The Nation Newspaper

Tag: change

  • Change, change, change! – top-down vintage and/or bottom-up model? (1)

    Change, change, change! – top-down vintage and/or bottom-up model? (1)

    I very strongly emphasize it: though change can be either positive or negative, prospective or retrogressive, the change that I have in mind in the series of reflections that begin in this column this week is change from very bleak circumstances to intimations of more hopeful portents ahead of us. This is consistent with the spirit of the times in our post-PDP Nigeria and many other parts of our world. True enough, Boko Haram has not faded away and other secessionist insurrections in potential or virtual states of mass mobilization dot the national horizon with threats of massive and fatal disruption of the unity of the country and its peoples. But overwhelmingly, Nigerians across the length and breadth of the country are united in their demand for and expectation of positive change from the hardship, suffering, insecurity and hopelessness that were the lot of the vast majority of Nigerians during the PDP years. And as a corollary to this, Nigerians also demand and expect profound change in the country’s new political rulers. This particular point leads directly to the central issue that I wish to explore in these reflections, an issue that can be posed in the form of a portentous question: can meaningful change in the new administration and the new ruling party take place exclusively or even primarily within the ranks of the new rulers without the intervention of powerful currents of mass action in words and deeds from below?

    Anyone reading this piece who is a regular visitor to this column would immediately know that the answer that I would personally give to this question is a resounding no: without the Nigerian masses intervening in the demand for and expectation of change, nothing much or significant will start from the top and percolate down to the masses of our peoples. This is a point I have been making unrelentingly in the last five or six weeks in this column, regardless of the particular issue that each column in the period has engaged. As a matter of fact, it is precisely because I have been harping relentlessly on this point that I now wish to reflect more carefully on its implications in the series of three essays that begins in the column this week. And as a first step in this exercise, I now wish to make a declaration that may startle many readers of this piece. What is this declaration? It is this: meaningful, significant and long lasting change can come from – and sometimes does come from – the top of the social and political order and from there percolate to the rest of the society; however, we have enough evidence now to come to the conclusion that this sort of change will almost certainly not come from the new ruling party, the APC. In other words, only if the groundswell for change comes powerfully from below, only to that extent will change of a reformative and beneficial kind take root and grow among the new rulers, the new ruling party. That is the conclusion that I have reached in carefully observing both the rulers and the ruled in post-PDP, APC-ruled Nigeria.

    Since time and space in the present series that begins today will not permit me to dwell exhaustively on this conclusion that will certainly strike many ardent supporters of the new ruling party as premature or unhelpful, in the present context, I will only briefly and in a rather summative manner give my reasons for coming to this conclusion. Thus, the main reason is none other than the tremendously consequential fact that the new ruling party is yet to forge an ideological and moral identity that is consistent with and conducive to meaningful reform of the state of affairs that the APC inherited from the defeated ruling party, the PDP. Let me put this in plain, unvarnished language: there are some genuine reformers within the leadership of the new ruling party at the federal and state levels, but their weight, their influence within the effective organs and institutions of governance is pretty insignificant. A few items highlighting the performance of the new ruling party in office might help to illustrate this claim.

    Item: in broad daylight and absolutely without any pretense to reform or “change”, Bukola Saraki seized the leadership of the Senate on the basis of a cynically opportunistic alliance with the defeated ruling party, the PDP; moreover, the APC was completely powerless to undo or reverse the coup. Item: the same arrant display of a blatant struggle for the spoils of office and power rather than a forthright prosecution of an agenda of reform marked theintra-party implosion of the APC in Kogi State in the recent governorship election in that state; significantly,this came after the APC had in fact become the national ruling party.In other words, the APC was not fighting the PDP in the Kogi State governorship elections; it was fighting itself. More appropriately, the APC was waging the fight within and againstitself in a war in which no principles or manifestations of reform or “change” were remotely in sight.

    There are many other items pertaining to the performance of the APC in power to which one could point to buttress the claim, the assertion that I have been exploring in the present discussion. Permit me repeat the assertion: we have enough evidence now to come to the conclusion that though there are some reform-minded leaders within the APC, change – if and when it comes – will not come from the top and percolate to the masses but will be sparked and fueled from below to strengthen the few genuine but isolated, confused and marginalized reform-minded leaders of the party. One item in this regard is the perpetuation of the extravagant greed of the APC members of the National Assembly in their completely unashamed dedication to receiving and consolidating the jumbo salaries, allowances and remunerations of the PDP years. In those years of the reign of the former ruling party, the non-PDP members of the National Assembly could claim – indeed, they did claim – that they were merely following the protocols established by the PDP. That excuse, that subterfuge is gone now and the APC lawmakers and lawgivers are glad-happy to continue to eat and drink from the same gravy train, as Americans like to call what we know as ilabe in the idiom of Naija decadence.

    If there is any aspect of the performance or behavior of the APC in office as a ruling party from which the winds of much needed change will blow from the rooftops of political governance to the rest of the society down below, surely it is the widely debated war on corruption, isn’t it? After all, the energy, the drive for the prosecution of the war has come mostly from the Presidency itself. Moreover, there is the far more significant fact that for the most part, the Nigerian masses have seemed to be content to be mere ringside onlookers in the war as it has been joined by a judiciary that, so far at least, has not been notably on the side of change, of justice.In drawing attention to this point, I do not ignore the fact that as ringside onlookers in the war on corruption, the Nigerian masses have been extremely agitated and voluble; they have lionized Buhari to the high heavens just as they have cast the looters and the lawyers and judges seemingly on their side to the darkest regions of hell. However, these factors notwithstanding, it is very doubtful whether even in this particular area of the APC’s performance in office meaningful and effective change will come primarily from the administration itself, that is to say from the top to the bottom.On what basis am I making this highly debatable claim, this highly contentious assertion?

    It is not my wish to embarrass him, but it was from a widely published statement credited to my comrade and former colleague at the University of Ife, Professor Itse Sagay, that it finally dawned on me that even in the war against corruption, we must not expect a one-sided flow of the winds of change from the government to the rest of the society. As everyone knows, Professor Sagay is the Chairman of the Advisory Committee on Corruption that Buhari set up very early in his assumption of power. Moreover, apart from being a celebrated legal luminary, Sagay has for long been an outspoken foe of the looters and their defenders within the top echelon of the legal profession.Imagine then the surprise and – I admit it, the sadness – with which I read the statement credited to Sagay last week in which he bitterly and rather helplessly denounced very senior and distinguished members of the legal profession and – yes! – the Supreme Court of the land itself as willful and unrepentant accomplices of the looters. Please dear reader, don’t get me wrong: Sagay’s patriotism and his fighting spirit were both indisputably present in his statement of last week. But alas, present also in the statement was a sense of desperation, a sense of perplexity as to what to do next in the war against corruption in the face of such powerful adversaries of change and justice as the Supreme Court and SANs galore.

