The Nation Newspaper

Tag: democracy

  • Democracy, Electoral Act: All hope is not lost

    UNTIL Justice Ahmed Mohammed of the Federal High Court, Abuja rules in April 25 whether the case brought before him by the Accord Party on the Electoral Act, 2010 amendment has merit or not, the political terrain will continue to quake under accusations and counter-accusations from the president’s supporters and opponents. The National Assembly had in February overwhelmingly voted to reorder the sequence of the 2019 general elections, with the presidential poll taking the rear after both the National Assembly and state legislative and governorship elections are conducted in that order. The electoral body, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), had in January announced the retention of the 2015 order of elections which put the presidential and National Assembly polls first, and governorship and state legislative polls second. But perhaps suspicious that the reordering of the polls targeted his re-election, the president vetoed it.  It is this veto that the National Assembly is attempting to override.

    On the one hand are those like the Accord Party who fear that if the National Assembly should be allowed to override the president’s veto in the order of elections matter, that action would constrict the electoral body’s elbow room in conducting the elections, for instance in terms of rescheduling postponed polls. Others in the same camp, including the president in particular, suggest that it would amount to usurping the functions and powers of the electoral body to impose a particular sequence on it. The umpire must not only have control of the order, it must also have control over the dates, they argue.

    On the other hand are those who argue that the order of elections is not the same as the date of elections, and that, in any case, they do not see why a popular president should be perturbed or feel targeted  by anyone using election dates and order. First or last, they suggest, the president should not feel intimidated by his popularity to contest the poll whether it is brought forward or rescheduled late. Whether the proponents of this position are being cynical or not, no one seems to know or even care. As far as everyone is concerned, the National Assembly has not abused its powers by amending the Act, and can furthermore, if the lawmakers so chose, even go ahead to strip more powers from the electoral umpire.

    It is simply democracy at work that the president and his supporters argue that the amendment is targeted at the number one citizen, fearing that rescheduling the order, and not the dates, of the elections could jeopardise his chances. It is also part of the dynamics of democracy that national lawmakers fear that should the presidential poll hold first, and the president wins, it could jeopardise the chances of victory for lawmakers and even governors who have drawn the ire, if not the fury, of the president. So, on the one hand, the president fears defeat should the presidential poll come last, for once his enemies win, they could immobilise him openly and remorselessly. On the other hand, the lawmakers fear defeat should the president win. The fear of defeat, rather than any thought of the sanctity and integrity of the polls, are the overriding considerations in the battle to amend or retain the order of elections.

    Significantly, one political party – ever so typical of the political class — has presumptuously dragged the judiciary into the fray. Here the Accord Party, which is not in alliance with the ruling party, nor seems on the surface friendly to the president, has gone to court over the matter. The party does not stand a cat in hell’s chance of winning the presidency, let alone suffer any loss by the reordering of the polls. Why it has gone to court is, therefore, not clear. Its action can of course not be thrown out on the ground of locus standi, and it can theoretically argue that the new order of elections as passed by the National Assembly could bring injury upon its political interests. It can also argue that it is selflessly concerned about safeguarding the independence and powers of the electoral umpire, which the lawmakers might be intent on eroding. But deep down, no one believes the Accord Party’s claim of political or legal altruism, nor of the sensibility and plausibility of its position.

    If the Accord Party should get any relief from the courts, the first beneficiary would be the president, not even the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) whose members dominate the pugnacious and antagonistic legislature. But the chances of getting any relief of any kind are not only slim, they are indeed next to nothing. What the courts will try to answer is whether the constitution does not empower the lawmakers to make amendments as part of the legislative process, or whether that lawmaking effort does not also include the process of overriding vetoes. The courts will also answer the question of at what point a judicial process can be initiated into and against legislative work: whether at the beginning, because a potentially injured person or part fears future damage, or at the middle, or at the end. Finally, the courts will also attempt to answer the straightforward question of what fraction of the legislature can override a veto, whether the ordinary two-thirds mentioned in the constitution as contained in the relevant override provision in Section 58, or in accordance with the explicit provision of two-thirds of All members as contained in some specific parts of the constitution such as Sections 8 and 9.

    Hopefully, in the final analysis, the courts will settle the question of the point at which an injured person can wade into the legislative process, such that whenever a similar case is brought before the courts in the future, it would merit outright dismissal. If it loses in the Federal High Court, would the Accord Party head to the Court of Appeal without seeming to be a busybody or stooge of the ruling party? No one can tell. April 25 is barely a month away, even though the contest seems clear and the winner incontrovertible.

    However, rather than see the presidency as being motivated by malevolent reasons, and the lawmakers as selfish and misdirected, and the Accord Party as dancing to nefarious tunes, and the courts as being pusillanimous in dismissing the matter, and the controversy surrounding the matter as needlessly passionate, partisan and misconceived, the public should proudly consider all the back and forth and cut and thrust as nothing but the exemplification and projection of the finest principles of democracy. Had this controversy popped up under the military, the question of order of elections would have been settled with a fiat or flagged as a no-go-area, an approach that has distorted and even stultified both democracy and constitution-making in Nigeria.

    The ongoing debate on the order of elections, the peaceful approach to litigating it, and hopefully the juridical expertise that would mark its conclusion, should inure the practice of democracy in Nigeria to the sometimes violent political vagaries that had hallmarked it in the past. The Accord Party’s judicial quest may be questionable and degrading, but as some developed democracies, particularly the United States, are showing, no country is immune to such judicial adventurism or humiliating flagellation.

