account of negligence and breached of duty of care owed its customers and consumers in the production of Fanta and Sprite with excessive “benzoic acid and sunset” additive

    For the conglomerate, the ruling was another blow within two years in Nigeria. In the case of half-filled Sprite bottle two years ago, the CPC got a complaint from a consumer, regarding two half-empty cans of “Sprite” purchased in Abuja, the Federal Capital Territory (FCT). Coca-Cola and the NBC were blamed for their nonchalant attitude towards the directive of the council. The CPC leadership was blamed by stakeholders for high handedness. But the CPC, its members and the beverages giant have moved on.

    Regardless of where the pendulum of judgment finally swings, it is obvious that the CPC/Coca-Cola matter was a major issue of consumerism in 2015.

    Unlike the case of half-filled bottle, the last case has been more frightening.  The court warned that taking Fanta and Sprite with Vitamin C is poisonous and awarded N2 million against NAFDAC for failing “to live up to expectations”. It said the agency failed the citizenry  by certifying as satisfactory for human consumption, products which, in the United Kingdom (UK), failed sample test for human consumption and became poisonous when taken with Ascorbic Acid, known as Vitamin C.

    Fijabi, also counsel to the plaintiffs, Mr. Abiodun Onidare, in an amended statement of claim, alleged that sometime in March 2007, Fijabi Adebo Holdings, bought large quantities of Coca-Cola, Fanta Orange, Sprite, Fanta Lemon, Fanta Pineapple and Soda Water from NBC for export to the UK for retail purpose.

    “In consideration of the fact that this case was filed in 2008 and has been in court for nine years, N2 million is awarded against NAFDAC. Interest shall be paid on the cost awarded at the rate of 10 per cent per annum until liquidation of the said sum,” Justice Oyebanji said.

    A public relations consultant for the NBC, Bolaji Abimbola, took to “Facebook” and posted releases to debunk the claims in an apparent move to insulate the brand.

    He said: “Both Benzoic Acid and Ascorbic Acid (Vitamin C) are ingredients approved by international food safety regulators and used in many food and beverage products around the world. These ingredients are also used in combination in some products within levels which may differ from one country to another as approved by the respective national food and drug regulators in line with the range prescribed by CODEX, the joint intergovernmental body responsible for harmonizing international food standards.

    “All Coca-Cola products, including Fanta and Sprite, produced and sold in Nigeria, contain quantities and combinations of various ingredients in line with the CODEX standards and the national levels approved by NAFDAC. While Fanta contains a combination of Benzoic and Ascorbic Acids, Sprite does not contain Ascorbic Acid (only Benzoic Acid).

    “The recent court order relating to this matter has been appealed by NAFDAC and the Nigerian Bottling Company Limited respectively. We reaffirm our unwavering commitment to product quality, safety and consumer satisfaction.”

    In the poisonous case saga, the claimants averred that as a registered exporter with the Nigerian Export Promotion Council (NEPC), they could lawfully export the products of NBC to any part of the world.

    “In fact, Nigeria Bottling Company was aware that the products  purchased were meant for export,” he stated.

    Consequently, apart from other reliefs, the claimants demanded N15, 119,619.37 as special damages and N1, 622,000 being the money admittedly received from the claimants.

    The NBC, in its amended statement of defence filed by Mr. T. O. Busari, admitted supplying the products but contended that the product manufactured by the company were meant for local distribution and consumption as the company does not manufacture its products for export.

    Coca-Cola soft drinks, he maintained, are manufactured and bottled by various Coca-Cola franchise holders in most countries of the world, including the United Kingdom.

    The company denied that it was negligent in the manufacturing of its products as alleged, stressing that stringent quality control procedures were adopted in its production process to ensure that its products are safe for consumption of the final user.

    The company denied that the damages alleged by the claimants were occasioned by its negligence as the level of the chemical components in its soft drinks is safe for local consumption.

    It contended that the claimants’ claims are speculative, frivolous and vexatious and should be dismissed with substantial costs.