    And indeed, where do we go from here, from this declared space of impasse and perplexity, not only in the specific warfront of the battle against corruption in the law courts but more generally in the universal yearning for meaningful and significant change in our country at the present time? Where will the momentum, the impetus for meaningful change come from? This will be our starting point in next week’s resumption of the series.

     

    Biodun Jeyifo

    bjeyifo@fas.harvard.edu

  • They want change but won’t change

    SIR: The 1999 Constitution is an offshoot of Nigeria’s problem. A handpicked few drafted the 1999 Constitution to protect “THEY, the ruling elite” to the detriment of “WE, the people.” THEY are bad leaders, past and present. THEY are the same of the same, yesterday and today. THEY are few;WE are many. WE are impoverished citizens held down by ignorance. WE are ordinary Nigerians deeply divided by ethnic and religious sentiments. WE are the common people who have common enemies but no common sense.

    There are three arms of government. Corruption, corruption and corruption!

    Impunity loves immunity and sycophants befriend mediocrity. Inconsiderategovernors provide for the people mediocre medicare and call it world class. But the same uncaring governors would abandon their own “world class hospital” for world-class medical treatment abroad.They say they steal because we don’t stone them. We’re sorry we never stone them.

    While we serve with dedication and selflessness under the sun or in the rainbetween the reign of terror and free rein of evil, some animals help themselves to what belongs to us. Now what do we have? Insecurity and tales of woe everywhere!

    The security and welfare of the people is the primary purpose of government. Needless to say, insecurity is one reason the Nigerian state faces a bleak future. Governors collect security votes and pretend to be chief security officers of their respective states. In countries where lives matter, states do have own state police and communities like a university campus or a local district reasonably do have district police. It’s long overdue the states were empowered to own their police to tackle crimes. A decentralized police is change we need. Federal police and state police and local police and community policing we pray!

    Let’s talk about our greatest fear – one Nigeria. Methinks that the life of one Nigerian is more precious than one Nigeria. Of what use is one Nigeria if Nigeria is not one? Today in Nigeria, no place is secure and no one is safe. It is alarming innocent lives are wasted daily across the country. It is sorrowful to know that fellow Nigerians perish everyday due to assassination, armed robbery, kidnapping, ritual killing, cultism, militancy, insurgency, terrorism,religious riots, ethnic violence, jungle justice, violent crimes by thugs, armed gangs, motor-park touts, area boys et al.Crime is everywhere in the world; there’s no time and nowhere on earth crime will disappear altogether. Nonetheless, if we as a people would do the needful, Nigeria will become a peaceful country where people can live in peace and leave in peace.

    President MuhammaduBuhari to fight corruption, corrupt people will fight back. They start by crying “witch hunt” in advance. Corruption must give way for Nigeria to move forward. However, winning the war against corruption is not the end. Government can at least do the ordinary by providing potable water; universal healthcare; all-round education; affordable housing; good roads; stable electricity; broadband Internet; decent jobs; security and social welfare, and all that they promised the Nigerian people.

    • John Adebisi,

    Abuja.

  • Who is afraid of the cost of change? 2

    Who is afraid of the cost of change? 2

    Unless there is an immediate revolution in the country’s judicial culture, citizens may be in a better position to support the government in ending or arresting corruption in the country than a judiciary that is already infected by the virus of Nigeria Factor.

    We need more support; it is about Nigeria, not an individual, the fight against corruption is for everybody, from the media we have to go to the grassroots, we will take it to children in the schools; we have to tell the children that corruption is bad, tell them why there is no chair in the classroom…. We will sensitise everybody to the evil of corruption. We need to let people know that corruption is bad, because some people don’t seem to know.—Ibrahim Magu, EFCC Chairman

    Last week, this column called on those holding the levers of power to get ready to deal with the cost of change. The column argued that if the current administration is to arrest corruption, it must address the two types of corruption: the act of plundering nation’s resources and a governance culture that makes citizens feel that the wealth of the nation belongs only to the few with access to political and bureaucratic power. It concluded that fighting corruption effectively will require not just the willingness of judges to serve the cause of justice, but also mobilisation of citizens to stand up to defend their patrimony through use of citizens’ sovereignty to call promoters and defenders of corruption and undue privilege for political officers to order. It also asked President Buhari to insist that his ministers declare their assets. Today’s piece will focus on the role of citizens in a democracy and the responsibility of people in power to encourage citizens to have a stake in the way they are governed. It will argue that both citizens and democratic governments in the country need to cooperate more than they are doing, if corruption is to be removed from the country’s governance culture.

    Born and raised mostly in the era of military dictatorship with no clearly defined mission for sustainable democracy and national development, a huge number of active citizens in the voting age today have grown to see themselves not as part of the governance process. The alienation of citizens at the instance of military governments continued into the few years of democratic governance since independence. The alienation reached its peak during the last administration, which essentially appropriated the state and its resources with a show of impunity that finally angered the citizens to the point of voting out a party self-referenced as the largest political party in Africa destined to rule without interruption for at least 65 years.

    In a way, the vote for Buhari and his manifesto of change marked the beginning of citizen dis-alienation. But the effective use of citizens’ votes to change a government they did not feel comfortable with does not amount to full acceptance of citizens’ role in a democracy. Apart from electoral democracy which gives citizens the opportunity to choose or replace governments that rule them, citizens are expected in democratic cultures to see themselves in post-election times as stakeholders whose main responsibilities are to participate in policy debates, petition the government, and protest against public policies whenever they feel the need to do so. The old aphorisms: “A people get the government they deserve” and “Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty” all illustrate the role of citizens in shaping the way their nation is governed, especially the readiness on the part of their rulers to see governance as a life-enhancing endeavour that expects people in government to commit to accountability and transparency in governance.