    Whether Nigerians like it or not, democracy is not only taking root in these parts, it is fast becoming indispensable and largely irreplaceable. Its definition may be problematic, and even somewhat at variance with the simple, austere and engaging explanation offered by Abraham Lincoln, a former US president, but overall, once the element of compulsion is taken away from the practice of democracy, and if the country can manage to develop a judicial practice that is intellectually incontestable, constitutional flaws and idiosyncratic political failings may pale into insignificance. Both the president and the National Assembly may selfishly posture for political advantage today, but in the end what will remain, after the dissipation of the election sequence controversy, should be of such lustre that will encourage Nigerians to have faith in their democracy and work harder to entrench it.

  • Decision good for APC, democracy, says Tinubu

    To All Progressives Congress (APC) stalwart Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, yesterday’s recommendation of President Muhammadu Buhari that the party should organise congresses at the expiration of its officers’ in June, is in order. In his reaction entitled: “The president has spoken: The APC stands for internal democracy”, the former Lagos State governor says fresh congresses will create a level playing ground for interested party loyalists, including incumbent officers to aspire to positions of choice. 

    In the clear, straightforward manner that is his mode of expression and that befits the moment, President Muhammadu Buhari affirmed that our party remains faithful to the principles of internal democracy and the rule of law.

    In his address to the March 27 NEC (National Executive Council (meeting), President Buhari stated that talk of extension or elongation of the tenures of national and state party executive officers was improper. The President declared that any such moves would contravene both the national and party constitutions.

    Additionally, he stated that the designation of existing officers as caretaker committees also violated constitutional requirements.

    President Buhari’s action saves the party from serious legal turmoil. If the elongations were deemed illegal, then, all subsequent party actions, including the nomination of all of our candidates for elective offices, might also be of questionable legality. Such a predicament would constitute an unnecessary and mortal blow to the party and its role in promoting progressive governance to Nigeria.

    Moreover, President Buhari has affirmed for all to see that our party is one based on the rule of law coupled with a firm adherence to internal democracy. While it would have been easy to allow the ill-conceived motion of 27 February to stand, President Buhari showed principle and courage by steering the party back to its original and correct path.

    The President has spoken. Today is a good day for those who cherish democracy and legality.  His action will also serve to strengthen the party by allowing party members, including present incumbents, to seek to contribute to the party by vying for executive offices as they see fit.

    His action will go far in advancing the process of internal reconciliation that is now underway. It is a time for the party to move forward and begin to plan and organise the needed congresses according to the existing timetables.

    After all, a party bearing the name All Progressives Congress should be the last party to resist holding congresses in which all its people have a fair say and fair chance to aspire to any position in the party for which they are qualified to hold.

    Again, this is a good day for the APC and democratic political practice in Nigeria. We shun the politics of old to move toward a new and better way of governing ourselves and this nation.

  • Strong institutions vital to democracy

    Sir: If democracy is to survive in Nigeria, strong institutions are a “sine qua non”.  This is because democracy – as opposed to our age-long traditional system, or the military rule that we recently experienced, cannot deliver its valued dividend in an atmosphere of weak public institutions and endemic corruption.

    Democracy has proven to be the preferred choice of many nations in the world today.  Its advantage over all other systems of government includes being the bulwark of freedom and platform for rapid development and peaceful transition.  The system works through various institutions, the principal ones being the executive, legislature, and judiciary.  These three provide the traditional checks and balances to the system.  They have to be strong to form the three cords that are not easily broken.  Any weakness in any of these institutions will, over time, force the others to fall like a pack of cards in terms of integrity.

    Nigeria is blessed with a good soil, weather and rich mineral resources (including abundance of crude oil).  Unfortunately, we went through many years of military rule because we allowed the democratic system that we first practiced to slip away from our hand.  Even then, it is a shame that we are still where we are today in terms of economic development.

    Every leakage in the nation’s wealth must have passed through one institution or the other.  It is these institutions generally that must be strengthened to make it difficult or impossible for any rascal to pass through them. All public servants and other operators of our democratic institutions (including the police and financial houses) must be equipped to stand on principles: from the cleaners to the chief executives. They should be paid well enough to be able to live decently on their legitimate incomes. They should also be given the necessary moral and legal backing to enable them to look anybody straight in the face, stand their ground and still keep their jobs intact.

    History tells the story of a farm boy employed to man the gate of his master’s farm in late 18th century France.  A long stick was all that was stretched across the farm’s gate as a barrier.  One day, Napoleon Bonaparte, while on holiday, arrived on horseback at the farm with his security details and the boy was asked to remove the stick for the Emperor of France to ride through. The boy insisted that his order was not to allow anybody to pass through the gate – not even the Emperor of France.  But Napoleon did not permit his security details to harm or “discipline” the boy.  Instead, he turned back to take another route and famously said: “If I had an army of soldiers who, like this boy, could neither be cowed nor paid into disobeying orders, I would conquer the world!”

     

    • Faith Toluwanimi Onilude, Ota, Ogun State.
  • Right leadership will entrench democracy in Africa, says Buhari

    Right leadership will entrench democracy in Africa, says Buhari

    President Muhammadu Buhari yesterday in Accra, Ghana, said with right leadership and implementation of public policies, Africa’s drive to eradicate poverty and entrench democracy is on course.

    In his speech at Ghana’s 61stIndependence anniversary  in Accra, President Buhari noted that Nigeria and Ghana were benefitting immensely from leaders committed to improving their economies and tackling corruption.

    President Buhari, in a statement by the Senior Special Assistant on Media and Publicity, Garba Shehu, praised President Nana Akufo-Addo of Ghana on his achievements in his first year in office, lauding his committed fight against corruption and the passing of the Special Prosecutors Bill into law.

    He pledged Nigeria’s support to Ghana in the fight against corruption, noting that the menace had badly affected both societies.