    Leadership unshaken by market threats

    With the enormity of this case, which has dragged on for nine years without the consumers knowing until the court pronouncement, will Coca-Cola company brands the market dominance be lost, perhaps to competitors like AJE Group, maker of BigCola? Will 7Up and Pepsi step up their game, seize the moment to snatch a slice of the Fanta and Sprite market share? Will the consumer fear factor favour any of the competitors? Expert says “No”.

    Brand loyalty, bonding

    “Over the years, Coca-Cola Company has developed a thick skin for market assaults either from competitors, regulators or consumers. The Coca-Cola Company is one of the world’s renowned beverage companies. It controls the largest chunk of the soft drinks market around the world, distributing roughly 160 different products.

    According to Forbes Magazine, Coca-Cola is one of the world’s most innovative companies with a networth of $192.8 billion. It has invested in many social causes, such as campaign against obesity and other environmental causes. The kind of campaigns the brand flag is consumer-bonding, ‘Share A Coke’ campaign is an example of such greats.

    “Apart from that, the level of the brand bond with consumers, you can call it reckless but there is nothing you can do about it. The most important thing is for both regulators and the company to collaborate and resolve any issues having to do with safety.

    “This is because if the company’s  sales drop, the entire global economy will feel it because there will be mass retrenchment, revenue drop for government.  So, nobody should rejoice over any marketing assault against the brand,”, a marketing communication expert certified by the Association of Advertising Agencies of Nigeria (AAAN), who pleaded for anonymity, said.

    Will the leadership slip?

    While no one knows how the case will end? Some experts believe that the market sales will drop in the meantime with little or no brand shift to other competing brands like 7Up, Big Cole variants among others as a result of what expert term “transferred fear factor”, a situation whereby consumers run away from a brand as a result of injurious effect and by extension do not want to go near  similar brands.

    They believe that the consumers will move on with time. This expected drop in sales is believed will also affect subtitude brands.

    “The sales might slightly shift downward but on a short term outlook. The brand will pick up. It has a way of surviving issues like this everywhere it operates. This is no gain to a competing brand because of consumers’ orientation.

    The transferred fear factor will cause consumers to run away from similar brands. So, that is why I said it is no really a gain to similar brands like 7Up, Big Cola etch. So, I see Fanta and Sprite retaining their normal share of market till the dust settles,” said Aderoju Richard, a client relationship manager with a leading marketing communication firm who has worked on the Fanta, Sprite, 7Up and Pepsi.

  • Coca-Cola brands and the burden of market leadership

    Coca-Cola brands and the burden of market leadership

    Arguably one of the world’s famous bottler of soft drinks, Coca-Cola is battling with the allegation of ‘poisonous’  Fanta and Sprite. But will the allegation affect the market dominance of the giant’s product? WALE AJETUNMOBI reports. 

    These are not the best of times for Coca-Cola Company – a frontline bottler of of soft drinks. There is a raging controversy over the consumption of its products and criticisms against the bottling company have been on the rise since 2000. There have been growing concerns over health effects, environmental issues, animal testing, economic business practices and employee issues.

    The company has multiple lawsuits to contend with. Its brands are some of the world most assaulted. In every market, the volatile competition has thrown many blows against one of world’s oldest brands. It has been from one trouble to the other from its Coke, Fanta to Sprite brands.

    Not a few consumers confirm these assaults, regulatory authorities in various market where the brands thread like a colossal are often knocking at the company’s door to explain one consumer violation or the other.

    The dust raised by half-filled bottles of Fanta and Sprite accusations in 2014 had hardly been cleared by Consumer Protection Council (CPC) before another was raised last week. A Lagos State High Court, Igbosere, judge, Justice Adedayo Oyebanji, on March 14, ordered the National Agency for Food, Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC) to compel the Nigeria Bottling Company (NBC) Plc, manufacturers of Fanta and Sprite soft drinks, to include a written warning that the drinks should not be taken with Vitamin C.