    For long in our country’s frequently broken journey to democratic governance, most citizens have come to see politicians and government as overlords. In addition, when vocational civil society organisations mushroomed in the country during the era of military dictatorship, many citizens saw civil society as separate from the citizenry. This perception has been traced to the fact that most civil society organisations came into being and remain in existence through funding by former colonial powers and their collaborators. Many observers also believe that many civil society organisations, like other segments of the Nigerian polity and society, had been infected and degraded by the culture of corruption in ascendancy from decade to decade.

    As this column observed last week, President Buhari’s call on citizens and the judiciary to play the roles allotted to them in a democracy enthusiastically and effectively remains one of the most profound statements from the presidency in respect of consolidating and sustaining democracy in the country. Undoubtedly, there have been similar statements in respect of democracy in the past, but it is salutary that such statement came this time from a man whose personal integrity had contributed noticeably to the success of an opposition party to unseat a political party ‘destined’ in the words of its leaders to rule Nigeria continuously for close to three quarters of a century. But the president’s encouragement of citizens to be vigilant beyond electoral democracy must have raised citizens’ expectations about the future of democracy and development in the country. However, for the president’s statement to have a lasting impact, it must be backed by programmatic commitment at every level of government to stimulating citizens to get fully engaged in the war against corruption, a political and social vice that is inimical to the thriving of democracy and development in the country.

    Unless there is an immediate revolution in the country’s judicial culture, citizens may be in a better position to support the government in ending or arresting corruption in the country than a judiciary that is already infected by the virus of Nigeria Factor. Like all aspects of the polity, the judiciary may need the type of re-orientation that other corruption-prone institutions in the polity require, for it to play a proper role in the fight against corruption. Building trust between the government and the electorate is the most important thing needed to reinforce the fight against corruption. It is perhaps easy for corrupt people to fight back and dirty as they seem to be doing already. Corrupt people in government, banks, and other resource-rich institutions are likely to have enough resources to purchase corrupt professionals in all spheres of life but they may not be able to have enough stolen money to spare for buying the conscience of most citizens.

    The fight against corruption and for amelioration of governance in the country (now coded as Change) needs citizens’ support more than that of any other institution inherited from decades of venality in governance. The managers of Buhari’s manifesto of change need to interact more respectfully with citizens than the governments in the past. They need to be honest with citizens and provide them with information about forces that are working to prevent change in all forms. For example, it should not be easier for the government’s media aides to identify names of police officers who take N100 bribe on the street than it should be to provide meaningful information about those who stole over one trillion naira from the state. The news about 55 individuals-former ministers, governors, bank officers, etc— is not helpful so far. WHO as one of the mandatory five Ws and one H of news reporting is the first thing to be established before an event is turned into a news story. There is no excuse for government to forget to give citizens the names of the 55 individuals that had wrecked the economy.

    If the manifesto of change is not to be rubbished by desperate members of the country’s venal elite, President Buhari needs to initiate programmes that can enhance participatory democracy by encouraging public debate and hearings on important policy initiatives, including bringing some matters directly before citizens in a referendum. Citizens feel the presence of governments all over the world through interaction with the public service. As of now, public service still acts as an agency to deny service rather than one to provide public goods and services to citizens. Making government agencies responsive to citizens is one way for the regime of change to establish trust with citizens to the point that they would take the risk of engaging forces that are hostile to good governance. It is after citizens are sure that those in power are serious about improving the institutions created to serve them that they too will “do the needful” to protect the machine of change.

    Citizens on their part need not feel overwhelmed by the noise of anti-change media warriors or by the power at the disposal of those they had elected. For example, as bad as the current constitution is, it provides citizens the right to recall elected officials when they feel this is necessary. Citizens need to be vigilant if they want change. They must realise that the power of example evident in Presidential Buhari’s personal life may not be enough to sustain a regime of change. Other branches of government, especially the houses of elected lawmakers require close scrutiny at all times. Like the president, the lawmakers need to be made accountable to those that elected them. When any lawmaker acts in a way that undermines citizens’ interests, citizens should not forget that they too have the power to recall irresponsible lawmakers.

  • Re: Pastor Tunde Bakare’s roadmap to a successful change

    Re: Pastor Tunde Bakare’s roadmap to a successful change

    Finally, the bullet that finally knocked off the pastor’s request/demand  was the recommendation that additional states be created when any suggestion, worthy of any consideration at all, should have canvassed confederation, and a return to the old regions, or something similar, which would then act as the federating units

    “INEC was not truthful on this point. INEC knew that a supplementary election was unnecessary in the circumstances. The electoral body was, and is still, in possession of records which show that in the affected 91 polling units, there were only 38,000 permanent voters cards (PVCs) issued. Of that figure, only 25,000 collected the cards. And at the November 21, 2015 election, only 19,000 persons were accredited in the affected units. The margin of win by Audu/Faleke ticket would, undoubtedly, have accommodated any of these figures with Audu/Faleke still leading by majority of votes. It can, therefore, be rightly concluded that the phony supplementary election was falsely devised to hoodwink the people of Kogi State and play the script of some powerful political interests at the expense of the will of the people of Kogi” – Olarinde Yesufu, a legal analyst, writing on the topic: Kogi – Inaugurating Bello as governor will be unconstitutional in The Nation of 21st Jan, 2015.

    It goes without saying that the above epigram does not speak to today’s topic but it  galls to high heavens reading the very pedestrian argument of  Dr Oluwayomi David Atte, a University of Ibadan- trained development scholar you’d expect  to be much  more liberated, trying to justify INEC’s premeditated, but thoroughly  illogical declaration of the  Kogi governorship election as  inconclusive, on the laughable  excuse that  Faleke is not known in Kogi. Even if this outlandish claim were true, and not merely playing to the ‘come and chop’ tradition of most Kogi State politicians always talking from both sides of their mouths, where was he when Faleke emerged the deputy gubernatorial candidate to Prince Audu? Does he know better than the late Audu who, with considerable justification, can be described as the godfather of Kogi politics far ahead of  the likes of  Idris or the simple hearted Wada? Was Atte away on Mars or where can we locate his objection to that selection if he wants to be taken serious? Of course, he must have been too patronising of Prince Audu to have the liver to complain. It’s a shame that the likes of  Atte, Clarence Obafemi and  Dino Melaye, have, with their volte face, further  demonstrated how effete the average Kogi politician, many of who were implicated in Obasanjo’s shoot down of  a decent Chief Sunday Awoniyi  who, it was, who first described PDP as an aggregation of very venal people, is. It is  obvious to the unbiased  that INEC was arms twisted  to do what it did as the same thing happened in the last Bayelsa election without any such unreasonable decision. One can only hope that APC will not, by its own hands, snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. It is germane to mention that in the case between Wada, Faleke and INEC, the trial judge specifically said that its decision had nothing to do with INEC’s failure to declare the election result or on the substitution of candidates.