    ‘‘From Nigeria, I have watched closely your achievements, ranging from your ingenious approach to creating jobs for the teeming youths through various initiatives, including the repositioning of agriculture for modern farming, ‘Farming for Jobs and Food’, Senior High School (SHS) free education, One-District-One-Factory, and One-Village-One-Dam as well as the improvement being recorded in the Republic’s macroeconomic indicators.

    ‘‘All these efforts, I am aware, have made Ghana to become a good destination for foreign direct investment, just like Nigeria. Accept my congratulations!

    ‘‘I congratulate both the government and the Parliament for the quick passage of the Office of the Special Prosecutor Act and its signing into law.

    ‘‘Your Excellency can be assured that you have a good partner in me as I look forward to any form of collaboration between Nigeria and Ghana in tackling the menace of endemic corruption.

    ‘‘Given all these public policies, it becomes reassuring that with the right leadership, Africa’s drive to eradicate poverty and to entrench democracy is on course,’’ he said.

    President Buhari, who was the special guest of honour at the ceremony, recounted the historic and cultural ties between Nigeria and Ghana, urging citizens of both countries to uphold the fraternal relations.

    ‘‘It is, therefore, my strong desire that we owe it as a duty to ensure that our good peoples continue to live in each other’s countries unhindered.

    ‘‘Our newly rejuvenated Permanent Joint Commission for Cooperation has already provided us with good platform in resolving any differences while focusing on our main developmental objectives,’’ the President said.

    Commenting on peace and security in West Africa, the President praised Akufo-Addo’s contribution to ensuring peace in neighbouring Togo.

    ‘‘Permit me to put on record, Ghana’s untiring efforts in brokering peace in Togo, by bringing all the warring parties to the negotiation table.  I am appealing to the opposing parties in Togo to please come together and resolve their differences so that Togo will move forward.

    ‘‘In the same vein, I wish Nigeria and Ghana to continue to provide the impetus in realising the objectives and ideals of the founding fathers of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), to ensure security, peace and development of our region,’’ he said.

  • From Imo to Zamfara: Monarchy trumps democracy

    From Imo to Zamfara: Monarchy trumps democracy

    A dialogue imaginatively ascribed to what would ordinarily pass as an innocuous photograph from a routine official event opens perhaps the best aperture on the festering culture of political degeneracy. (The author of the mischief that trended in the social media is understandably anonymous.)

    Face lit up with his trademark fawning smile, Rochas Okorocha is shown drawing close to President Buhari, whispering in Oriental pidgin English for green-light to “nack” (erect) the general’s statue “free of charge” in Owerri, obviously now the playground of the Owelle’s perverse theatrics.

    More in superstitious fear than any sense of modesty, Buhari would decline, thundering instead in Arewa-flavored cadence: “Shege (unprintable), you nack (Madam Johnson) Sirleaf (of Liberia) she waka, you nack (Alex) Ekweme him kpai (died), you nack(ing) (Jacob) Zuma (of South Africa) don pursue am, you think I want to retire to (the other room)?”

    In all of this, what confounds is not that Okorocha advertised a lack of scruple by, for instance, erecting at Imo taxpayer’s expense a monument to a man later crucified for monumental graft in his native South Africa. Rather, the great puzzle is why all the political elders in his party appear to oblige him with the conspiracy of silence as he slides from one sacrilege to another. What else, if not contempt for urban dwellers, would have made the proverbial bushman stroll into town in loincloth.

    Without shame, Okorocha had dragooned the cartel of “warrant” chiefs to crown visiting Zuma “The People’s Warrior”. When did public stealing become a communal virtue in Igboland?

    Yet, some of the finest political giants the Igbo have bred in history hail from Imo.

    Alas, the latest in Okorocha’s career of political infamy is the ongoing attempt to finally degrade the egalitarian castle they toiled hard to build to a monarchy in which the Owelle seeks to pass the gubernatorial baton to his son-in-law while he hands himself the senatorial staff of Orlu zone. It means his daughter is being positioned too to take over from her mum as the queen, the First Lady.

    A spoilt brat, the heir apparent had been a suckling in Okorocha’s diapers, shedding his milk teeth all the while – first as Lands and Housing Commissioner and later Chief of Staff to his doting father-in-law.

    As for the murmuring deputy governor Madumere coveting the high stool, the great king is magnanimous enough to offer to compensate him with the senatorial ticket of Owerri zone. To leave other pretenders in no doubt, he actually publicly decreed this with a ring of magisterial finality.

    Imo’s nominee in the Federal cabinet, Anthony Anwuka, the Minister of State for Education, is also Okorocha’s in-law, married to Okorocha’s second daughter.

    Since the kingdom must mirror the king’s shadow even if grotesque, not a few of the public buildings built by Okorocha ended being named after the Okorochas.

    Having groomed his younger sister as deputy Chief of Staff under his son-in-law, Okorocha recently decided not only to elevate her but also allocate her an entirely novel portfolio – Commissioner of Happiness. Not surprising, on assumption of office, one of her radical proposals to ending the social menace of prostitution is a challenge to Imo men to consider marrying more than one wife, promising government’s generous incentives to those converted.

    Grapevine has it that another sister of the king retains the exclusive franchise of supplying all food and drinks to the Government House from her fast food joint tucked somewhere in Owerri. Just as the head of one of the state-owned higher institutions is said to be the governor’s aunt.

    In short, democracy has been turned to family business in Imo. What perhaps remains now is to issue a certificate of incorporation in Okorocha’s name.

    Taken together, it is a sad commentary on Buhari’s political guardianship that democracy is being given a bad name in Imo. But who knows, maybe loquacious Okorocha will soon tell us he is only following PMB’s example by only appointing “trusted” people.