    It was the climax of a nine-year old suit against NBC and NAFDAC. A Lagos-based businessman, Dr. Emmanuel Fijabi Adebo and his firm, Fijabi Adebo Holdings Ltd., who dragged NBC and NAFDAC to the court, urged the court to direct NAFDAC to conduct routine laboratory tests of all soft drinks and allied products of the company, to guarantee their safety on the account of negligence and breached of duty of care owed its customers and consumers in the production of Fanta and Sprite with excessive “benzoic acid and sunset” additive

    For the conglomerate, the ruling was another blow within two years in Nigeria. In the case of half-filled Sprite bottle two years ago, the CPC got a complaint from a consumer, regarding two half-empty cans of “Sprite” purchased in Abuja, the Federal Capital Territory (FCT). Coca-Cola and the NBC were blamed for their nonchalant attitude towards the directive of the council. The CPC leadership was blamed by stakeholders for high handedness. But the CPC, its members and the beverage giant have moved on.

    Regardless of where the pendulum of judgment finally swung, it is obvious that the CPC/Coca-Cola matter was a major issue of consumerism in 2015.

    Unlike the case of half-filled bottle, the last case has been more frightening.  The court warned that taking Fanta and Sprite with Vitamin C is poisonous and awarded N2 million against NAFDAC for failing “to live up to expectations”. It said the agency failed the citizenry  by certifying as satisfactory for human consumption, products which, in the United Kingdom (UK), failed sample test for human consumption and became poisonous when taken with Ascorbic Acid, known as Vitamin C.

    Fijabi, also counsel to the plaintiffs, Mr. Abiodun Onidare, in an amended statement of claim, alleged that sometime in March 2007, Fijabi Adebo Holdings, bought large quantities of Coca-Cola, Fanta Orange, Sprite, Fanta Lemon, Fanta Pineapple and Soda Water from NBC for export to the UK for retail purpose.

    “In consideration of the fact that this case was filed in 2008 and has been in court for nine years, N2 million is awarded against NAFDAC. Interest shall be paid on the cost awarded at the rate of 10 per cent per annum until liquidation of the said sum,” Justice Oyebanji said.

    A public relations consultant for the NBC, Bolaji Abimbola, took to Facebook and posted releases to debunk the claims in an apparent move to insulate the brand.

    He said: “Both Benzoic Acid and Ascorbic Acid (Vitamin C) are ingredients approved by international food safety regulators and used in many food and beverage products around the world. These ingredients are also used in combination in some products within levels which may differ from one country to another as approved by the respective national food and drug regulators in line with the range prescribed by CODEX, the joint intergovernmental body responsible for harmonizing international food standards.

    “All Coca-Cola products, including Fanta and Sprite, produced and sold in Nigeria, contain quantities and combinations of various ingredients in line with the CODEX standards and the national levels approved by NAFDAC. While Fanta contains a combination of Benzoic and Ascorbic Acids, Sprite does not contain Ascorbic Acid (only Benzoic Acid).

    “The recent court order relating to this matter has been appealed by NAFDAC and the Nigerian Bottling Company Limited respectively. We reaffirm our unwavering commitment to product quality, safety and consumer satisfaction.”

    In the poisonous case saga, the claimants averred that as a registered exporter with the Nigerian Export Promotion Council (NEPC), they could lawfully export the products of NBC to any part of the world.

    “In fact, Nigeria Bottling Company was aware that the products the purchased were meant for export,” he stated.

    Consequently, apart from other reliefs, the claimants demanded N15, 119,619.37 as special damages and N1, 622,000 being the money admittedly received from the claimants.

    The NBC, in its amended statement of defence filed by Mr. T. O. Busari, admitted supplying the products but contended that the product manufactured by the company were meant for local distribution and consumption as the company does not manufacture its products for export.

    Coca-Cola brand of soft drinks, he maintained is manufactured and bottled by various Coca-Cola franchise holders in most countries of the world, including the United Kingdom.

    The company denied that it was negligent in the manufacturing of its products as alleged, stressing that stringent quality control procedures were adopted in its production process to ensure that its products are safe for consumption of the final user.

    The company denied that the damages alleged by the claimants were occasioned by its negligence as the level of the chemical components in its soft drinks is safe for local consumption.

    It contended that the claimants’ claims are speculative, frivolous and vexatious and should be dismissed with substantial costs.