    With all due respect to their eminences, Bishop Matthew Kukah of the Sokoto Catholic Diocese and Pastor Bakare of The Latter Rain Assembly, it can  be safely concluded that the way they venerate, and  purvey, elements of former President Goodluck Jonathan’s recondite policies and actions in office, can only be a consequence of our Lord’s teachings about the Christian love.  “And one of the scribes came, and having heard them reasoning together, and perceiving that he had answered them well asked him: which is the first commandment of all?” To which Jesus answered: “Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord. And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul, and with thy entire mind and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment. And the second is like, namely this: thou shall love thy neighbour as thyself”. “There is none other commandment greater than these” – Mark 12: 28-31. While Bishop Kukah has severally  exonerated the former president on all he did in office, Pastor Bakare, like most  members of his core  group in the Jonathan National Conference of 2014, has continued to present the recommendations of that talkshop as a silver bullet to all of Nigeria’s problems  regardless of  its dramatic, but shadowy origins, its skewed membership and the fact that neither the president nor his political party, the PDP, considered it important enough to be made a campaign issue.

    The pastor has again come out calling on his friend, President Mohammadu Buhari, to adopt the conference decisions as the way forward for Nigeria, conveniently forgetting that despite the president’s party giving the confab a wide berth, Nigerians in their millions, still voted him as their president while sending Goodluck Jonathan out of office.  If only for this, I expect Pastor Bakare to understand that Nigerians know exactly what they want.

    The pastor hoisted his latest call on the following grounds:

    (1)    That promise of true federalism is contained in Article 14 of the Nigerian Charter for National Reconciliation and Integration, which was unanimously adopted and signed by the delegates to the 2014 National Conference;

    (2) That although the report may have been produced under a PDP government but it is not a PDP document. It is a Nigerian people’s document;

    (3) That it will be comparable to Buhari’s adoption of some of Jonathan’s policies, e.g the Integrated Personnel and Payroll Information System, IPPIS and the Treasury Single Account, TSA, and,

     (4) That the need for diversification also brings to the fore the question of viability of states in relation to the need for economies of scale.

    Let me now take them serially:

    As implied in Chief Obafemi Awolowo reference  to Thesis and antithesis at the UPN 1983 congress in Abeokuta, Ogun State, a critical  analysis of Pastor Bakare’s grounds renders his plea dead on arrival. Concerning no.1, the pastor cannot in all honesty claim that the recommendations of a politically- manipulated national conference can, in any way, be superior to the  tomes patriotic Nigerians have, in the past, came up with after  some sober interrogation of our multifarious problems as a country. That of Obasanjo was a gem until inordinate ambition killed it.

    It is in his no.2 argument that Pastor Bakare very, uncharacteristically, missed it. How really pan-Nigerian was the Jonathan conference? In the certainty that he knows all about that conference, let me remind him and inform Nigerians of the following: the Jonathan Conference was borne out of crass political opportunism. It was not only initiated, but kick started and controlled, throughout, by Afenifere, aided by those they selected from other parts of the country. They actually corruptly interfered with some state nominations. In the specific case of Ekiti, Chief Deji Fasuan, nominated by the governor, Dr Kayode Fayemi, as the state’s leader, was substituted by them and their traditional ally, my friend, Dr Kunle Olajide, brought in. I am not sure Senator Durojaiye, very experienced as he is, did not suffer the same fate. I knew, as a matter of fact, that Dr Fayemi, visited President Jonathan to protest this callous infraction but to no avail. It was under this crass manipulation that Ogun State came to have the highest number of delegates, countrywide, at 19. They donated a member of their group to kick start the entire process and were, in fact, not far from its very leadership. They then proceeded to include all manner of organisations whose delegates’ selection they influenced. So, Pastor Bakare, how truly pan-Nigerian was the Jonathan conference?

    Concerning no.3, I expect that if nobody knows it at all, Pastor Bakare should know that these and other adopted policies were neither the ideas nor the outcome of cheap political opportunism but programmes which emerged after long and thorough interrogations by appropriately qualified professional appointees of government who not only have the expertise but are most likely to have seen them in practice in the civilised world. They were not constructed as some deu ex machina aimed at freeing some people from any political Siberia.

    Finally, the bullet that finally knocked off the pastor’s request/demand  was the recommendation that additional states be created when any suggestion, worthy of any consideration at all, should have canvassed confederation, and a return to the old regions, or something similar, which would then act as the federating units. Without a shred of doubt, restructuring Nigeria is an urgent desideratum, but certainly not on the model arrived at the Jonathan National Conference.