    In the north, Okorocha’s alter ego will be Abdulaziz Yari, the Zamfara potentate. Of course, just like the former, he is among the party zealots seeking to stampede Buhari into second term. But unlike the Owerri clown who has outlined an incestuous secession plan by sharing governorship and senatorial tickets among himself and family members obviously as his own bargain for backing Buhari, Yari’s personal agenda is yet unclear.

    What is however certain is that he, just like Okorocha, won’t mind an opportunity to coronate his clone to sustain the heritage of filth.

    Yari’s poverty of ideas has ensured that, even after almost seven years at the helm in Gusau, Zamfara today has more or less remained stunted, stuck at the bottom of all development indicators including education and access to healthcare. It is a measure of Yari’s toxic development model that a state with 3.8m population boasts of 23 doctors manning 24 public hospitals.

    In the security sector, while it is true that a number of northern states are infected by the contagion of AK-47 herders spiced with armed banditry, Zamfara’s own trauma is compounded by leadership sterility.

    The latest massacre of 50 no doubt bore the hallmark of bestiality. A wedding party was waylaid. The driver’s throat was slit and the gunmen wiped out with gunfire the passengers including bride-maids and traders. Not content with taking the lives in cold blood, the savages set fire on their bodies. Thereafter, they proceeded to the market and shot at everyone indiscriminately.

    But while the state floats in the blood of innocents slaughtered by marauding beasts, Yari only seems obsessed with gallivanting outside. Though he answers Zamfara Governor, it seems more appropriate to describe him as governor-in-self-exile, Abuja being his hideout.

    Yari’s Zamfara would only appear to be making phenomenal advance in the unlikely sector. In a BBC documentary aired recently, Iheoma Obibi, a sex doll merchant, appreciatively listed Zamfara as her next biggest market in Nigeria after Lagos and Abuja.

    So, the old Sharia enclave now seems condemned to stew in the truancy of a power eunuch. So much that when concerned outsiders arrived the state capital recently on a sympathy visit following another round of bloodletting, they met empty Governor’s office as Oga had jetted out again.

    When eventually he found time to lead a pack of visiting brother governors on a condolence visit to the monarch of grieving Zurmi council, Yari chose to enact a comedy of errors in the moment of tragedy. By disclosing that his administration had intelligence report of impending attack 24hours prior, he only exposed himself as accessory before the fact of a pogrom. The question: since he knew ahead, what practical steps did he make to avert it?

    Tellingly, on the day the gunmen struck, he was said to be ensconced in the luxurious comfort of Abuja.

    It is lame for Yari to explain his failing away by saying that he passed information to the relevant security agencies 24 hours before the attack. A wise governor would not have stopped there; he would also rally the communities to a red alert, apart from he being at his desk to monitor development.

    Later in Zurmi, apparently to ingratiate himself to the locals he had failed, he would parrot the populist line that killings by herdsmen has escalated under PMB: “I feel let down facing the people of this state whenever I remember the promise I made to them that when they elect President Muhammadu Buhari into power, these killings will end. But unfortunately, things are now getting worse.”

    While such confession must have helped disarm the mob outside the Emir’s palace that day who might have been tempted to stone the fumbling governor in annoyance and frustration, he alas only ended up projecting his party, APC, as not just a failure but also clueless on the challenge of securing people’s lives and property.

    Worse, after pontificating at the Emir’s palace obviously for the television cameras, Yari failed another leadership test by refusing to visit the community affected, if only to comfort the bereaved in Birani. (Maybe, he was scared the people might stone him for failing them as a leader.) Thereafter, he was said to have zoomed off to Katsina before flying to Abuja and, by some accounts, again jetting abroad.

    With characters like these, democracy is indeed imperiled.

     

  • Does true federalism guarantee true democracy?

    Does true federalism guarantee true democracy?

    For clarity and transparency, I should start with an explanation of the mindset that provokes the above question. Simply put, it is the mindset of an optimism that sees beyond the present fog of uncertainty which defines our national politics to a future that is as certain as death. The future I foresee is that of change from this quasi-unitary system to one that approximates a true federal republic. And I envisionthis change coming in the lifetime of this generation.

    There are good signs that we will get there. First, we have been there before, and we were witnesses to its successes and its failures. The mark of a genuine human intellect is to learn from failure and make necessary improvements for greater success. It is a defeatist mindset that gives up on a course with great potentials after only six years. That was what we did.

    Second, the failure of the present system has been demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt for every rational being. Since 1966, we have operated a governing system that has caused unprecedented political and economic instability on a regular basis. We blame the founding fathers for agreeing to a regional federal system that fueled ethnicism. Can anyone honestly suggest that this quasi-unitary system has gotten rid of ethnicism? Third, with recent developments, as discussed in this column last week, it appears that we have put on our thinking caps again and are getting back our senses.

    For the foregoing reasons, I am optimistic that we will get to the state of a true federal republic and this is the rationale for the question raised in the title of the column today. The assumption behind the question, “does true federalism guarantee true democracy?” is that true federalism is not an end in-itself. What does this mean? It simply means that in response to the assertion “It is good and helpful to have a true federal system of governance in a multi-national state”, one may reasonably ask “why?””What is good about it?”

    The question, “what is good about true federalism?” is reasonable and it deserves an adequate answer. One possible answer can be eked from a combination of the works of John Stuart Mill and Chief Obafemi Awolowo. In “On Representative Government”, Mill argues that every nationality, with a distinct language, culture, and a sense of belonging, has a right to self-government. Where this is not possible because of a forceful imposition by a colonial power, Awolowo argues in People’s Republic that federalism is the closest to self-government.