     

    Leadership unshaken by market threats

    With the enormity of this case which has dragged for nine years without the consumers knowing until the bubble burst recently, will Coca-Cola company brands market dominance loose grip, perhaps to competitors like AJE Group, maker of BigCola company which has a near perfect substitute for both Sprite and Fanta? Will 7Up and Pepsi step-up their game, seize the moment to snatch a slice of Fanta and Sprite market share? Will the consumer fear factor favour any of the competitors? Expert says “No”.

     

    Brand loyalty, bonding

    “Over the years, Coca-Cola Company has developed a thick skin for market assaults either from competitors, regulators or consumers. The Coca-Cola Company is one of the most renowned beverage companies in the world. It controls the largest chunk of the soft drink market around the world, distributing roughly 160 different products.

    According to Forbes Magazine, Coca-Cola is one of the world’s most innovative companies with a networth of $192.8 billion. It has invested on many social causes, such as campaign against obesity and other environmental causes. The kind of campaigns the brand flag is consumer-bonding, ‘Share A Coke’ campaign is an example of such greats.

    “Apart from that, the level of the brand bond with consumers, you can call it reckless but there is nothing you can do about it. The most important thing is for both regulators and the company to collaborate and resolve any issues having to do with safety.

    “This is because if the company sales drop, the entire global economy will feel it because there will be mass retrenchment, revenue drop for government.  So, nobody should rejoice over any marketing assault against the brand”, a marketing communication expert certified by the Association of Advertising Agencies of Nigeria (AAAN), who pleaded for anonymity, said.

     

    Will the leadership slip?

    While no one knows how the case will end? Some experts believe that the market sales will drop in the meantime with little or no brand shift to other competing brands like 7Up, Big Cole variants among others as a result of what expert termed “transferred fear factor”, a situation whereby consumers run away from a brand as a result of injurious effect and by extension do not want to near any similar brand.

    They believe that the consumers will move on with time. This expected drop in sales is believed will also affect subtitude brands.

    “The sales might slightly shift downward but on a short term outlook. The brands will pick up. It has a way of surviving issues like this everywhere it operates. This is no gain to a competing brand because of consumers’ orientation.

    The transferred fear factor will cause consumers to run away from similar brands. So, that is why I said it is no really a gain to similar brands like 7Up, Big Cola etch. So, I see Fanta and Sprite retaining their normal share of market till the dust settle,” said Aderoju Richard, a client relationship manager with a leading marketing communication firm who has worked on the Fanta, Sprite, 7Up and Pepsi.

  • Ogun: The burden of being number one

    To the uninitiated, it would appear like a jolt from the blues. In fact, it would be difficult to see it coming. But not so for those who may have been keenly following developments in the Gateway state in recent years.

    For those in this latter group, the recent data released by the National Bureau of Statistics, NBS, indicating that Ogun State is Nigeria’s leading producer of solid minerals could not have come as a surprise.

    Titled, “State Disaggregated Mining and Quarrying Data (2016)” the NBS, in its report, lists limestone, laterite and granite as Nigeria’s leading types of solid minerals. It also mentioned that there are sizable quantities of expensive gems such as topaz, sapphire, tourmaline and gold.

    “The States Disaggregated Mining and Quarrying Data for 2016 reflected Nigeria produced 43,495,423.12 tonnes of solid minerals last year. Ogun State produced the highest tonnes of solid minerals among the 36 states and the FCT.

    “The state produced 16,376,547.50 tonnes of solid minerals representing 37.65 per cent of the total tonnes of solid minerals produced,” the report said.

    It added that, “Kogi and Cross River states followed with 12,739,318.65 and 2,997,678.73 tonnes of solid minerals produced representing about 29.29 per cent and 6.89 per cent of the total tonnes of the minerals produced.

    “Borno and Yobe states, both from the Northeast Zone, produced the least tonnes of solid minerals with 1,250 and 883.08 tonnes of minerals produced respectively.”

    Now, those who had taken time to look into developments in Ogun State in recent times would have seen this coming. In fact, anyone with more than a passing interest in the socio-economic transformation that Ogun State has gone through in the last five to six years would have found the NBS report as long overdue.