  • Akintola: Continuity and change in Nigerian politics – 1

    It is 50 years since Chief Samuel Ladoke Akintola was brutally cut down by a band of rebellious Nigerian soldiers who participated in a coup d’état that led to a chain of events disrupting a normal democratic trajectory of Nigeria, the consequences that are still with us today. Fifty years in many countries provide a timeframe within which an objective assessment of past events can be viewed. The dust of history presumably would have settled and the emotional trauma would somehow have been healed because time is a healer. Man is the centre of politics because man constitutes a variable factor in social science, it is difficult and problematic formulating general laws in social science unlike in physical and experimental sciences. Therefore, what happened in the past even though it has implication for the present and for the future does not necessarily determine the trajectory of events in the present. History repeats itself and as George Santayana said, when history repeats itself it comes as a tragedy and those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. This is why it is very important to study the past in other for the present not to repeat the mistakes of the past. Unfortunately, people do not learn from the lessons of the past and this is why we keep doing the same thing and expecting different outcomes or result. The study of historical personages or characters provides the historian the opportunity to learn a lot about the past because dominant personalities play fundamentally significant roles in history. It is impossible to study the past of modern Britain without the full knowledge and study of Winston Churchill neither can we understand modern Germany without the study for bad or for ill, the impact of Adolf Hitler. The development of modern historiography in Nigeria is at its infancy but at least now we have a century of the role of important personalities in the history of our country from people like Sir Akintoye Ajasa, the Emir of Kano, Sarkin Mohammadu Abass and Alafin Ladigbolu the first and others. It is in this respect that a careful and analytical study of the life and times of a major historical figure like Chief Samuel Ladoke Akintola may elucidate the past and foreshadow the future of our country. There is no doubt that Chief Akintola first as a central minister, leader of opposition in the federal parliament in Lagos, successful mover in 1957 of the motion for independence of Nigeria and lastly premier of Western Nigeria from 1959-1966 was a formidable figure in the politics and evolution of Nigeria. The child is the father of the man and we are products of our environment so hence before a detailed analysis of his role in Nigerian politics, I will like to situate him within the context of his environment and his people respectively Ogbomoso and Yoruba. Politics is about competition of ideas and people, sometimes in the interplay conflict almost seem inevitable in the life and times of politicians. It is when compromises cannot be reached that you sometimes have open rebellion, disagreement and breakup of political parties. Historically in the Yoruba past, wars were a feature of Yoruba politics. Between 1783 and 1884, almost a century, the Yorubas were involved in internecine fratricidal war particularly after the collapse of the old Oyo Empire and Ogbomoso; Chief Akintola’s hometown produced one or two Are-ona-ka-kan-fo as a major war leader in old Oyo. It would therefore be necessary for me to say a few things about Ogbomoso.

    Ogbomoso, the town where Chief Akintola was born, and which has a current population of over 500,000, is the fourth largest town in Nigeria. It is located in the drier part of the rain forest belt and is a city in a transitional zone between the rain forest and the savannah.  It is, perhaps, the openness of this environment and the shortage of adequate employment opportunities at home because of over-population which, among other factors, made Ogbomoso people wander as itinerant traders throughout West Africa and particularly into Northern Nigeria. This wandering has in turn tended to make them accommodating and adaptable in the various alien places where they have settled.

    Ogbomoso people are Oyo-Yoruba and form part of the larger Yoruba nation that spreads from South Western Nigeria westward into the Republics of Benin and Central Togo. The Yoruba are a highly homogenous people in terms of culture, and while they speak a variety of dialects, these are intelligible to most of the Yoruba. The Yoruba number around 40 million in Nigeria and West Africa. The Yoruba form a well-defined society with a common history, shared experience, a distinct and common language, a single and contiguous geographical area and even the belief in common eponymous ancestors, Oduduwa or Olofin.

    This is not to say that Yoruba people themselves do not recognise sub-groups or regional traits and characteristics. In fact, throughout most of the 19th century, the Yoruba were engaged in civil wars after the collapse of the old Oyo Empire when new centres of power were established and new political alignments were being made to ensure peace and good governance.

    Most members of the Yoruba nation would also acknowledge their membership in sub-groups such as Ekiti, Ondo, Oyo, Ilorin, Ijebu, Ikale, Ilaje, Ijesha, Awori, Akoko, Owo, Okun, ibolo, Igbomina and some would say Itshekiri. Contact between the Yoruba and other Nigerians, particularly the Edo, Nupe, Borgawa (Ibariba), Hausa-Fulani, Kamberi, the Fon and Aja speaking peoples in Benin Republic (Dahomey) goes back thousands of years at least, it certainly predated the coming of the Portuguese during the fifteenth century. The contact has been of two kinds. In some cases, it was for trade and in others, contact took the form of conquest. In these relations, Yoruba culture has influenced others and has in turn borrowed from others. The mutuality of this contact in the case of the Yoruba, Edo, Igala and Nupe can be seen in their fairly similar political organisations and in the similarity of the material artefacts of their past civilisations.

    The British first made an inroad into Nigeria by the invasion and annexation of Lagos in 1851 and 1861 respectively. From that time onwards, they spread their tentacles all over Nigeria through either diplomacy and cunning or outright conquest. By 1914 modern Nigeria came into being after the amalgamation of the separate administrations of Northern and Southern Nigeria. The country was put under an autocratic governor, Sir Frederick Lugard, who succeeded in isolating one Nigerian group from the other and maintained the political status quo then prevailing as much as possible. Through this administrative unification, the state of Nigeria was preserved for the British, who used Nigerian men and resources in prosecuting two World Wars. But by and large, Nigerian leaders until 1914 were not brought together to advise the British about the direction of policy. The so-called “Nigerian Council” created by Lugard and to which belonged important indigenous rulers like the Alafin of Oyo and the Emir of Kano, was no more than an ineffective talkfest or causerie if it was even that, since “discussions” such as they were, were carried on in English, and these rulers spoke no English at all. It was not until the 1930s, through the meetings of native rulers organised by the British that the traditional elite in Nigeria began to perceive their common nationality and identity. Of course, the ordinary Nigerian people continued to engage only in trade relationships as before, and to regard themselves different from other Nigerians.  It was, for example, quite normal for one group, particularly one which did not have much external contact before the advent of the British, to regard other groups as bogeymen and strangers with whom it was unsafe to associate.

  • Who is afraid of the cost of change? 1

    Who is afraid of the cost of change? 1

    Failure on the part of ministers to declare their assets is already being construed by citizens as attempts on their part to hide something.

    President Buhari may be doing his utmost to fight corruption and re-engineer governance in a way to make corruption unattractive to the thieves of state among us. What is not clear is to what extent he, his co-rulers in the legislature and judiciary, and the citizenry at large are ready to cope with the inevitable cost of change. The focus of today’s piece is to draw the attention of the president and his ruling party to many lapses in the organisation and governance of the state that require immediate change, to prevent the war on corruption becoming ‘a drum that breaks in the middle of the dance it has started.’

    The president needs to re-read the history of corruption in the polity and the various manifestations of policies designed to give undue advantage to the few with access to power in the country. When the military came to power for the first time in 1966, it accused the Balewa government of corruption and pledged to citizens that the military government would rid political and bureaucratic corruption in the country. The promise was never fulfilled, especially since easy flow of petrodollars under the various military governments between 1966 and 1999 and the civilian governments of 1979 and 1983. The more revenue came from petroleum, the more corruption festered until it reached its apogee in between 1999 and 2015. It was a sign of relief to the citizens when Buhari came out under the auspices of the All Progressives Congress to promise that he would give all his energy to fight and kill corruption in order to prevent corruption from killing the country.