    Yet, as reasonable as both positions are, we could still ask the question “why?” Why is it the right of nationalities to have self-government? And why is still necessary to have a federal system where two or more nationalities cohabit? Other answers are possible: political stability, balanced development, etc. For each of these, we could still ask why it is so important. The ultimate answer beyond which we might not anticipate a reasonable question is that self-government promotes freedom and freedom is an inalienable right of human beings.

    Freedom is divinely ordained. As Rousseau surmised, human beings are born free. No one is born with chains around his or her neck. And human beings are born into communities which naturally nurture them to survive the helplessness of infancy and the dependency of adolescence until they come of age and their freedom is acknowledged and respected. When a young man comes of age, he is given a farm plot of his own. That is freedom.

    We also realize, however, that a community composed of free individuals needs a governance structure; and over the years of human existence, different systems of political-economic governance have been operated. From communal to slave systems, from feudal to capitalistic, from monarchical to aristocratic, from autocratic to fascist and militocratic. The experiments have been varied and consequential. But none has endured except democracy and the reason democracy endures is that it exemplifies and validates the natural human affinity and quest for freedom.

    If freedom is the ultimate political value for human beings, and if democracy validates, protects, and promotes, human freedom, then we must expect that our quest for true federalism would also guaranteetrue democracy and promote human freedom. This is the basis for my question: does true federalism guarantee true democracy?

    My inclination is to argue that why true federalism is a necessary condition for true democracy in a multinational state, it is not by itself a sufficient condition? It is easy to see that true federalism is a necessary condition for true democracy. Mill argues rightly that “free institutions are next to impossible in a country made up of different nationalities. Among a people without fellow feeling, especially if they read and speak different languages, the united public opinion, necessary to the workings of a representative government, cannot exist.” The next best alternative to make such a system work is to give recognition to each nationality through a federal system of government.

    But while true federalism is a necessary condition in such a structure, it is not sufficient. For, a true federal system may end up empowering a few elites and power-brokers within a nationality at the expense of the freedom of every individual member of the nationality. To know what else must be added to true federalism for it to lead to the end of true democracy and individual freedom, we need to understand the impediments to the realization of the latter even in a truly federal state.

    First on the list of impediments is self-interest which is now a proxy for ethnic interest. In a malfunctioning quasi-unitary state, ethnicism is the culprit. Nepotism is the foe of freedom. We tend to ignore the fact that these cleverly elide the obnoxiousness of individual egos masquerading as ethnics. The nepotist revels in the act because it enhances his image within the group and his private interest is thus promoted. In a truly federal state, this human urge for image enhancement and ego bolstering is not suddenly supplanted with a desire to promote the freedom of all fellow-ethnics.

    Consider even now what goes on in the various states of the lopsided federation. Where there is no visible nepotism, there is factionalism even within the same political party. Party members are categorized based on loyalty to leaders, including governors, instead of loyalty to party manifesto and governing philosophy. Based on the universality of human nature, whichseldom respects moral and political ideals of freedom and equality, without additional effort to make the ideal of individual freedom the centerpiece of a true federal structure, we can expect some variants of the following.

    Nepotism will relocate to states or regions with regional tribes within regional nationalities using the political power of numbers to oppress and exploit their minority members. We could see federal

    bigmanism becoming state or regional bigmanism. We could see the enlargement of the coast of regional or state tin gods. Without additional efforts, transparency is not likely to increase, and candidate imposition is not likely to abate. As our people understand so well, it is imprudent to allow a sharp pointed wood to be menacingly close to one’s eyes before raising an alarm.

    Morning predicts the day. What we see now in state and regional politics is likely to dictate what democracy looks like in a truly federal system.

    But of course, there is always the power of the people to determine their fate. Southwest leadersmust always remember Awolowo’s eternal wisdom garnered from experience of leading our people. As he once observed in Path to Nigerian Greatness, the Yoruba are a sophisticated people who will not allow their rights to be trampled upon for long: “Many rights are enjoyed within the family; these rights are fundamental and inalienable, because the urge for their enjoyment is inherent and instinctive in man…. Because of their inherent and instinctive nature, these rights cannot be permanently suppressed. In the short run, they can be held in abeyance, but even only at great risks to the peace, harmony, and cohesion of the family.”

     

    • Follow me on Twitter:

    @SegunGbadeg2002

    @HarvestDayPubs

  • Culture, democracy and leadership

    Culture, democracy and leadership

    Let  me state clearly  from the onset  that  I believe democracy is a form  of  government that has outlived its usefulness in the modern world as we know it  today. I  do not buy the arguments of those who say the worst  form of  democracy is still  better  than a dictatorship. That  is just  plain  nonsense to me and it is not because  I am  angry  with democracy  as an ideology. It is because day in day  out,  we see good examples of why there should be a better way for human beings to govern themselves  than this  present   process   of periodic elections that   throw up leaders  who  are strangers to those who elected  them   into power even  before  they are sworn  into office. As  at  this week  the newest  president in the world is Cyril  Ramaphosa  the man   who  is taking over from disgraced former president of S Africa , Jacob  Zuma,  who  should face charges of  corruption immediately  and whose party should  be punished or admonished  for putting up with him  for  so long,  but  whose  party  has such a solid majority  that it will always win elections in that  nation  no matter  the quality  of leadership   it offers to   S Africans.  That is democracy  and that is a shame indeed  for any such ideology  which  conscripts  citizens  to the servitude  of avoidable poor  and bad leadership.