    And the reason for this is not far-fetched. To start with, the Senator Ibikunle Amosun-led administration in Ogun State, right from the blast of the whistle in 2011, had embarked on a deliberate policy to navigate the economy of the gateway state away from its traditional reliance on federal allocation.

    At a time when federal allocation was more than sufficient to foot the bills, Amosun had insisted on diversifying the economic base of Ogun and expanding the tax bracket. He chose to change the story of Ogun from a largely civil service state to a bubbling commercial and industrial hub that is ready to take full advantage of its proximity to Lagos and its status as the Gateway to not only the rest of Nigeria, but also the West African sub regional market.

    To achieve this, the governor knew that he needed to not only attract private sector investments, but also create an enabling environment for private sector players to operate. He immediately set to work on achieving these. And perhaps one of the first signs that his effort had started yielding results can be traced to the ranking of Ogun on the Ease of Doing Business Index by the World Bank.

    At inception of his administration in 2011, Ogun State was ranked number 35 in Nigeria as far as the Ease of Doing Business rating was concerned. That was the sorry tale he met in office. Within a year in the saddle, that story changed. By the time the report was released in 2012, the Gateway state had climbed from the bottom of the ladder to the top four positions.

    One of the immediate results of this feat is that today, Ogun State has emerged the fastest growing State economy and is now the industrial capital of Nigeria by all indices. “We have been able to attract 543 new industries in the five years of our Administration, all of which have invested not less than $50 million each. Of these industries, 110 have invested between $200 million and $2 billion,” Governor Amosun said recently.

    Quite naturally, the status of Ogun State as the industrial capital of Nigeria would reflect in the state’s Internally Generated Revenue, IGR profile. At inception, Ogun State was, at best, only generating about N750m as IGR per month. Again, the Amosun administration went to work on this and soon raised the profile from N750m to a peak of N7bn. By the time the country ran into economic recession, the IGR nosedived from its peak and now oscillates around N4bn monthly. Today, Ogun is only next to Lagos in terms of IGR profile.

    Although these are developments to be celebrated, they are also a source of concern for the Ogun State Governor. “Yes we are the industrial capital of Nigeria and we contribute so much to the Gross Domestic Product of the country through the activities of the industries within our territory but this has not reflected in what we get from the federation account,” Governor Amosun says.

    The governor is often quick to point out the fact that whereas Ogun has recorded the highest percentage increase in IGR growth and contributes more than any other state of the federation to the coffers of the Federal government in the non-oil sector, what the state gets from the federal allocation does not reflect this reality in any way.

    “Whereas we are responsible for the lion share of the non-oil income of the country and happily shoulder a lot of responsibilities due to the presence of these large number of industries in our state, when it comes to allocation we are still way down at the bottom of the ladder,” Governor Amosun said recently.

    The Ogun State governor has also had cause to complain about instances where mining licenses are issued, by federal agencies based in Abuja, to companies who then proceed to undertake activities that may be injurious to local communities without having any recourse to the state government.

    Such, he said, often result in environmental degradation, tension between mining companies and their host communities as well as security and infrastructural challenges among others.

    In order to put an end to the bittersweet experience, the Ogun State governor wants a situation where states are carried along in the process of issuing mining licenses to prospective miners. Not only that, Governor Amosun wants a review of the revenue allocation formula of the federal government in order to ensure that states that contribute more to the coffers also get more from the coffers.

    Although the federal government, speaking through the Minister for Mines and Steel Development, Dr. Kayode Fayemi, recently promised to ensure a 13 per cent derivation for states with solid mineral deposits, it remains to be seen how soon this promise will be implemented.

    Not only that, one would love to see the day when the revenue allocation formula will also adequately compensate a state like Ogun that bears the burden of providing and maintaining infrastructure for the large number of industries within its corridor.

    Until then, Ogun State will continue to experience the joy and pain of being the industrial capital of Nigeria. It will continue to bear the burden of being number one.

    Soyinka is Senior Special Assistant (Media) for Governor Ibikunle Amosun.