    Corruption as abuse of power for material gain at the expense of the citizenry takes various forms in our country, with some forms seeming legitimate on the surface while in reality they are   designed to give to political office holders and top public officers undue advantage, all on the excuse that there was enough revenue from petroleum to pamper and indulge the few Nigerians that are lucky enough to have access to political or bureaucratic power. For example, the salaries and allowances given to political officer holders—at both the executive and legislative levels—are outlandish, and those receiving these perquisites are aware of the fact that they are getting more than they deserve in an economy that is in every sense of the word undeveloped or underdeveloped, lacking every basic element of modern life; electricity, transportation infrastructure, proper health and education provision, housing provision for citizens, etc.

    It is no use for anyone to pretend that citizens are not getting worried about the miraculous power of the status quo to remain intact even after eight months after the inauguration of a change regime. Instructively, President Buhari and Vice President Osinbajo have declared their assets as required by the country’s laws. But there is no evidence that President Buhari’s ministers have declared their assets months after their appointment. The president in his recent Media Chat confirmed that he expects his ministers to do the right thing and does not believe that he has to drag them to do this. Without doubt, the buck stops on the desk of the president in this regard. He has to read the riot act to his ministers, if this becomes necessary to make them do what he and his vice president had already done, to assure citizens that the ministers are not above the law of the land. Citizens are already grumbling about what they see as nonchalance on the part of the ministers. It is not good for consolidation of electoral democracy for people with political appointments to discountenance such an important law. Failure on the part of ministers to declare their assets is already being construed by citizens as attempts on their part to hide something.

    With respect to the salaries and allowances (including the so-called constituency allowance that turned lawmakers into executive officers), there is nothing in the character of presidential system all over the world that justifies what Nigerian lawmakers earn and the amount of public funds available to them to spend. This column raised this issue recently in the essays titled ‘Pork Barrel Politics.’ Those responsible for writing the constitution that gave enormous powers to the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) could only have done this on account of the huge revenue flowing into the country from petroleum. There is no better time than now to revisit the policy of indulgence of lawmakers and ministers with regards to salaries and allowances, as well as the policy on severance benefits to citizens who opted for political office. Severance packages should not apply to individuals who work in any capacity for less than eight years for members of the executive and the legislative branches of government. It will be a matter of serious controversy if tax payers have to pay such humongous salaries and allowances to political office holders in the lean years thrown up by a huge slump in the price of petroleum and the new danger that may come to Nigeria’s share of the gas market from the United States becoming a major gas exporter.

    It is one thing to recognize the negative impact of corruption on the polity and the economy as President Buhari has done very well. It is another thing to come to terms with a political culture that promotes social and economic injustice, and thus creates a conducive atmosphere for corruption on the part of those unduly favoured. There is so much haemorrhage in a system that expends so much of the commonwealth on just a few of its citizens at the expense of the majority. For example, why are former lawmakers given police protection long after they have ceased to be in office? Even many ministers who served in military governments and in the Obasanjo regime are still moving around with police orderlies while there are no police officers to protect citizens. Former lawmakers still ride vehicles without registration numbers or some with House or Senate registration plate numbers, just as there are former state commissioners and local government chairmen with police orderlies. Citizens are already wondering why those who had served the governments that had brought Nigeria to its present low level of development over the years are being given undue protection at the expense of the citizenry. Citizens are already expressing surprise in both traditional and social media about a policy that continues to pamper former office holders. Some citizens are even asking why such people would need special protection, if they have not done anything criminal.

    A system created at a time that military and civilian rulers thought that money was not a problem for Nigeria should be given serious review now that the era of manna from the bowels of the earth is fast disappearing. For example, what message are policies of indulging top political and bureaucratic officers sending to citizens when they provide severance packages that include free cars, generators, diesel, and houses for former governors and deputy governors after they leave office while millions of citizens still in service do not have any housing or transportation benefits? A system that promotes the kind of inequality that is evident between those privileged to be in high political positions and the millions at the bottom cannot but nurture corruption among men and women who have been made to see the wealth of the country as belonging primarily to them.

    The philosophy and praxis of our change regime cannot avoid taking a close look at the culture of governments in Nigeria in the age of plenty. The outcry against lawmakers’ decision to spend billions of naira on cars and the seeming slowness on the part of RMAFC to review the salary/allowance package adopted in the days of oil boom show lack of enthusiasm on the part of political officers to come to terms with the reality on the ground in an era that petroleum no longer brings huge inflows of dollars. President Buhari’s observation at his recent media chat that it is only citizens and the judiciary that can check any excesses on the part of all the branches of government is remarkable. As this column plans to discuss next week, citizens need to be encouraged to invoke their sovereignty on all matters by the executive’s unmistakable preparedness to be more forthcoming with information.

  • Take a step to change your results

    Happy New Year to you. Thank God you made it to 2016. There is something quite interesting about life- it is a never-ending cycle. Towards the end of 2015, there was an excitement about ending the year. We all looked forward to it as though we had lived the entire year just to see it end. We spent a lot of money travelling, celebrating and buying gifts. It was undoubtedly a delightful holiday. Now, 2015 has ended and we have entered into a new year. The race has begun again. A few minutes before 12am on January 1, 2016, we waited and prayed. We held our breath as though awaiting the unveiling of a special package. Now the package has been unveiled; it is time to make the best of it.

     

    Believe me, 2016 is worth the wait, because this is your year. If you’ve ever dreamt of achieving something great, this is your opportunity. There is something special about beginnings. The foundation of a building determines how high it rises. This is the opportunity you’ve always prayed for. Don’t think my intention is to stir up your emotion so that you can feel good about yourself. If you feel good after reading this, consider it a bonus. What I hope to achieve is to make you see that you have a fresh opportunity take the right steps that can take you to a desirable destination.

     

    A lot of people pray for miracles to change their fortune, unfortunately, they are expecting a magic. People want their lives to change without their commitment to do something about it. You can’t succeed without your involvement. Les Brown, one of the world’s leading motivational speakers, told the story of a young man who walked past a family sitting on a porch, with a dog groaning at their feet. Out of curiosity, he went back and asked, “Sir, why is the dog groaning?” “Because he’s lying on a nail” the man answered. “So why didn’t he get up?” he asked, confused. “Because it doesn’t hurt enough for him to get up” the man answered. Have you ever met people who were not satisfied with their lives, jobs, relationships, etc, and they did nothing but moan about it? I am yet to meet the first person who changed an undesirable situation by complaining.