    Today  however  I  look at events in Nigeria  where the ruling   APC   has now admitted  that  it has dissent within its  fold and has now drafted  its most gifted  political  strategist  to  put its house in order in order  to  be  battle ready  for 2019  elections. Which   to  me   is  a great   distraction and a costly  diversion   of   talent  that  has been  hitherto ignored in  governance    and   is now being used    belatedly    for  a   fire   brigade  exercise.  We  also  look  at the USA where the president is on trial  as it were because he dared to say  that  a man  working for him  is a good man  even though  allegations have surfaced  that  he was a wife beater  who molested  his   two  divorced  former wives  We  also  look  at  Russia  where  a  presidential  election is to take place with  no one in doubt    that the winner will  be the incumbent  president  Vladmir  Putin who  is being  vilified   in the US   for  helping the current  US   president  Donald  Trump  win the 2016  presidential  elections in the   US.

    We  look  at these  nations  and their  democracies   in the context  of my  resentment against  democracy, its workings  and failure, in spite  of the laudable  objectives  of politicians in these  nations.   I  am  not blaming the inadequacies  of democracy  on leadership but on the environment of democratic  values  especially  emerging   political  cultures    and expectations tied symbiotically  to  a game of numbers   and  elections that  have  in many instances undermined  political stability and humanity without  which no political system  can  survive. Let  me   first  attempt   to highlight  the political  values   in these  nations driving their democracy   in  the directions they  have now found themselves.

    In  Nigeria  a  political  culture  of rigging at  elections is  a way  of life while the economic culture is corruption  and the sociological attitude  to work  is well  steeped in nepotism  and ethnicity. In   the  US   the political  culture is that of  ‘winner  takes all ‘ which  creates a no  prisoners taken approach   to the use and exercise  of power  without  consideration  for   the feelings or even  the existence  of losers  at  periodic  elections.  The  economic  culture  is laissez  faire capitalism  which  widens social  inequalities brazenly  till  the next  elections  and the sociological attitude  nowadays is  sexism or more  appropriately  sexual    harassment.  In  the UK  the cabinet  system  makes  the PM  first  amongst  equals and that creates leadership  competition which  can  at   times   be disruptive but the Parliamentary  system ensures great  accountability  and transparency. The  economic  system is rooted in social  insurance   and human rights  hold sway even at the expense  of state  stability  and security.  Again  like the US  sexual  harassment   is the major sociological  pursuit   of the moment along with  gay  rights and sexual equality.  How   all  these political   and socio –  economic considerations   and values  make or mar  the practice of   democracy  in these   nations  is what  I will  examine next.

    In  Nigeria  the present government  got  into power on an  anti-corruption platform  accentuated  by the discovery, on getting power that its predecessor  party  in power  had looted the nation’s treasury blind. The  new president had health  challenges,   which given  his age, were really  not unexpected  but he recovered but not early  enough for the   Catholic  bishops to tell  him to his face during a visit  that he has frittered  away  his goodwill  capital.  But  the government   from  the beginning  really  never  got   its  bearing  right as it was derailed by a  palace  coup  at the start  by a member  of the party who  became the President of the   Senate, the No.  3    position  in our democracy.  That  political  wound has been  untreatable   and I think   that would be part  of the reconciliation  assignment  of former Lagos  state  governor Asiwaju Bola Tinubu  for the APC  on the eve of the 2019  presidential  elections.  But  that too  is like a political hemlock   to a leader  who  should be  in the forefront  of leading the nation    at  the next elections.  For  now crisis  management is a priority  for the ruling  APC. That  can  only mean that it has lost sight of the more  nagging issues  like  restructuring  and the killing of Nigerians  by  herdsmen  which  has made a   beleaguered   state  governor  to ask  his people  to arm  and defend themselves  if the central   government  can not do so  against  well  armed  herdsmen. This  issue  will  overshadow  any  fence mending in the APC because it is the party in power  and  its best  captain should  be deployed  to  nip  a   problem  with  high potential   to foment a civil  war  from going in that direction,  rather  than a protracted mend  fencing  which is like  closing the stable doors after  the horses  have bolted.

    With  regard  to the US  I  want to treat  their  democracy  on a comparative basis  with  that  of  Russia since  the US intelligence  community  has developed a rare paranoia   and sees Russia  lurking behind  any action  of   the US president  and has said Russia  aided his election  in  2016, which is something that annoys him  no end.  But  really  the US Intelligence  community  has short  changed itself  professionally  by playing  second fiddle to  Russia  on election  hacking. Sexual  harassment  too is fuelling   that  Russian  fiddling allegation.  But  it   also shows a moral  depravity heightened  by  Trump’s  background and unexpected victory. Surely  there  can  be no sexual  harassment in the fact  that his three former  wives  camapiagned  for  him. That  gives him a right to applaud  his aides  competence while  condemning sexual  harassment  in any  form.  Anyway  a political culture that makes great noise over sexual  advances  several  years  old is an unserious  and malicious  one. That  is what the US   has  become in spite  or despite the election of  Trump  and that is a sorry  situation indeed  without  much   political   value   or  respect  for  transparency  and    justice  as expected  in any democracy.

    At  the other  end Russia  is mocking the US’ political  and intelligence  establishments . Russia  under  Putin  is getting more  religious  and the Church  and the state  are partners on moral  values  while American  politics is dominated  by gay rights  and sexual  harassment. In  addition  Russians  are proud  that the mighty  Americans  cannot  manage their  elections  and insist  that  Russians intervened   to  elect  an  American  president with  all  the wealth  and technology  that  the Americans claim  to be at their  disposal. They  wonder what  sort of morality  Americans have,  given  the pursuit of gay rights and sexual  harassment.  So  who  has the better  democracy  between  the two worthy  of emulation?  Of  course  any  African  or Arab  will  favour  the Russian democracy  on  its    anti gay rights    posture  alone which is an anathema  in their  culture. Of  course  Americans  will scoff at that, while comparing   gay  rights with  civil   liberties but that  is an  insult  to such  people  and really  the Americans funeral. Once  again  long live  the Federal  Republic  of  Nigeria.

  • Rape of democracy in Africa

    The famous Roman author Pliny, had this to say about Africa: ‘ex Africa semper aliquid novi’ (Something new is always coming out of Africa). To me, something new came out of Africa again last week with the news that President Pierre Nkrurunziza of Burundi changed his country’s constitution to see him rule till 2034. His government adopted a plan in October to revise the constitution to enable him run for another two terms from 2020. To make a plan to rule for another 14 years when one has not completed the current term is novel to me. It will be recalled that the same Nkurunziza plunged Burundi into crisis in 2015 when he ran for a controversial third term that he went to win. The crisis generated by this tenure elongation claimed the lives of 2000 people in his country.

    Nkurunziza came to power in 2005 and if allowed to rule till 2034, he would then have ruled his small landlocked country for 29 years. To many observers, this should not raise an eyebrow in Africa where we had sit-tight African dictators like Mobutu, Eyadema, Omar Bongo, De Santos and Mugabe who between them spent 187 years in power. The trend is still being continued by rulers like the longest serving Nguema Mbasogo of Equatorial Guinea who has already spent more than 38 years in power, Museveni of Uganda, Kigame of Rwanda, Kabila of DR Congo and Ngueso of Congo ( Brazzaville) who continue to extend their grip on power through dubious tenure elongation.

    All these African leaders and others who rule their countries as personal fiefdoms are not monarchs with divine right to rule, as they are supposed to derive their power through participatory democracy which they rape with impunity. There is no doubt that after almost six decades of independence in Africa, democratic practices are unfortunately still wobbling in most part of Africa. This piece is therefore an attempt to chronicle the unedifying travail of democracy in Africa.

    Immediately after the colonizing powers left the shores of Africa in the sixties, the political leaders who took over from them wasted no time in dismantling the democratic contraption left behind by the departing colonialists. The new African leaders introduced what they termed one party system of governance in which the state recognized only one political party. This system of governance had main apostles in Dr. Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana, Sekou Toure of Guinea, Omar Bongo of Gabon, Kenneth Kaunda of Zambia, Kamuzu Banda of Malawi, and the leaders of Francophone African countries in West Africa exemplified by Houphouet Boigny of Ivory Coast who was the favorite of De Gaulle, the then French leader. These post-independence African leaders felt for selfish reasons that African countries at their formative stages could not afford the luxury of multi-party system as practiced in Europe and that there was no room for opposition in traditional African society. The late Chief Obafemi Awolowo countered them that by this view, they were portraying Africans as having no mental capacity to practice democracy. However, in countries where one party system of government was not practiced like Nigeria and Kenya at that time, elections were chaotic and opposition parties were harassed and emasculated. Our chaotic federal elections of 1964 and the rigging that characterized the Western Regional elections of 1965 buttressed this assertion.

    The above phase in governance in Africa gave way to governance by the military through series of coup d’état. The military in Africa from mid-sixties added to their expected role of defending the people against external aggression, the difficult task of political governance. In sub -Sahara Africa, the trend started in Togo in 1963 when the then President Slyvannus Olympio was overthrown and assassinated in a military coup. Before long, Africa took over from South America as a continent of the Generals. It was at this period that Africa had fiendish military dictators like Mobutu Sese Seko of DR Congo, Idi Amin of Uganda, Eyadema of Togo, Kerekou of Republic of Benin, clownish Bokassa of Central African Republic, Rawlings of Ghana and others.

    Nigeria also had his own heavy dose of military rule which covered almost 30 years of its existence as a sovereign nation. The military rule in Africa was so pervasive and appeared so entrenched that many leading political lights in Africa felt that military rule had come to stay in Africa. In Nigeria, one of the founding fathers of Nigerian independence, Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe in frustration suggested that Africans should adopt what he called ‘Diarchy form of governance’ in which the military would rule with the civilians. The reason usually given by these military despots for taking over the governance of their countries was that they were in government to save the people from anarchy and civilian dictatorship, but all of them usually ended up compounding the problems of their countries. During this period some countries in Africa such as Kenya, Senegal, Ivory Coast and some countries in Southern part of Africa escaped military rule but that did not mean that these countries enjoyed good governance.

    With its customary excesses and unsuitability for governance, the military of overstayed its welcome in the governance in Africa towards the end of 20th century. The outside world, especially Europe and USA used their leverages to call for an end to military rule in Africa. These countries outside Africa condemned military rule and threatened to cut off aids to any military regime in Africa. The African Union was forced to take a stern stand against military coups and military regimes were ostracized. African countries were encouraged to adopt democratic form of governance. This new era in governance in Africa brought joy and hope to millions of Africans and their well-wishers all over the world. Unfortunately, this joy and hope were short lived. Some African leaders in their characteristic despotic manners now devise means of truncating the new democratic dispensations. After getting to power through democratic means, they manipulate the constitutions of their countries to elongate their stay in power as it is currently been done by President Nkrurunziza of Burundi. Tenure elongations through dubious means, had been carried out in Uganda, Togo, DR Congo, Congo (Brazzaville ), Rwanda, and there was a failed one in Gambia by the illiterate upstart called Yahya Jammeh. A subtle attempt at tenure elongation in Nigeria was thwarted in 2003 by the National Assembly.

    There is no doubt that that we have bright spots in Africa where democracy seems to be thriving and such bright spots can be found in Ghana, Republic of Benin, Senegal, Tanzania, Malawi and Zambia, but it is not yet ‘Uhuru’ for democracy in black Africa as a sizeable portion of the continent is still under the grip of malevolent dictators masquerading as democrats. As Tatalo Alamu wrote in his column last Sunday, we may hope for the ’emergence of new generation of African leaders who will drag the laggard continents screaming and kicking from the hell-hole of millennial suffering to the threshold of compulsory modernity’. I do not think that this hope will be realized soon, when we have people like Pierre Nkrurunziza of Burundi and others with the same mindset in charge of this misused continent.