     

    A world class author and speaker, Zig Ziglar, said he spoke to people in Psychology, Psychiatry and Ministry who had experience in counseling, and they all agreed that not everyone who came to them with a problem wanted it solved.  A lot of people just wanted to tell someone about it to elicit sympathy. Zig said that if you solve the problem, you have spoilt it for them because they can’t tell people about it anymore. According to him, “They want the attention that goes with the problem”. In case you think that is extreme, I have heard of people who preferred to be ill because they got the attention of some people they felt had previously ignored them. The big question is this: “are you complaining about something you can change, without the will to change it?”

     

    This is your year, but you must be ready to do what you have never done. How can you keep doing the same thing (or actually do nothing) and expect a different result? You may not be able to change other people, but you can change yourself and how you react to circumstances.

     

    I would love to know your views about our topic for today so please send your comments. I would also love to respond to your questions. I look forward to hearing from you. Thank you.

  • Nigerian youth and quest for change

    SIR: In Nigeria, there has been a change of government, but I submit quite sadly that there seems to be no change in the approach of government to youth affairs and welfare.   I have been in critical look out for the youth agenda of this government.  My constant watch has for the time being failed me yet I choose to live in the belief that the government means and would act well as it concerns the youth.  I submit that to give bite to the policy and governance bark of the current government, young Nigerians who have leveraged on current advances in Information, Communication Technology and education must be engaged to bring modern inputs to country’s advances. The old breed plus the young breed would ensure we don’t breed greed. Nigeria needs to make bold, decisive and critical steps geared towards handing the reins of leadership to the young and informed.  The solution to our years of long plagues lay in the hands of the energetic, revered, committed, consistent and creative class.

    There appears to be a promotion of entertainment and raw fun over intellectualism and innovation.  It is no longer fascinating to be brilliant and hard work is serially unrewarded. The federal and state governments are called upon to reverse this trend by rewarding hardworking, educated young Nigerians with job placements, funds, grants, and offer loud, attractive benefits to the youths who contribute to the change agenda and overall development of the country.

    The multinationals, telecom operators and country-based companies can do an instructive bit by making brilliant, innovative and exemplary young Nigerians their Brand Ambassadors thereby ensuring the creation of a new national order which would see to the setting of our country’s priorities in a right and sustainable way.

    The moment the youths as a collective observe, note, see and know that national premium is being placed on merit,   I posit that their focus would be geared towards positive directions and this would ensure a corresponding reduction in crime rates and other societal vices.

    Nigeria is blessed and can have young professors, young leaders and bright influencers pilot its affairs.   I send words to the Minister of Youths Development to ensure reform goes beyond the NYSC scheme by setting up engaging platforms for youth discussions and insightful programmes which would gain youthful attention.

    A sterling flag of commendation is raised in honour of the Nigerian youth who despite the near and total lack of institutional support have excelled in the academia and entertainment industry.  They have attained levels of excellence suo moto and this leaves other young Africans green with envy.

     

    I believe that the change agenda can leave the current form of verbal productions and become our reality. Nigeria is for all of us but it is the youths and those to come after them to inherit and grow the country.  Let’s get them involved.

     

    • Nwokolo Geoffrey Netochukwu,

    University of Nigeria, Nsukka.

  • Teens groomed for change

    A teen motivator, Pastor Wale Craig, has charged teenagers to be ambassadors of positive change wherever they are.

    He said they could be the positive change they wanted to see around them because they are leaders of the future.

    Craig spoke at a three-day retreat  by the Divine Destiny Foundation (DDF) at the Holy Saviours School, Ogun State.

    Speaking on the theme: “The invincible teens: Pertinent in nation building,” Craig said teenagers need positive role models who should expose them to leadership early.

    “Teens must be well impacted because they will carry the world on their shoulders in the future.  They should be actively involved in governance and other aspects of the economies so they must be properly groomed to suit these basic needs in the nearest future,” he said.

    He added that the invincible teen must learn to make time, seasons as well as other components work to his advantage at all times and see challenges as opportunities to be empowered.

    “As an invincible teen, you are a life changer. You are the light of the world wherever you go so you must always exhibit that light, you must always acknowledge it and use it positively,” he said.

  • The change we need in Nigeria

    It’s amazing to think that this time last year, Nigerians were deep in the fray of politics and the opposition was chanting the change mantra. Since then, a lot has happened. Now that the (then) opposition has become the, (present) ruling party, Nigerians are beating down the doors of government asking to see where the change that they voted for is. As I, myself, reflect on where exactly that change is, I want to tell you a short story…

     “…Some time ago, back when there was rabid fuel scarcity, I did something that I am not too proud of.

    Driving with a low tank of fuel, I was forced to head to a fuel station. Arriving at the fuel station, I met an incredibly long queue, of which I joined. With the queue not moving and having been there for a while, I concluded that queuing at the station indefinitely was not an option I was willing to embrace. So, I decided to leave the queue and drive up to the station. As I approached the station, lots of young men offering black-market fuel approached me. I thought about obliging the black-market trade fleetingly, but eventually decided against it. I settled on cutting my losses, going home and sending a driver to join the queue instead. But then, a well-dressed middle-aged man approached my vehicle and asked if I wanted fuel from the station.

    “Yes,” I replied without hesitation…“But the queue is too long. I will just go home and send a driver to join,” I said.

    “I work at the station and I can let your car in to fill your tank now, now Ma… for a small amount,” Offered the man.

    I understood perfectly what he was offering and, I must admit, it didn’t take me long to decide whether I was going to accept his offer or not. Yes, I was going to get the tank filled now!

    I had justified the trade in my mind; you see… It had been a long, tiring day and I had fasted. And paying extra to jump the fuel queue may have been a form of injudiciousness, but it was one I felt I deserved at the time.

    So, it was! I followed the man with my car and he led me into the fuel station through a separate entrance. After some motor acrobatics, I aligned my car with the fuel pump and within a few minutes, I had a full tank of fuel in my car. The whole operation took less than ten minutes.

    Satisfied and smug, I drove out of the station. Feeling a little guilty and sorry for those I had bypassed on the fuel queue, I turned to look at them. That was when I made contact with a woman in the queue sat in the driver seat. She had three young children in the back seat. The kids looked like they were all under ten years old. The youngest was crying non-stop and the two elder kids seemed to be fighting. Between trying to console the younger child and trying to mediate the fight with the older children, she turned and looked at me. She had the most desperate, forlorn and tired look on her face. She was sweating and looked overwhelmed. That was when a large surge of disappointment followed by utter guilt hit me.

    Thinking that I had dishonestly paid a bribe, jumped the queue and shortchanged law-abiding Nigerians, while a woman in her situation had done the right thing by following the queue, despite her circumstance, made me feel so bad, guilty and disgusted with myself. It was then that I had an “A-Ha moment’ about what the change, that so many Nigerians fought to have was. What it symbolized!

     …By God’s Grace, as I sit here, in this crispy New Year, watching my fellow countrymen and women ask where exactly the change is, I am reminded of my misadventure that day in the fuel queue.

    The question shouldn’t be ‘where’ the change is; it should be ‘what’ the change is. So what is the change? The answer is… ‘For every single one of us in this nation to commit ourselves to make a change for the better! As Mahatma Gandhi said, every single one of us in this country has a responsibility to be the change we wish to see in Nigeria!’

    So, when we speak of Nigeria’s urgency to see ‘change,’ whom do we expect that change to come from? The expectation for change has been fixated on the government. A long ‘To-Do’ list has been placed at the foot of the President. But in reality, the wind of change that ushered in a new government in the last election wasn’t so much about voting one man into office. It was about the need of a people to see a change in the very fabric and marrow of their country. And if that is what it was, then it includes every single one of us that considers ourselves a member of the collective known as Nigeria!

    We live in a time when people speak about requests in terms of needs, needs in terms of rights, and rights in terms of entitlements. Government, and government alone, is thought compelled to provide the expected change. And while such an expectation maybe valid to a large extent, we have to refer to the very concept of responsibility and accountability when we speak of the mantra of change that recently took hold of and shook Nigeria.

    To be responsible is to be answerable for one’s action. When one acknowledges a legitimate call to do something, one has a duty to react. Accountability rests not only on a genuine call for action, but also in the ability to heed the call. Just as the president and the government has a responsibility to us and to the nation, we each also have a responsibility to every other Nigerian and to the nation at large. Once both the government and Nigerians accepted the call for action, which we did when we voted for change, then we all have that responsibility to heed its call. What happened in the elections of 2015 was Nigeria’s call. What we did in voting for change was to heed that call. Now we have a responsibility to follow it through.

    Indeed, elections of 2015 saw a nation’s call for change. Nigerians heeded and opted for that change. But our responsibility didn’t stop after the inauguration.

    Responsibility doesn’t usually come from one single establishment or one union. Individuals in a family or a community bear the responsibility to care for its members, in the same way that the friends, neighbors, leaders and governments do.

    Although we should all have expectations for the government to implement policies, which will make our existence as Nigerians more comfortable, we should be aware that we each have a role to play in that journey to change. Every single Nigerian has a role to play in actualizing change.

     While government has a great responsibility to attain the parameters needed for us to grow and flourish, one must be realistic and keep in mind that government isn’t ‘solely’ liable for taking care of every single one of us in our communities, neighborhoods and families. That obligation is the responsibility of every single one of us as participants in a variety of relationships and overlapping communities. One will intrinsically be indebted to fellow members by a shared principle, which unites their community and, as members of a shared community, we must rely on each other to attain common objectives. That would entail making claims upon each other as we collectively strive to satisfy the ideals our society struggles to actualize.

    A government safety-net is there to make available, liberty, service and social justice, but it cannot give personal attention, on-the-ground instincts, or the flexibility sometimes required in an emergency situation. Governments’ responsibility and accountability has to be met by each of our communities and each one of us individually.

     The fact that we are aware of government policies being put in place to effect the much-needed change may work to our disadvantage if we don’t value the social contract we have with each other and our communities. Because it may lead us each to relax our own social responsibility in the misleading belief that someone else is holding the forte.

    As a nation, we are persons existing in a community, not self-standing individuals. People are not islands and we deny an important feature of our humanity once we approach it as such. Each of us shares some manner of link to one another; every one of us exists in a human society. Our actions have a domino effect on Nigeria and, thus, each have central moral obligations towards our collective.

    Part of the government’s role is to employ public judgment when it comes to justice. The connection between government and its citizens is one of equal standing and protection under the law. We have got to understand that the government’s responsibility is not to be the ‘sole’ harbinger of change. We each have that responsibility also.

    Let us say that the government is able to achieve some of its main objectives in its change manifesto and I, as a part of this huge collective, continues to jump the fuel queue, as does the next person and the next person, then the expectation of change is incapacitated and untenable; purely because we didn’t play our part. It is like a big jigsaw puzzle and we each represent a piece of it. Any of the expectations we have towards government, as far as change goes, has got to start with us… each one of us!

    If every single one of us, in our capacity as Nigerians, can make a change that will make Nigeria better, then we will see the change we so yearn for. If not, then it doesn’t matter what policies the government puts in place; there will never be change!

    Having been part of an opposition movement since 2003, I am not sure whether I am truly being objective about this concept of change, now that a former opposition forms the government. I cannot say whether I am being fair to all the governments that came prior to this present administration. But, here and now, I honestly see this concept of change as being the responsibility of each and every single Nigerian.

     I don’t believe that change only comes in the form of a rescue package by government nicely wrapped in a bow. It no longer only means a list of executives with the exquisite cerebral capacity to make decisions to transform the economy. It is no longer who makes or doesn’t make the Ministerial, Ambassadorial or Executive lists. It is about each and every single one of us doing the right thing by making a change in an area that we know disadvantages the nation.

     As long as we are talking about government responsibility to deliver change, we must also examine our own personal irresponsibility, which has an effect on that change. Besides government, we also have a collective responsibility to provide a better example so that those who come after us aren’t propelled toward bad choices.

     While I am waiting to see the government finish putting into effect its policies of change, I’m determined never to jump a fuel queue or any other queue again.

    When it is clear that Nigeria will never change if we sever our desire for change at the threshold of government alone; when we know that our self-destructive behavior batters the mantra of change that Nigerians chanted for one year ago, is it not time we end our own personal unprogressive conduct? The change that Nigeria desperately needs starts when I don’t pay a bribe to jump the fuel queue; the change starts with every single one of us!