    • Professor Lucas writes from Old Bodija, Ibadan.
  • Black Friday: A festival of dark and shoddy deals?

    Black Friday: A festival of dark and shoddy deals?

    By Moses Emorinken

    The recent frenzy that permeated and circulated every space – from social, terrestrial and print media is simply amazing…all in the name of Black Friday.

    Online buyers impulsively cherry-pick items such as home appliances, groceries, electronics, phones and laptops, and other similar appurtenances; they do so with the hope of getting the best deals in prices for the year.

    However, their already wide and bright grins sagged as their expectations were dashed to the ground in an epic humpty dumpty style.

    According to research in Consumer Psychology, humans are known to be the most impulsive creatures in this massive terraqueous globe we call earth.

    Our excessive desire to satisfy our insatiable wants have become a major preoccupation making us hustle and toil day and night or even borrow money that we do not have, to purchase things we do not need, in order to impress people who really do not care about us.

    What a wasteful expedition!

    In Nigeria, e-commerce sites like Jumia, Konga, DealDey etc., are amongst some of the major players in the Black Friday saga.

    Black Friday have wrapped its thick dark sheets around us just like the heavens wrap the horizons of the sky with “black” clouds before sending down the rain; the rain in our case is the purported discount promised us by a lot of these sites.

    Little wonder it is called Black Friday because of the surreptitious hoax deployed to legitimately defraud customers of their hard-earned mazuma without them knowing.

    Customers have been wooed and lured to believe they would have a blast and slash in the prices of their favourite items. However, just like the majority of gullible teenage girls who get deflowered before they clock 18, Nigerian customers have had their hearts broken, hopes dashed, and expectations dulled and lulled by the failed promissory love notes from these Casanovas called e-commerce stores. This is reminiscent to “daylight” rape and robbery.

    How do you explain the rationale behind a product being sold during the discount period, which is more expensive than it was a few weeks ago?

    They even have the effrontery to paste a former price against a discounted price and percentage off – we should be grateful…shey!?

    This is the case of Sharon: A customer who found a product on one of our popular e-commerce website. She identified the product, saw the price and took note of it; only to wait till black Friday to find that the product which she saw barely 2 weeks ago at N3,000 is now N4,000 at a “supposed” discounted price. This is absurd!

    Sometimes, what is most personal is most general; it’s almost certain that Sharon’s pitiable Black Friday story is the same narrative for so many Nigerian customers.

    Please, somebody help me…why call it ‘Black Friday’ when the promo lasts from a certain date to end on another date very distant from the start date; why call it Black Friday, why not Black Weekend?

    How do you call a bonanza period which lasts for days “Black Friday”? Meaning it was designed to start and end on that day (Friday) – not a second more. What we find today is a twisted narrated and semantics for a day of the week to be equivalent to the entire week or even more.

    Is someone trying to play on our intelligence?

    Haven’t we suffered enough from sleazy and corrupt politicians and government officials whose job description is to loot our collective patrimony all in the name of giving us the dividends of democracy?

    I think the new narrative should be that they (politicians) have promised to give us a Black Friday (instead of dividends of democracy) because Black Friday in Nigeria is reminiscent to exploitation.

    No wonder my friend’s grandmother never liked the idea of Black Friday (not because she is old-school), because regardless of the many good that comes with the day as practiced internationally, here in Nigerian, it is merely a show and a bauble.

    Locally, especially in the Yoruba parlance, one can literally translate it to – “Oja Ale”; meaning night market.

    A well-grounded and cultural person knows that nothing good really comes from Oja Ale.

    For those that are already primed to mould and throw balls of accusations at the writer, did you know that e-commerce websites in Nigeria usually rake in billions of Naira in turnover this period than they normally would in a quarter (three months) of their business year?

    It is certainly a festival of dark, black and shoddy transactions at the expense of the majority of the Nigerian people.

    It is high time the Consumer Protection Council ( CPC ) stepped up its game and live up to its mandate of protecting the people from heartless and unscrupulous bourgeoisies who are wolves in sheep’s clothing.

    Dear Nigerians, please think twice before picking those items from your favourite e-commerce stores; it is sometimes advisable to walk into a physical store to price and pick the items of your choice that you need and not being manipulated online to impulsively pick items that you don’t need, at a very exploitative price.

    Be wise!

  • Secondus promises internal democracy

    Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) chairmanship aspirant Prince Uche Secondus has promised to guarantee internal democracy, if elected.

    Secondus, according to a statement by his media office, said: “Internal democracy strengthens a political party; it is the essential oil for the survival of any party organisation

    “We will not joke with the rights of our members to decide on issues in line with the constitution of the party.

    “We will ensure the party constitution is adhered to in both letters and spirit. As a leading opposition party ,this mantra of internal democracy is a must for us, especially in our drive to take over governance of the country by 2019.We need all leaders and members on board to build a mass movement that will unseat this failed government.

    “We are fully aware of the state of our party, especially across the state chapters. We will consolidate on the good and make amends on what is bad. Our members will have their voice respected from the smallest of decisions to the biggest. Never will our members be taken for granted under my leadership.”

    He lauded the pact of unity signed in Enugu, saying: “Any living being like an organisation must place the will of its members as sacrosanct, we have a pact apart from the one signed in Enugu.

    “It is a pact with PDP members nationwide that Prince Secondus will be a chairman for all and sundry, for the rich and the poor, for the week and the strong, for the high and the low. We hold this pledge to be very dear to us because that is where our path to victory and return to power lie,” the statement noted.